This conservative (can we even call it that any more? Pro-business, pro-wealthy, pro-power-in-the-hands-of-the-very-few-and-very-wealthy) Court is so disturbing. I couldn’t believe it when I heard that a Texas federal court, benched by Trump loyalists, had stayed the lower court’s decision to strike down Governor Abbott’s move to limit ballot boxes in Texas to one per county! That quickly?! And my guess is the next court would be the Supreme Court without RBG. This is voter suppression, it is not democratic, it is not fair. My question is, why don’t Biden and Harris just say, “It is NOT off the table any more, with the hijacking of the court the Republicans have forced upon the majority, adding Justices is NOT OFF THE TABLE. Then they are strong, take the mystery out of it and get the focus where it belongs, on cheating, law-breaking, hypocritical Republicans, desperate to make power grabs while they can.
Arrrrgh.
I want to send your letter to every news outlet so they see how they are letting Republicans control the narrative.
Also Biden could just say, I will be happy to answer that question after you share your plan to protect people with preexisting conditions, or after you stop supporting white supremacists, or after you release your tax return , or after you stand up to Putin about those soldier bounties. Turn the attention back on the Trumpkin.
I am sure that the Mango Moron will hit again and agin on this question in the next debate, no matter what question he is asked. He thinks he is on to a winner and it will affect how people vote. IMHO, Biden could simply respond by asking how many Republican Senators said they did not approve of naming a SCOTUS judge before an election and then proved that their word was worthless. If you've got the votes, you can do what you like.
I hadn’t heard about the Texas federal court decision, so thank you. But do really think sending any information, especially Heather’s letter, would do any good? The media and the newspapers are so concerned with losing readership that they try to “balance” their reporting. I put that in quotes because the preponderance of all the crazy stuff that Trump and his minions do, simply cannot be balanced. All it does is legitimize the crazy. Even in my local paper, they usually have equal numbers of their letters to the editor even if they have to omit the majority of one view.
Yes it still helps to send letters to the local newspaper. There are still undecided voters out there and young voters just starting to read the paper. We can't give up the fight just because the media is biased.
I agree, and by avoiding a response, it would be too easy for voters to believe that Biden feels compelled to be secretive about his intentions because they are somehow corrupt.
This so feel like Orwell's Animal Farm with all the distortion and breaking of the rules, e.g. the Constitution. The pig elites are in charge and the rest of us are less equal.
It seems Democrats are always playing defense because of language. We accept the existing terms and then fight an uphill battle.
Instead of “Defund the Police”, which repulses the average American, we should have immediately defined it as “Reimagining Social Services” (or anything more descriptive) and played offense with that slogan.
Likewise, Heather’s insightful perspective today on how Republican’s have used their minority power to jam the federal courts with conservative judges, should be an opportunity to re-label what we want to do.
Instead of “Court Packing”, which has a negative connotation, why not “Court Leveling”. Joe and Kamala, then, don’t have to duck the question (which looks bad) but, rather, go on offense explaining to the American people how the courts currently misrepresent the ideals of the popular majority.
Democrats and progressives do NOT have the language to easily describe our vision - our thinking is a bunch of special interests, like MoveOn, Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, etc., and the specific special interest causes they advocate.
For instance, how in the world did feminists and progressives get cajoled into “pro choice’. We ought to have been advocating “women’s equality”- and broaden the frame to include pay, child care, board membership - in addition to access to equal health care - do NOT mention abortion, because the campaign forewoman is much broader
“Economic Democracy” could have been Democrats' rallying cry to challenge “free market economics”.
Let’s wrap the American flag, finally, around Economic Democracy - what could bee more American?
I'm thinking of equivalencies. Pro-birth suggests that those who prefer women to choose the course of their own reproductive lives would be anti-birth, and I'm pretty sure that's not so; pro-life's opposite would be anti-life, and I'm sure that's not so.
I’m attempting to reach a broader ‘frame’ - which would therefore include your worthy suggestions, as well as those of previous commenters Deborah, Paula, Joe and Lynell
The frame of ‘womens' equality’ or womyns’ equality’ encompasses issues beyond reproduction. Gender equality specifies freedoms of one’s body, and freedom around issues of economy, housing, health, legality - all encompassing.
This would move the discussion away from an operation (abortion) to full fledged gender equality.
The “defund the police” term as well as “court packing” term are unfortunate at best. I’m deeply angered and scratching my head. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING???
Governor Andrew Cuomo came up with “RE-imagine the police” early on. I don’t know why the centrist Democrats didn’t go with that term immediately. And we should have argued about who was really pro life from the beginning. Anti-abortion is so much against the life of the mother and any existing kids depending on her - as are unregulated guns, and not wearing masks, etc etc.
I have many times appreciated Donnie Deutsch's take and wording on things. He had suggested at one time that Dems ought to be calling Trump a criminal or his actions as being criminal and stay on that message. I don't get why Dems aren't savvier about their messaging. It's past time!
"The media seems to be taking this distracting bait." One need say no more. It is our corporate media that selects what phases will be selected from a corrupted language to be used, thereby defining issues and meaning. It is our corrupted media that feels entirely comfortable in doing so.
Exactly. "Defund the Police" was a huge gift to the messaging masters of the right. Have we not learned that most of the GOP's power is in framing issues in a way that prevents a reasonable counterpoint on their terms? This, and using wedge issues to provide cover for other motives, is how they trick people into voting against their own best interests. If we can't get better at this...
Thank you, Heather. Today's letter shone a light on a few things that have been hanging around the fringes. For instance, the American people, as you noted, get distracted by the hot button issues, and don't really notice the bigger picture, let alone grasp how all these moving parts add up.
Even before Trump's pin-ball game of an administration, voters have been deliberately kept engaged in such 'oh, new flashy object' type distractions, all the better to disguise the Republican long game of turning the country into a corporate theocracy.
Connecting the dots would have shown the confluence of activities from Lewis Powell and the new-born Federalist Society, but also the influence of University of Virginia economist James Baker and his part in the establishment of the various right-wing think tanks, like the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, and now the Mecates Center, and the money thrown at universities to teach more libertarian agendas.
Threaded into this is the long libertarian influence of the Koch Brothers, beginning with their father's position in the John Birch Society of old.
Democrats have never really grasped, until maybe now, what the GOP has been up to. We've put so much of our capital on winning the White House every four years, and left the wide open field of the Senate, not to mention state houses, to be taken over by the GOP. And speaking of state legislatures, let us not forget ALEC, busily writing 'draft legislation' for state legislators to pass to further the conservative agenda. And in the states where they've established Republican majorities in the legislature, they've been able to control the redistricting every decade, thus promoting their insidious gerrymandering. With GOP friendly federal courts, up to and including the Supremes, they've controlled the entire game for over forty years, while Dems were still focused to keeping a Democrat in the White House!
