https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Quotations on Elections and Character

Time for my quadrennial quoting of folk who have something to say about the US elections

I maintain a website of quotations, so once every four years or so I dip into the grab bag there for other people’s profound words about elections and voting and the like.

This year I had two classes of quotes I picked: ones about character (and, just to be clear, Donald Trump’s lack of anything that can be considered the sort of character you want to have in a US President, or even your McDonalds’ fry wrangler), and ones about voting and participation (and why it’s important).

Here’s what I had to say, cleverly covered up by other people saying it.

Character, and What We Do/Don’t Want in a President’s

If a public man tries to get your vote by saying that he will do something wrong in your interest, you can be absolutely certain that if ever it becomes worth his while he will do something wrong against your interest.

Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) American politician, statesman, conservationist, writer, US President (1901-1909)
Speech (1910-04-23), “Citizenship in a Republic [The Man in the Arena],” Sorbonne, Paris

The supreme quality for leadership is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, no matter whether it is on a section gang, a football field, in an army, or in an office. If a man’s associates find him guilty of phoniness, if they find that he lacks forthright integrity, he will fail. His teachings and actions must square with each other. The first great need, therefore, is integrity and high purpose.

Dwight David Eisenhower (1890-1969) American general, US President (1953-61)
(Attributed)

Eisenhower quote

The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They use isolationism as a slogan to conceal their own selfish imperialism. They cultivate hate and distrust of both Britain and Russia. They claim to be superpatriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.

Henry Wallace (1888-1965) American politician, journalist, farmer, businessman
“The Danger of American Fascism,” New York Times (1944-04-09)

Since the beginning of our American history, we have been engaged in change — in a perpetual peaceful revolution — a revolution which goes on steadily, quietly adjusting itself to changing conditions — without the concentration camp or the quick-lime in the ditch.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945) American lawyer, politician, statesman, US President (1933-1945)
Speech (1941-01-06), “State of the Union [Four Freedoms Speech],” Washington, D. C.

Justice requires us to remember that when any citizen denies his fellow, saying, “His color is not mine,” or “His beliefs are strange and different,” in that moment he betrays America, though his forebears created this Nation.

Lyndon B. Johnson (1908-1973) American politician, educator, US President (1963-69)
Speech (1965-01-20), Inaugural Address, Washington, D. C.

Dependability, integrity, the characteristic of never knowingly doing anything wrong, that you would never cheat anyone, that you would give everybody a fair deal. Character is a sort of an all-inclusive thing. If a man has character, everyone has confidence in him. Soldiers must have confidence in their leader.

Omar Bradley (1893-1981) American general
Interview with Edgar Puryear (1963-02-15)

A democracy cannot function effectively when its constituent members believe laws are being bought and sold.

John Paul Stevens (1920-2019) American lawyer, US Supreme Court Justice (1975-2010)
Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010) [dissenting]

Because power corrupts, society’s demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases.

John Adams (1735-1826) American lawyer, Founding Father, statesman, US President (1797-1801)
(Attributed)

If you don’t understand that you work for your mislabeled “subordinates,” then you know nothing of leadership. You know only tyranny.

Dee W. Hock (b. 1929) American businessman
“Unit of One Anniversary Handbook,” Fast Company (1997-02-28)

The best foreign policy is to live our daily lives in honesty, decency, and integrity; at home, making our own land a more fitting habitation for free men; and abroad, joining with those of like mind and heart, to make of the world a place where all men can dwell in peace.

Dwight David Eisenhower (1890-1969) American general, US President (1953-61)
Inaugural Gabriel Silver lecture, Columbia University (1950-03-23)

For of those to whom much is given, much is required. And when at some future date the high court of history sits in judgment on each of us — recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities to the state — our success or failure, in whatever office we hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions:

First, were we truly men of courage — with the courage to stand up to one’s enemies — and the courage to stand up, when necessary, to one’s associates — the courage to resist public pressure, as well as private greed?

Secondly, were we truly men of judgment — with perceptive judgment of the future as well as the past — of our mistakes as well as the mistakes of others — with enough wisdom to know what we did not know and enough candor to admit it.

Third, were we truly men of integrity — men who never ran out on either the principles in which we believed or the men who believed in us — men whom neither financial gain nor political ambition could ever divert from the fulfillment of our sacred trust?

Finally, were we truly men of dedication — with an honor mortgaged to no single individual or group, and comprised of no private obligation or aim, but devoted solely to serving the public good and the national interest?