We have to get a helluva a lot smarter, a helluva lot faster, or this country really will be toast.
Nancy Maclean (Democracy in Chains)) and Jane Mayer (Dark Money) couldn't have said it better. They have a lot of "nasty" people in and around Koch's GOP but they are very clever, persistent and totally amoral. Their concentration on State "takeovers" has been going on for a very long time. In this it is the Democrats who have been caught like a rabbit in the car headlights. They still think that the GOP is full of basically "decent" people! Almost criminal niavety.
You have absolutely nailed it. For too long, the Democrats (my friend who is a Biden supporter calls them the “dim Dems and he may be right) have not realized how insidious the Republicans have been. Consumed with tactics and ignoring strategy, we’ve been playing checkers while they have been playing chess.
As we finally wake up and recognize the painful consequences of insufficient attention to the Republican agenda for the court for these past 50 years, this very long arc points to another fix of putting term limits on SCOTUS appointments—to help shorten the duration.
Praying for that... but how could we even hope for that? It seems that we will be in a Catch 22.... the current judicial makeup at every level will block it every step of the way?!
“The longest journey starts with the smallest step,” but Democrats have to pay more attention to the long journey, as the Republicans have—too effectively.
The depth and breadth of what the Republicans have been doing for decades, unnoticed by most (except HCR readers), make me wonder if there is any hope the apparently oblivious Democrats can regain their voice for the people.
Excellent summation. "Corporate Theocracy" nails it. I have been reading about The Dark Ages to cheer myself up, and the following Renaissance. Both are dominated by Imperial (corporate?) Theocracies. How persistent is the hijacking of religion to control the persuadable masses. God (?) help us all.
MaryPat, I know it's a serious subject and that's how you meant it, but I must say your comment about reading about The Dark Ages 'to cheer yourself up', made me laugh out loud. It so captures where so many of us are right now, I think. 😉😒
Will the Democrats pack the court? What Kamala Harris should have said:
You meant “unpack” Mr Vice President. Will the Democrats unpack the court? Republicans have been running a project for the past 40 years to pack the courts and under the administration of President Trump, this plan has come to fruition. Two supreme court judges stolen from the Democrats to give Republicans a 6-3 majority. Fifty one appellate court judges, nominated by President Trump for life long tenure, many of whom were rated as unqualified by the American Bar Association, appointed after minimal debate in the senate due to partisanship and the rush to approve any “judge” whose only qualifying criterium was partisan lean - actual legal qualifications and experience as a judge not needed.
Unpack the court? Yes - the Biden administration will look to restore justice for all - not maintain justice for the minority. President Trump didn’t win election with a majority of the vote. He’s a minority president. The 54 Republican senators represent states that make up 47 percent of the US population. A minority representation. How many of the 51 appellate court judges appointed were black? How many were LGBTQ? Zero. Not one. Many appointees have openly expressed anti-LGBTQ views. This is not a justice system. This is minority rule by the privileged.
The constitution gives control of the courts to congress. There is nothing in the constitution that limits the number of supreme court judges to nine. “Thirteen circuits, thirteen judges” is a bumper sticker - it’s not a long term solution to the injustice system created by the hyper-partisanship of a backward-looking Republican party. President Biden supports changes to the supreme court. Those changes are up to congress but they will be carefully considered to restore justice and prevent a repetition of the court packing that we have seen under the minority party rule of the Republicans.
The term "unpack the court" has been used by Dems. Musta missed it in all the blather that is going on. I am not impressed with what much of the media is doing: allowing themselves to get pulled off track. They are not covering anything much but Trump's antics and the word-games started by the Republicans. They are so over the fires (except the people who lived through them, and the state legislatures trying to figure out how to fix things). Covid is always big, but most of the media is drifting away from science and into the partisan pettiness it's being dragged into. Folks, please seek out the better sources. Cable news and the Sunday shows are not it. Besides sources like WaPo, NYT, The Guardian, etc there are smaller ones like Columbia Journalism Review, ProPublica, et al. Also, take a look at papers in smaller cities: some are ho-hum, esp those owned by Pamplin and other "investment" owners, but there are some really good local papers & stations. Find out what else is going on in the country. Even the so-so local papers will at least get you out of the beltway and into the main streets so you can see what is driving folks there. We need to demand better and broader coverage by our media.
Yesterday I watched both Barbara Kopple films, "Harlan County, USA" (United Mine Workers strike) and "American Dream".(The Hormel strike in Austin, MN) They each represented the last gasp of union power. The owners, with all the money and leverage, killed the unions. Business took control by refusing to negotiate. Refusing to acknowledge the inhumane working conditions. Refusing to acknowledge the value of workers. The workers at Hormel went on strike when it was revealed that Hormel profits were up 170%. Still, the owners offered workers a 4% raise when the inflation rate was 7%. The devastating conditions of inequality in the nation continued to expand from that day on. Giving business more power has always been a Republican ideal. It is now solidly cemented as the law of the land.
Did anyone catch the news last week about the former CEO of Massey Energy, the coal giant that declared bankruptcy, now has lung cancer and wants black lung disease benefits? The same benefits he worked his butt off to deny his fellow coal miners for decades? Karma's a bitch.
Blankenship? I did not hear about this. My grandfather was a Union organizer for coal miners and died of prostate cancer all the while suffering from black lung. He organized in secret within the Order of the Redmen Society which evolved from the roots of the Sons of Liberty. His nephew became the President of the New River Coal company. I will look for the films you mention here. I do know Blankenship to be the arch corporatist and to think he now wishes to have Black Lung assistance is Karma on steroids.
"Leo Rosten in The Joys of Yiddish ... defines the term as 'that quality enshrined in a man who, having killed his mother and father, throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.'"
On a slightly different subject, I was incensed to hear President Trump's words at the White House on Saturday. Besides the obvious Hatch Act violation, it was personally insulting to be told that he is going to vote 'these people' into oblivion. I am one of 'these people' and he clearly has no intention of governing a huge swath of the American people. Of course, it is no surprise coming from Trump but I should not be hearing this from the balcony of the 'Peoples' House'
"The Hatch Act of 1939, An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is a United States federal law. Its main provision prohibits civil service employees in the executive branch of the federal government,[3] ***except the president and vice president***,[4] from engaging in some forms of political activity."
I believe that many civil service employees who prepared and engaged in this political campaign rally at the White House were coerced into violating the Hatch Act. Of course, Trump is exempt from the Hatch Act but that doesn't negate my outrage at his using the White House and the civil service employees for ***pernicious political activity***!
This entire scenario, and this trend is sickening. Embarrassed to admit, but I have not paid enough attention to this judicial system in my life to see what was going on. I was very focused on the Clarence Thomas debacle at the time, as I was in the middle of a situation where I had blown the whistle on my boss at a major network radio station. He was an abusive tyrant but his biggest ‘sin’ was rigging contests on the air and negotiating with vendors and gave the desired bids to those who included side work on his home(s) and benefits for his kids. (The abuse barely got notice from the company principles, needless to say)
I left the industry the next year, married and had a baby, never looked back.Years flew by.
Over the years there were times when I ‘zoomed in’ on judicial news but it wasn’t until Obama and the Merrick Garland situation arose that I was drawn to the courts with laser focus. And when Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in I was crushed, shocked, and devastated. That was when I really started to panic about the SCOTUS.
And now this!
I am ready to take to the streets on this.
The anxiety knowing this is nearly inevitable, and cannot be undone is so upsetting! I want to yell like a little kid and cry, ‘this isn’t fair!’
And I feel the guilt. Had I been paying better attention all these years couldn’t I have done anything to help shape this disaster? Could I have learned more, worked harder, led others...?
The media is either hungry for a horse race and are grasping at anything to make Biden look bad to balance how horrible trump is or they are republicans themselves. The biggest con has been a paper like the New York Times pretending to be against trump where in reality they hired Maggie Haberman who is his spokesperson. The courts are gone for a generation if not effectively forever.
I think David Farenthold, a tip top investigative reporter, show dig into where Kavanaugh’s debts went. And, while I’m complaining, I’m sick of the entire media giving unbroken coverage of crazy trump and his antics for too long. It took too long for them to say out loud! “You’re wrong”or, even more truthfully, “you’re lying.”
I agree that Republicans are grasping to make Biden look bad and it’s a long haul to get back the courts.
But it was Maggie Haberman’s mother who did PR for trump in the 1970s, and then Maggie Haberman herself has reported ON trump since his presidential campaign, for which trump called her a "Hillary flunky" and a "third rate reporter.”
They are all too old. The Democrats have to appoint young justices since it is a lifetime appointment. That is what the repugnicants are doing, and there is a lot to be said for younger appointees. These are people who could serve for 40 or more years.
Good thing about Obamas though is how it will make rethugs head explode. They have enjoyed enough liberal tears, it's time for us to enjoy theirs. I say this knowing full well that they might still steal the election. Contra Barr is not done yet.
When was Maggie Haberman a Trump spokesperson? I look for Haberman's byline. To say she is any way a Trump PR flack is as off-base as you can get. I don't think Trump would agree to that characterization either.
Wow, that’s a powerful statement. I am always hoping that maybe she’s not so bad, and perhaps she has access that is the worth her questionable loyalties.
- cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.
When people or a nation are subjected to tyranny by a minority without granting their consent or support the result is resistance and rebellion. The rebellion is not necessarily violent if the majority has the ability to recapture power and control through peaceful democratic means. However, resistance to suppression of the will of the majority is inevitable and ultimately results in removing the minority from power.
This lesson has been taught repeated throughout history and is not limited to anyone culture or nation. The present Republican Party seems to be oblivious to this constant. They seek to maintain their hold on power and authority despite popular vote losses while also continuing to suppress the will of the majority opposing them. They do not seek to expand their support significantly amongst the population at large by modifying their positions. Rather they only further double down on their pursuit of tyrannical authority.
History tells us without exception the end result will be the majority will remove them from positions of authority and power. Let us all hope this is accomplished peacefully through the power of the ballot.
So, as a follow up to my first post here, someone I know on Facebook posted a “social experiment” suggestion: look at both Biden and trump’s Facebook pages and see how many of your ‘friends’ follow each one. I tried it. I am absolutely stunned. Of my Facebook ‘friends’ 9 ‘liked’ Biden. NINETEEN ‘liked’ trump!!!! I just don’t even have words for this at the moment. I am horrified and will need to think carefully on how I will deal with this and what I will say, if anything. There is clearly work to be done and we cannot be complacent or we will end up with a repeat of 2016. God help us all.
I will say though that my younger sister responded to something posted by Trump’s campaign, and they keep listing her as a fan! She is not a fan at all. So, that could be misleading.
I have been getting mail from the RNC all year. I won’t even follow trump on Twitter, and have called out my 2 Republican senators on a regular basis. I began thinking someone sent or donated in my name. Who knows.
I get tons, TONS of Republican texts, and they are almost creepily harassing and resentful lately, as they ask for money. I can't believe that goes over well with a lot of people who voted for him in 2016. Not sure why I landed on their lists. I never respond.
61 for Biden / 14 for Trump. So I clicked on the 14 and noted that 3 were Dem politicians from NC. 3 were friends that definitely didn't support trump. So I am not sure what that all means.
Mine ended up 27 for Biden, 9 for Trump (and 3 of those I know for a fact follow him not out of support). I suspect that almost all of the remaining 6 have blocked my posts. I don't really care. I have nearly 500 friends and have only blocked a couple, and those have since "de-friended" me. Again, I'm not concerned. I'm cagey about who I "friend" on there and don't like adding anyone I am unsure about or don't REALLY know directly. As a result, I think I have a nice little coterie of folks.
I have friends with over 1 or 2 THOUSAND. My students have quite literally hundreds. 500 is actually fairly modest. As a working professional I crossed paths with a lot of people...
5/3 for Biden here. I know 2 of the 3 have blocked my posts. One is a retired Navy Captain, one is a media guy with the Tribune Co. and the 3rd is our fresh fish guy. His like doesn't count in the scheme of US politics; he's a Mexican citizen and lives in Progress, Yucatan. I know he hasn't blocked me because he responds to posts where I've complimented the quality of his catch.
Well, I have a less diverse pool of friends. 86 had bothered to “like” Joe’s page. Just 5 “liked” or had “checked in” at DJT’s page. I have many more friends who are not on FB at all anymore, eschewing it for all the damage done to us (even as we sheepishly cave to the “like” buttons!!) and trying to focus on ‘real life’ engagement.
Talk about complicit corporate entities in the tug of war re: judicial fairness from the American people... we should put FB up with the Federalist Society on that end of the rope.
I just checked: Of my 512 Facebook friends, 53 like the Biden page, and 14 (as I figured; we're not "real" friends but share an interest in, say, photography) like the Creature's page.
I find the Democrats' reluctance to go on the offense baffling. The Republican side consistently sets the conversation's parameters by attacking the Democrats, who take the defensive position, rather than by countering with a more truthful offense. It sure looks to me that the Rs are packing the Supreme Court, yet the Ds are behaving as if a fait accompli cannot be called out, and instead react to Republican speculation. it's bizarre, and disheartening; it continues to feel as if the parties are having two different conversations.