Courage — judgment — integrity — dedication — these are the historic qualities […] which, with God’s help […] will characterize our Government’s conduct in the four stormy years that lie ahead.

John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) US President (1961-63)
Speech (1961-01-09), Massachusetts legislature, Boston

You can tell the size of a man by the size of the thing that makes him mad.

Adlai Stevenson (1900-1965) American diplomat, statesman
Speech (1952-08-28), “Faith in Liberalism,” State Committee of the Liberal Party, New York City

You see the thing you have to remember. When you get to be President, there are all those things, the honors, the twenty-one-gun salutes, all those things. You have to remember it isn’t for you. It’s for the Presidency, and you’ve got to keep yourself separate from that in your mind. If you can’t keep the two separate, yourself and the Presidency, you’re in all kinds of trouble.

Harry S Truman (1884-1972) US President (1945-1953)
In Merle Miller, Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman, ch. 15 (1973)

Dishonor in public life has a double poison. When people are dishonorable in private business, they injure only those with whom they deal or their own chances in the next world. But when there is a lack of honor in Government, the morals of the whole people are poisoned.

Herbert Hoover (1874-1964) American engineer, bureaucrat, President of the US (1928-32)
Speech (1951-08-30), “Concerning Honor in Public Life,” Iowa Centennial Celebration (national radio broadcast), Des Moines

The only way of really finding out a man’s true character is to play golf with him. In no other walk of life does the cloven hoof so quickly display itself.

P. G. Wodehouse (1881-1975) Anglo-American humorist, playwright and lyricist [Pelham Grenville Wodehouse]
“Ordeal by Golf,” Collier’s Magazine (1919-12-06)

Precisely in trifles, wherein a man is off his guard, does he show his character, and then we are often able at our leisure to observe in small actions or mere mannerisms the boundless egoism which has not the slightest regard for others and in matters of importance does not afterwards deny itself, although it is disguised. We should never miss such an opportunity. If in the petty affairs and circumstances of everyday life, in the things to which the de minimis lex non curat applies, a man acts inconsiderately, seeking merely his own advantage or convenience to the disadvantage of others; if he appropriates that which exists for everybody; then we may be sure that there is no justice in his heart, but that he would be a scoundrel even on a large scale if his hands were not tied by law and authority; we should not trust him across our threshold. Indeed, whoever boldly breaks the laws of his own circle will also break those of the State whenever he can do so without risk.

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) German philosopher
Parerga and Paralipomena, Vol. 1, “Aphorisms on the Wisdom of Life [Aphorismen zur Lebensweisheit],” ch. 4 “Counsels and Maxims [Paränesen und Maximen],” § 3.29 (1851) [tr. Payne (1974)]

Something of a person’s character may be discovered by observing when and how he smiles. Some people never smile; they grin.

Christian Nestell Bovee (1820-1904) American epigrammatist, writer, publisher
Intuitions and Summaries of Thought, vol. 2 (1862)

We can have no better clue to a man’s character than the company he keeps.

Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) Italian politician, philosopher, political scientist
The Discourses on Livy, Book 3, ch. 34 (1517) [tr. Thomson (1883)]

Machiavelli quote

Voting and Democracy and Participation and Elections

Build movements. Vote with your values, but vote strategically. Voting isn’t a Valentine. It’s a chess move.

Rebecca Solnit (b. 1961) American writer, historian, activist
Facebook (2016-10-17)

Solnit quotation

If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too. And when a nation has to fight for its freedom, it can only hope to win if it possesses certain qualities: honesty, courage, loyalty, vision and self-sacrifice. If it does not possess them, it has only itself to blame if it loses its freedom.

W. Somerset Maugham (1874-1965) English novelist and playwright [William Somerset Maugham]
Strictly Personal, § 30 (1941)

Of course I vote! If you’re a woman, or a person of color, or a person who doesn’t own property, or even a white male who doesn’t belong to the nobility, centuries of struggle and many deaths have bought you the right to vote. I vote to keep faith with peasant rebels and suffragist hunger strikers and civil rights workers braving the lynch mobs of the South, if for no other reason. But there is another reason — because who we vote for has an enormous impact on real peoples’ lives.

Starhawk (b. 1951) American writer, activist, feminist theologian [b. Miriam Simos]
Blog post (2016-11-07), “Pre-Election Day Thoughts”

Monarchy is like a sleek craft, it sails along well until some bumbling captain runs it into the rocks. Democracy, on the other hand, is like a raft. It never goes down but, dammit, your feet are always wet.