Yes, I have lost my voice by screaming at them with their dysfunctional dumb reactions to his daily distractions. (Note: this was unintentional alliteration)
Thank you, as always, Heather for your hard work to make sense of this craziness. I am amazed and appalled at the focus on Biden’s refusal to discuss the issue of potential future “court packing”. As Heather states, it is a future hypothetical issue, vs the very real efforts of the current regime. I grew up in a mostly liberal rural area in New England. I recently saw a post on Facebook by a former high school friend saying “that’s it, I will never vote for him because he says we don’t ‘deserve’ to know his position on court packing”. She is a rabbit trump supporter that I have been arguing with on Facebook for the past 4 years. Others have taken up the argument on that post and I have refrained thus far but I am struck by the large number of *females* that I considered friends in high school who are openly angry, rabid trump supporters. I don’t understand how they can support him and, to avoid argument, I haven’t asked. There are plenty of males, too, from the same pool of people. Given our liberal leanings in this area, it worries me. Everyone please keep up the effort to get out the vote for Biden and Harris, I suspect that there are more people like my former classmates than any of us realize and it’s a frightening thought.
Rabbit kind of made sense--obvuisly someone with an attention span too short to follow onto the deep issues, just boots from one inflammatory news cycle to the next.
Wow, I think you’re right, and that’s very concerning. I am so exasperated by their stupidity, with a few exceptions, and thank God every day for you Heather.
Even if they aren’t "must runs", the publisher’s wishes are well known, and not only the editors, but the reporters who work for them know who butters their toast. Moral courage is easy if you don’t have a family to raise in an environment of dwindling journalist jobs. Thank Bill Clinton for his meddling with the FCC.
Another illustration of what reader Shaf is calling minoritarian rule, and how corporate money has gained hegemony over the citizenry’s individual votes.
The Constitution, as the originalists know full well, was written in order to establish an oligarchy, not a true democracy. Voting and the acquisition of public power in all three branches of government was strategically limited (even if more broadly based than in Britain) and changing the electorate through the system of amendments--which requires those in power to vote against their own continued dominance--is difficult. Judge Barrett is a hypocrite of the Phyllis Schlafly school of hypocrisy: she adheres a radically backward-looking agenda that limits women's rights to their own bodies, that proposes that in marriage men should dominate, but craves the public world of the courts, university life, and publicity. She is a living model of exactly what she is trying to prevent other women (especially) from achieving. She is not Scalia: he was not a hypocrite.
Exactly this: “The Constitution ... was written in order to establish an oligarchy ...”
We are taught that this Republic is an expression of ‘Enlightenment’ ideals; “Voltaire, who wanted ... a 'relationship with the Lords of the earth', repeatedly expressed his hatred of the *canaille* - the 'ignoble masses who respect only force and never think'. The Enlightenment *philosophes* sought and enjoyed the patronage of Frederick of Prussia and Catherine of Russia. With the radical exception of Rousseau, they were not interested in social equality. 'We have never claimed to enlighten shoemakers and servant girls.”
Once you start this, where will it end? It is like the Democrats eliminating the filibuster and now the Republicans are benefitting from it. If the Dems add 4 "moderate to left-leaning" justices, the Republicans can just rebalance it when they next get power.
Beware of the longer-term implications before you move that chesspiece.
They should add four justices, then amend the constitution so the court can have no more than 15. Honestly, lock it all up. And add term limits after the current raft dies or retires.
I don’t know what we need for that. Someone said 2/3rds. If the Dems “pack” the court with four more moderate and/or left-leaning judges, then they might be able to get some Republicans to sign onto an amendment at least for term limits.
It's a conundrum, for sure. But the R's have not been balancing the courts at all. They are the court packers, the pots calling the kettle black. The Dems need to demand "equal time."
This reminds me of Pence's behavior at the VP debate. The moderator asked me to explain exactly how he was going to cover pre-existing conditions without the Affordable Care Act. Instead of answering the moderator at all, he demanded that Sen.Harris talk about "packing" the court. When she did not, he badgered her with "Answer the question!" and he got away with it - neither Harris nor the moderator pointed out that he was avoiding answering the question he had been asked.
This conservative (can we even call it that any more? Pro-business, pro-wealthy, pro-power-in-the-hands-of-the-very-few-and-very-wealthy) Court is so disturbing. I couldn’t believe it when I heard that a Texas federal court, benched by Trump loyalists, had stayed the lower court’s decision to strike down Governor Abbott’s move to limit ballot boxes in Texas to one per county! That quickly?! And my guess is the next court would be the Supreme Court without RBG. This is voter suppression, it is not democratic, it is not fair. My question is, why don’t Biden and Harris just say, “It is NOT off the table any more, with the hijacking of the court the Republicans have forced upon the majority, adding Justices is NOT OFF THE TABLE. Then they are strong, take the mystery out of it and get the focus where it belongs, on cheating, law-breaking, hypocritical Republicans, desperate to make power grabs while they can.
Arrrrgh.
I want to send your letter to every news outlet so they see how they are letting Republicans control the narrative.
You’re the Best.
Also Biden could just say, I will be happy to answer that question after you share your plan to protect people with preexisting conditions, or after you stop supporting white supremacists, or after you release your tax return , or after you stand up to Putin about those soldier bounties. Turn the attention back on the Trumpkin.
Robin Jett, That is a great comeback!
Thank you.
I am sure that the Mango Moron will hit again and agin on this question in the next debate, no matter what question he is asked. He thinks he is on to a winner and it will affect how people vote. IMHO, Biden could simply respond by asking how many Republican Senators said they did not approve of naming a SCOTUS judge before an election and then proved that their word was worthless. If you've got the votes, you can do what you like.
I hope you do send this to every organization with your suggestion. We know someone at NYT reads this. Maybe the others need to also.
We do?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/briefing/debate-disney-nba-finals-your-wednesday-briefing.html
I hadn’t heard about the Texas federal court decision, so thank you. But do really think sending any information, especially Heather’s letter, would do any good? The media and the newspapers are so concerned with losing readership that they try to “balance” their reporting. I put that in quotes because the preponderance of all the crazy stuff that Trump and his minions do, simply cannot be balanced. All it does is legitimize the crazy. Even in my local paper, they usually have equal numbers of their letters to the editor even if they have to omit the majority of one view.
Yes it still helps to send letters to the local newspaper. There are still undecided voters out there and young voters just starting to read the paper. We can't give up the fight just because the media is biased.
I agree, and by avoiding a response, it would be too easy for voters to believe that Biden feels compelled to be secretive about his intentions because they are somehow corrupt.
This so feel like Orwell's Animal Farm with all the distortion and breaking of the rules, e.g. the Constitution. The pig elites are in charge and the rest of us are less equal.
And what’s it say that the Russian media recently called trump “Putin’s piglet.”
Amen
Agree with all said, J Doyle. I unfortunately, live in the state with the Ahole for governor. Why is he getting away with this? It’s an outrage!
It seems Democrats are always playing defense because of language. We accept the existing terms and then fight an uphill battle.
Instead of “Defund the Police”, which repulses the average American, we should have immediately defined it as “Reimagining Social Services” (or anything more descriptive) and played offense with that slogan.
Likewise, Heather’s insightful perspective today on how Republican’s have used their minority power to jam the federal courts with conservative judges, should be an opportunity to re-label what we want to do.
Instead of “Court Packing”, which has a negative connotation, why not “Court Leveling”. Joe and Kamala, then, don’t have to duck the question (which looks bad) but, rather, go on offense explaining to the American people how the courts currently misrepresent the ideals of the popular majority.
Democrats and progressives do NOT have the language to easily describe our vision - our thinking is a bunch of special interests, like MoveOn, Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, etc., and the specific special interest causes they advocate.
For instance, how in the world did feminists and progressives get cajoled into “pro choice’. We ought to have been advocating “women’s equality”- and broaden the frame to include pay, child care, board membership - in addition to access to equal health care - do NOT mention abortion, because the campaign forewoman is much broader
“Economic Democracy” could have been Democrats' rallying cry to challenge “free market economics”.
Let’s wrap the American flag, finally, around Economic Democracy - what could bee more American?
Pro-choice is fine with me, but I prefer anti-choice as its opposite, rather than pro-life.
let's get rid of pro-life. What they really mean is pro-birth.
I'm thinking of equivalencies. Pro-birth suggests that those who prefer women to choose the course of their own reproductive lives would be anti-birth, and I'm pretty sure that's not so; pro-life's opposite would be anti-life, and I'm sure that's not so.
Pro-life = Forced-birth.
I was just thinking that but I doubt those who are "pro-life" will ever change their slogan.
It's not up to them. Those that are pro-choice must use it every single time.
Agree. Kid gloves are only appropriate at garden parties and the opera.
Pro-woman v. anti-woman
Wordsmithing: Forced-Birth, instead of Pro-Life. Reproductive Freedom, instead of Pro-Choice.
I’m attempting to reach a broader ‘frame’ - which would therefore include your worthy suggestions, as well as those of previous commenters Deborah, Paula, Joe and Lynell
The frame of ‘womens' equality’ or womyns’ equality’ encompasses issues beyond reproduction. Gender equality specifies freedoms of one’s body, and freedom around issues of economy, housing, health, legality - all encompassing.
This would move the discussion away from an operation (abortion) to full fledged gender equality.
Wow! Hot to the touch!
excellent points.
The “defund the police” term as well as “court packing” term are unfortunate at best. I’m deeply angered and scratching my head. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING???
Governor Andrew Cuomo came up with “RE-imagine the police” early on. I don’t know why the centrist Democrats didn’t go with that term immediately. And we should have argued about who was really pro life from the beginning. Anti-abortion is so much against the life of the mother and any existing kids depending on her - as are unregulated guns, and not wearing masks, etc etc.
We need to get a new PR Firm on the case.
I have many times appreciated Donnie Deutsch's take and wording on things. He had suggested at one time that Dems ought to be calling Trump a criminal or his actions as being criminal and stay on that message. I don't get why Dems aren't savvier about their messaging. It's past time!
They are disgusted by the image of rolling in the dirt in a common brawl - and yet, they keep getting knocked down in the dirt.
Correct me if necessary, but aren't the Republicans the ones who started using that term (court-packing), not the Dems?
FDR - Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 ("court-packing plan")
Thanks. I wasn't clear: I meant in the current brouhaha, although I'm glad you said where the term first appeared.
"The media seems to be taking this distracting bait." One need say no more. It is our corporate media that selects what phases will be selected from a corrupted language to be used, thereby defining issues and meaning. It is our corrupted media that feels entirely comfortable in doing so.
How about 'balance the court' instead of pack the court...
Yes!
Exactly. "Defund the Police" was a huge gift to the messaging masters of the right. Have we not learned that most of the GOP's power is in framing issues in a way that prevents a reasonable counterpoint on their terms? This, and using wedge issues to provide cover for other motives, is how they trick people into voting against their own best interests. If we can't get better at this...
Thank you, Heather. Today's letter shone a light on a few things that have been hanging around the fringes. For instance, the American people, as you noted, get distracted by the hot button issues, and don't really notice the bigger picture, let alone grasp how all these moving parts add up.
Even before Trump's pin-ball game of an administration, voters have been deliberately kept engaged in such 'oh, new flashy object' type distractions, all the better to disguise the Republican long game of turning the country into a corporate theocracy.
Connecting the dots would have shown the confluence of activities from Lewis Powell and the new-born Federalist Society, but also the influence of University of Virginia economist James Baker and his part in the establishment of the various right-wing think tanks, like the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, and now the Mecates Center, and the money thrown at universities to teach more libertarian agendas.
Threaded into this is the long libertarian influence of the Koch Brothers, beginning with their father's position in the John Birch Society of old.
Democrats have never really grasped, until maybe now, what the GOP has been up to. We've put so much of our capital on winning the White House every four years, and left the wide open field of the Senate, not to mention state houses, to be taken over by the GOP. And speaking of state legislatures, let us not forget ALEC, busily writing 'draft legislation' for state legislators to pass to further the conservative agenda. And in the states where they've established Republican majorities in the legislature, they've been able to control the redistricting every decade, thus promoting their insidious gerrymandering. With GOP friendly federal courts, up to and including the Supremes, they've controlled the entire game for over forty years, while Dems were still focused to keeping a Democrat in the White House!
We have to get a helluva a lot smarter, a helluva lot faster, or this country really will be toast.
Nancy Maclean (Democracy in Chains)) and Jane Mayer (Dark Money) couldn't have said it better. They have a lot of "nasty" people in and around Koch's GOP but they are very clever, persistent and totally amoral. Their concentration on State "takeovers" has been going on for a very long time. In this it is the Democrats who have been caught like a rabbit in the car headlights. They still think that the GOP is full of basically "decent" people! Almost criminal niavety.
You have absolutely nailed it. For too long, the Democrats (my friend who is a Biden supporter calls them the “dim Dems and he may be right) have not realized how insidious the Republicans have been. Consumed with tactics and ignoring strategy, we’ve been playing checkers while they have been playing chess.
As we finally wake up and recognize the painful consequences of insufficient attention to the Republican agenda for the court for these past 50 years, this very long arc points to another fix of putting term limits on SCOTUS appointments—to help shorten the duration.
Praying for that... but how could we even hope for that? It seems that we will be in a Catch 22.... the current judicial makeup at every level will block it every step of the way?!
“The longest journey starts with the smallest step,” but Democrats have to pay more attention to the long journey, as the Republicans have—too effectively.
Absolutely agree.
Thank you, Sandra.
The depth and breadth of what the Republicans have been doing for decades, unnoticed by most (except HCR readers), make me wonder if there is any hope the apparently oblivious Democrats can regain their voice for the people.
Excellent summation. "Corporate Theocracy" nails it. I have been reading about The Dark Ages to cheer myself up, and the following Renaissance. Both are dominated by Imperial (corporate?) Theocracies. How persistent is the hijacking of religion to control the persuadable masses. God (?) help us all.
MaryPat, I know it's a serious subject and that's how you meant it, but I must say your comment about reading about The Dark Ages 'to cheer yourself up', made me laugh out loud. It so captures where so many of us are right now, I think. 😉😒
My friend's wife posted this elsewhere:
Will the Democrats pack the court? What Kamala Harris should have said:
You meant “unpack” Mr Vice President. Will the Democrats unpack the court? Republicans have been running a project for the past 40 years to pack the courts and under the administration of President Trump, this plan has come to fruition. Two supreme court judges stolen from the Democrats to give Republicans a 6-3 majority. Fifty one appellate court judges, nominated by President Trump for life long tenure, many of whom were rated as unqualified by the American Bar Association, appointed after minimal debate in the senate due to partisanship and the rush to approve any “judge” whose only qualifying criterium was partisan lean - actual legal qualifications and experience as a judge not needed.
Unpack the court? Yes - the Biden administration will look to restore justice for all - not maintain justice for the minority. President Trump didn’t win election with a majority of the vote. He’s a minority president. The 54 Republican senators represent states that make up 47 percent of the US population. A minority representation. How many of the 51 appellate court judges appointed were black? How many were LGBTQ? Zero. Not one. Many appointees have openly expressed anti-LGBTQ views. This is not a justice system. This is minority rule by the privileged.
The constitution gives control of the courts to congress. There is nothing in the constitution that limits the number of supreme court judges to nine. “Thirteen circuits, thirteen judges” is a bumper sticker - it’s not a long term solution to the injustice system created by the hyper-partisanship of a backward-looking Republican party. President Biden supports changes to the supreme court. Those changes are up to congress but they will be carefully considered to restore justice and prevent a repetition of the court packing that we have seen under the minority party rule of the Republicans.
Wow. Great answer. How can we get this to the Biden/Harris campaign?????
Exactly! How do we get it to the right people?
They should call it balance the court. Keep correcting them every time they use the derogatory 'pack' word. McConnell did it, so we will too.
The term "unpack the court" has been used by Dems. Musta missed it in all the blather that is going on. I am not impressed with what much of the media is doing: allowing themselves to get pulled off track. They are not covering anything much but Trump's antics and the word-games started by the Republicans. They are so over the fires (except the people who lived through them, and the state legislatures trying to figure out how to fix things). Covid is always big, but most of the media is drifting away from science and into the partisan pettiness it's being dragged into. Folks, please seek out the better sources. Cable news and the Sunday shows are not it. Besides sources like WaPo, NYT, The Guardian, etc there are smaller ones like Columbia Journalism Review, ProPublica, et al. Also, take a look at papers in smaller cities: some are ho-hum, esp those owned by Pamplin and other "investment" owners, but there are some really good local papers & stations. Find out what else is going on in the country. Even the so-so local papers will at least get you out of the beltway and into the main streets so you can see what is driving folks there. We need to demand better and broader coverage by our media.
YES!!! May I cooy and post?
Copy
It's even worse than this. This clip of McConnell is very revealing. https://twitter.com/thetnholler/status/1315278394884489216?s=21&fbclid=IwAR38tnXambLTzJiJdCoS3Or0Sg5H2qscT8II-f_vvEOgioFz13ls2Wi0hOA
Yesterday I watched both Barbara Kopple films, "Harlan County, USA" (United Mine Workers strike) and "American Dream".(The Hormel strike in Austin, MN) They each represented the last gasp of union power. The owners, with all the money and leverage, killed the unions. Business took control by refusing to negotiate. Refusing to acknowledge the inhumane working conditions. Refusing to acknowledge the value of workers. The workers at Hormel went on strike when it was revealed that Hormel profits were up 170%. Still, the owners offered workers a 4% raise when the inflation rate was 7%. The devastating conditions of inequality in the nation continued to expand from that day on. Giving business more power has always been a Republican ideal. It is now solidly cemented as the law of the land.
Did anyone catch the news last week about the former CEO of Massey Energy, the coal giant that declared bankruptcy, now has lung cancer and wants black lung disease benefits? The same benefits he worked his butt off to deny his fellow coal miners for decades? Karma's a bitch.
Blankenship? I did not hear about this. My grandfather was a Union organizer for coal miners and died of prostate cancer all the while suffering from black lung. He organized in secret within the Order of the Redmen Society which evolved from the roots of the Sons of Liberty. His nephew became the President of the New River Coal company. I will look for the films you mention here. I do know Blankenship to be the arch corporatist and to think he now wishes to have Black Lung assistance is Karma on steroids.
Sorry, I had the wrong guy - it was Robert Murray head of Murray Energy. Here's a link. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/10/03/coal-o03.html
It's called chutzpah.
"Leo Rosten in The Joys of Yiddish ... defines the term as 'that quality enshrined in a man who, having killed his mother and father, throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.'"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chutzpah
Whoa..... would love to hear him interviewed about this by Anderson or Rachel!
Not Blankenship right? Oddly he is running for president under the ‘constitution’ party ?
Ok, I feel dumb. Blankenship? The football player?
On a slightly different subject, I was incensed to hear President Trump's words at the White House on Saturday. Besides the obvious Hatch Act violation, it was personally insulting to be told that he is going to vote 'these people' into oblivion. I am one of 'these people' and he clearly has no intention of governing a huge swath of the American people. Of course, it is no surprise coming from Trump but I should not be hearing this from the balcony of the 'Peoples' House'
True ‘nuf this! And for this alone I dreamed of him in court facing charge last night.
"The Hatch Act of 1939, An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is a United States federal law. Its main provision prohibits civil service employees in the executive branch of the federal government,[3] ***except the president and vice president***,[4] from engaging in some forms of political activity."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939
I believe that many civil service employees who prepared and engaged in this political campaign rally at the White House were coerced into violating the Hatch Act. Of course, Trump is exempt from the Hatch Act but that doesn't negate my outrage at his using the White House and the civil service employees for ***pernicious political activity***!
Agreed. Thanks for the clarification and the outrage.
*** = emphasis added
This entire scenario, and this trend is sickening. Embarrassed to admit, but I have not paid enough attention to this judicial system in my life to see what was going on. I was very focused on the Clarence Thomas debacle at the time, as I was in the middle of a situation where I had blown the whistle on my boss at a major network radio station. He was an abusive tyrant but his biggest ‘sin’ was rigging contests on the air and negotiating with vendors and gave the desired bids to those who included side work on his home(s) and benefits for his kids. (The abuse barely got notice from the company principles, needless to say)
I left the industry the next year, married and had a baby, never looked back.Years flew by.
Over the years there were times when I ‘zoomed in’ on judicial news but it wasn’t until Obama and the Merrick Garland situation arose that I was drawn to the courts with laser focus. And when Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in I was crushed, shocked, and devastated. That was when I really started to panic about the SCOTUS.
And now this!
I am ready to take to the streets on this.
The anxiety knowing this is nearly inevitable, and cannot be undone is so upsetting! I want to yell like a little kid and cry, ‘this isn’t fair!’
And I feel the guilt. Had I been paying better attention all these years couldn’t I have done anything to help shape this disaster? Could I have learned more, worked harder, led others...?
So now, here we are. Now what do we do!?
Vote Biden in. REFORM SCOTUS.
Guilty as charged.
The media is either hungry for a horse race and are grasping at anything to make Biden look bad to balance how horrible trump is or they are republicans themselves. The biggest con has been a paper like the New York Times pretending to be against trump where in reality they hired Maggie Haberman who is his spokesperson. The courts are gone for a generation if not effectively forever.
I think David Farenthold, a tip top investigative reporter, show dig into where Kavanaugh’s debts went. And, while I’m complaining, I’m sick of the entire media giving unbroken coverage of crazy trump and his antics for too long. It took too long for them to say out loud! “You’re wrong”or, even more truthfully, “you’re lying.”
Or "You're mentally disturbed."
I agree that Republicans are grasping to make Biden look bad and it’s a long haul to get back the courts.
But it was Maggie Haberman’s mother who did PR for trump in the 1970s, and then Maggie Haberman herself has reported ON trump since his presidential campaign, for which trump called her a "Hillary flunky" and a "third rate reporter.”
Not unless Biden packs the SCOTUS with four justices. Garland, Obama, and Obama are three good ones to start.
I think Anita Hill would be a fine choice! Can you imagine the look on Clarence Thomas’ face when she sits near him?
With a can of Coca Cola?
I was just thinking that!
Love it!! Anita Hill!!
SCOTUS Obama and Obama, what a nice dream! But I don’t think we want to reinforce nepotism on the heels of the trump clan.
I guess you’re right. Maybe just one Obama then.
They are all too old. The Democrats have to appoint young justices since it is a lifetime appointment. That is what the repugnicants are doing, and there is a lot to be said for younger appointees. These are people who could serve for 40 or more years.
Good thing about Obamas though is how it will make rethugs head explode. They have enjoyed enough liberal tears, it's time for us to enjoy theirs. I say this knowing full well that they might still steal the election. Contra Barr is not done yet.
Barr seems completely devoid of any ethics whatsoever. Ditto for Trump and McConnell.
Six
13 is my favorite number
YES!!
Maggie Haberman has the best reporting on why Trump is unfit for office.
When was Maggie Haberman a Trump spokesperson? I look for Haberman's byline. To say she is any way a Trump PR flack is as off-base as you can get. I don't think Trump would agree to that characterization either.
Her mother.
Wow, that’s a powerful statement. I am always hoping that maybe she’s not so bad, and perhaps she has access that is the worth her questionable loyalties.
She’s not.
My fear.
I guess it’s some long term relationship between her mother’s company, the Kushner and...?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie_Haberman
Sinclair owns our local news stations...
The "Grey Lady" has been the "Whore of Babylon" for sometime.
Tyranny:
- a nation under cruel and oppressive government.
- cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.
When people or a nation are subjected to tyranny by a minority without granting their consent or support the result is resistance and rebellion. The rebellion is not necessarily violent if the majority has the ability to recapture power and control through peaceful democratic means. However, resistance to suppression of the will of the majority is inevitable and ultimately results in removing the minority from power.
This lesson has been taught repeated throughout history and is not limited to anyone culture or nation. The present Republican Party seems to be oblivious to this constant. They seek to maintain their hold on power and authority despite popular vote losses while also continuing to suppress the will of the majority opposing them. They do not seek to expand their support significantly amongst the population at large by modifying their positions. Rather they only further double down on their pursuit of tyrannical authority.
History tells us without exception the end result will be the majority will remove them from positions of authority and power. Let us all hope this is accomplished peacefully through the power of the ballot.
So, as a follow up to my first post here, someone I know on Facebook posted a “social experiment” suggestion: look at both Biden and trump’s Facebook pages and see how many of your ‘friends’ follow each one. I tried it. I am absolutely stunned. Of my Facebook ‘friends’ 9 ‘liked’ Biden. NINETEEN ‘liked’ trump!!!! I just don’t even have words for this at the moment. I am horrified and will need to think carefully on how I will deal with this and what I will say, if anything. There is clearly work to be done and we cannot be complacent or we will end up with a repeat of 2016. God help us all.
I will say though that my younger sister responded to something posted by Trump’s campaign, and they keep listing her as a fan! She is not a fan at all. So, that could be misleading.
I have been getting mail from the RNC all year. I won’t even follow trump on Twitter, and have called out my 2 Republican senators on a regular basis. I began thinking someone sent or donated in my name. Who knows.
I get tons, TONS of Republican texts, and they are almost creepily harassing and resentful lately, as they ask for money. I can't believe that goes over well with a lot of people who voted for him in 2016. Not sure why I landed on their lists. I never respond.
Mine were 47/41 Biden leading. I wonder how many of the 41 have blocked my posts???
61 for Biden / 14 for Trump. So I clicked on the 14 and noted that 3 were Dem politicians from NC. 3 were friends that definitely didn't support trump. So I am not sure what that all means.
excellent point ... however in my case, I suspect all 41 chose to be where they are. It confounds me.
Mine ended up 27 for Biden, 9 for Trump (and 3 of those I know for a fact follow him not out of support). I suspect that almost all of the remaining 6 have blocked my posts. I don't really care. I have nearly 500 friends and have only blocked a couple, and those have since "de-friended" me. Again, I'm not concerned. I'm cagey about who I "friend" on there and don't like adding anyone I am unsure about or don't REALLY know directly. As a result, I think I have a nice little coterie of folks.
How can anybody have 500 "friends"?
I have friends with over 1 or 2 THOUSAND. My students have quite literally hundreds. 500 is actually fairly modest. As a working professional I crossed paths with a lot of people...
I have a large list, mostly for my advocacy for the elephants. And others for my photography. And I am quite outspoken about my political feelings.
This includes co-workers, business contacts, acquaintances, friends of friends, family, people we know. Mire than the typical definition of “friend.
5/3 for Biden here. I know 2 of the 3 have blocked my posts. One is a retired Navy Captain, one is a media guy with the Tribune Co. and the 3rd is our fresh fish guy. His like doesn't count in the scheme of US politics; he's a Mexican citizen and lives in Progress, Yucatan. I know he hasn't blocked me because he responds to posts where I've complimented the quality of his catch.
Progreso
Perhaps a defensive “like”?
Well, I have a less diverse pool of friends. 86 had bothered to “like” Joe’s page. Just 5 “liked” or had “checked in” at DJT’s page. I have many more friends who are not on FB at all anymore, eschewing it for all the damage done to us (even as we sheepishly cave to the “like” buttons!!) and trying to focus on ‘real life’ engagement.
Talk about complicit corporate entities in the tug of war re: judicial fairness from the American people... we should put FB up with the Federalist Society on that end of the rope.
You might start by reposting these Letters to FB.
I do that often!
I just checked: Of my 512 Facebook friends, 53 like the Biden page, and 14 (as I figured; we're not "real" friends but share an interest in, say, photography) like the Creature's page.
I find the Democrats' reluctance to go on the offense baffling. The Republican side consistently sets the conversation's parameters by attacking the Democrats, who take the defensive position, rather than by countering with a more truthful offense. It sure looks to me that the Rs are packing the Supreme Court, yet the Ds are behaving as if a fait accompli cannot be called out, and instead react to Republican speculation. it's bizarre, and disheartening; it continues to feel as if the parties are having two different conversations.
Yes, I have lost my voice by screaming at them with their dysfunctional dumb reactions to his daily distractions. (Note: this was unintentional alliteration)
Thank you, as always, Heather for your hard work to make sense of this craziness. I am amazed and appalled at the focus on Biden’s refusal to discuss the issue of potential future “court packing”. As Heather states, it is a future hypothetical issue, vs the very real efforts of the current regime. I grew up in a mostly liberal rural area in New England. I recently saw a post on Facebook by a former high school friend saying “that’s it, I will never vote for him because he says we don’t ‘deserve’ to know his position on court packing”. She is a rabbit trump supporter that I have been arguing with on Facebook for the past 4 years. Others have taken up the argument on that post and I have refrained thus far but I am struck by the large number of *females* that I considered friends in high school who are openly angry, rabid trump supporters. I don’t understand how they can support him and, to avoid argument, I haven’t asked. There are plenty of males, too, from the same pool of people. Given our liberal leanings in this area, it worries me. Everyone please keep up the effort to get out the vote for Biden and Harris, I suspect that there are more people like my former classmates than any of us realize and it’s a frightening thought.
*rabid, not rabbit. Wishing for an edit option!
Rabbit kind of made sense--obvuisly someone with an attention span too short to follow onto the deep issues, just boots from one inflammatory news cycle to the next.
And caught, immobilized in Trump's "dazzling" headlights/headlines!
Oops. That needs an edit; 'boots' was supposed to be 'bops '.
Oh yes, I no longer have‘friends or followers’ who are Trumpers! I couldn’t take it. I don’t know how you can stand those conversations!
They definitely raise my blood pressure!
Smear and fear. This is the tRump playbook.
The media either can't learn or are complicit.
Wow, I think you’re right, and that’s very concerning. I am so exasperated by their stupidity, with a few exceptions, and thank God every day for you Heather.
Mostly owned by big business and chasing profits not truth. They, and the internet have killed off local independant media.
The Sinclair Broadcasting Group owns most media and provide scripts that the "news" is required to read on air.
Yes, Sinclair distributes " must runs" to all of its outlets which must be read as written.
Even if they aren’t "must runs", the publisher’s wishes are well known, and not only the editors, but the reporters who work for them know who butters their toast. Moral courage is easy if you don’t have a family to raise in an environment of dwindling journalist jobs. Thank Bill Clinton for his meddling with the FCC.
Another illustration of what reader Shaf is calling minoritarian rule, and how corporate money has gained hegemony over the citizenry’s individual votes.
And our newscasters look so pained when they read them. But that or lose the job. Corporate Democracy.
Like "fresh frozen" or "military intelligence" "corporate democracy" is an oxymoron.
Not most, but certainly a big majority in small and mid-size markets. It was so upsetting when they moved in on our ‘Free Press’! Poison.
You sir, are absolutely correct. Always follow the $$
The Constitution, as the originalists know full well, was written in order to establish an oligarchy, not a true democracy. Voting and the acquisition of public power in all three branches of government was strategically limited (even if more broadly based than in Britain) and changing the electorate through the system of amendments--which requires those in power to vote against their own continued dominance--is difficult. Judge Barrett is a hypocrite of the Phyllis Schlafly school of hypocrisy: she adheres a radically backward-looking agenda that limits women's rights to their own bodies, that proposes that in marriage men should dominate, but craves the public world of the courts, university life, and publicity. She is a living model of exactly what she is trying to prevent other women (especially) from achieving. She is not Scalia: he was not a hypocrite.
Exactly this: “The Constitution ... was written in order to establish an oligarchy ...”
We are taught that this Republic is an expression of ‘Enlightenment’ ideals; “Voltaire, who wanted ... a 'relationship with the Lords of the earth', repeatedly expressed his hatred of the *canaille* - the 'ignoble masses who respect only force and never think'. The Enlightenment *philosophes* sought and enjoyed the patronage of Frederick of Prussia and Catherine of Russia. With the radical exception of Rousseau, they were not interested in social equality. 'We have never claimed to enlighten shoemakers and servant girls.”
(From Pankaj Mishra
Age of Anger: A History of the Present (2017))
Oh.
I really hope that Democrats win the presidency and a senate majority and that they DO add 4 moderate to left-leaning Supreme Court Justices.
Agreed. That would not be not court packing, but court balancing.
Once you start this, where will it end? It is like the Democrats eliminating the filibuster and now the Republicans are benefitting from it. If the Dems add 4 "moderate to left-leaning" justices, the Republicans can just rebalance it when they next get power.
Beware of the longer-term implications before you move that chesspiece.
They should add four justices, then amend the constitution so the court can have no more than 15. Honestly, lock it all up. And add term limits after the current raft dies or retires.
Exactly
and how would you propose amending the Constitution, pray tell?
Dems wise up, get majorities in State legislatures
I don’t know what we need for that. Someone said 2/3rds. If the Dems “pack” the court with four more moderate and/or left-leaning judges, then they might be able to get some Republicans to sign onto an amendment at least for term limits.
It's a conundrum, for sure. But the R's have not been balancing the courts at all. They are the court packers, the pots calling the kettle black. The Dems need to demand "equal time."
This reminds me of Pence's behavior at the VP debate. The moderator asked me to explain exactly how he was going to cover pre-existing conditions without the Affordable Care Act. Instead of answering the moderator at all, he demanded that Sen.Harris talk about "packing" the court. When she did not, he badgered her with "Answer the question!" and he got away with it - neither Harris nor the moderator pointed out that he was avoiding answering the question he had been asked.