Fisher Ames (1758-1808) American politician, orator
(Attributed)

Ames quotation

The people — the people — are the rightful masters of both Congresses, and courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it.

Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865) American lawyer, politician, US President (1861-65)
Speech (1859-09-16), Columbus, Ohio

Another point of disagreement [with Lesser Evil Voting] is not factual but involves the ethical/moral principle […] sometimes referred to as the “politics of moral witness.” Generally associated with the religious left, secular leftists implicitly invoke it when they reject LEV on the grounds that “a lesser of two evils is still evil.” Leaving aside the obvious rejoinder that this is exactly the point of lesser evil voting — i.e. to do less evil, what needs to be challenged is the assumption that voting should be seen a form of individual self-expression rather than as an act to be judged on its likely consequences. […] The basic moral principle at stake is simple: not only must we take responsibility for our actions, but the consequences of our actions for others are a far more important consideration than feeling good about ourselves.

Noam Chomsky (b. 1928) American linguist and activist
“An Eight Point Brief for LEV (Lesser Evil Voting)” (2016-06-15) [with John Halle]

Bad officials are elected by good people who do not vote.

George Jean Nathan (1892-1958) American editor and critic
(Attributed)

The punishment which the wise suffer who refuse to take part in the government is to live under the government of worse men.

Plato (c.428-347 BC) Greek philosopher
Republic, Book 1, 347c

Plato quote

I am a democrat because I believe in the Fall of Man. I think most people are democrats for the opposite reason. A great deal of democratic enthusiasm descends from the ideas of people like Rousseau, who believed in democracy because they thought mankind so wise and good that everyone deserved a share in government. The danger of defending democracy on those grounds is that they’re not true. And whenever their weakness is exposed, the people who prefer tyranny make capital out of the exposure. I find that they’re not true without looking further than myself. I don’t deserve a share in governing a hen-roost, much less a nation. Nor do most people — all the people who believe advertisements, and think in catchwords and spread rumours. The real reason for democracy is just the reverse. Mankind is so fallen that no man can be trusted with unchecked power over his fellows. Aristotle said that some people were only fit to be slaves. I do not contradict him. But I reject slavery because I see no men fit to be masters.

C. S. Lewis (1898-1963) English writer, literary scholar, lay theologian [Clive Staples Lewis]
Essay (1943-08-27), “Equality,” The Spectator

CALVIN: When I grow up, I’m not going to read the newspaper and I’m not going to follow complex issues and I’m not going to vote. That way I can complain when the government doesn’t represent me. Then, when everything goes down the tubes, I can say the system doesn’t work and justify my further lack of participation.

HOBBES: An ingeniously self-fulfilling plan.

CALVIN: It’s a lot more fun to blame things than to fix them.

Bill Watterson (b. 1958) American cartoonist
Calvin and Hobbes (1992-05-18)

Calvin and Hobbes comic

Colorado Ballot Initiatives 2024 (and how I’m voting on them)

Ballot initiatives are direct democracy. Here’s how I’m voting.

I’ve been doing these sorts of analyses for several years here on the (woefully under-uitilized) blog. So let’s look at what’s on the ballot in the way of Amendments and Propositions this year.

So two things first:

One, the idea of the legislature referring issues to the citizenry to approve (and, better yet, letting citizens themselves propose such things) was one of the great Progressive reforms from over a century ago, along with statewide votes for US Senators and women’s suffrage.

Has putting up measures been an unalloyed success? Certainly not. It has, in fact, led to state constitutions full of clutter and cruft, badly written laws and amendments, and too often, populist measures that hamstring government’s abilities to deliver services to those that need them.

That said, this limited effort at direct democracy helps break lawmaking out of the hands of partisan politicians who are most interested in what their more wealthy lobbyists want to see in the way of law. That’s a good thing, far outweighing cases of human frailty, to which the citizenry at large is no more prone to than their elected representatives.

Second — boy, howdy, do we have a lot of measures on this year’s ballot in Colorado: seven Constitutional amendments and seven propositions for new laws. So … we’d better get started.

As a guide, ballot proposals with a letter were put there by the legislature (cowards). Those with numbers were put on by citizen initiative.

Constitutional Amendments

Amendment G: Modify Property Tax Exemption for Veterans with Disabilities: NO?

I feel a deep, but not unlimited, appreciation for veterans, especially those whose service has left them unable to work. This proposition would expand an existing homestead-style property tax exemption (on the first $200K value of their house) to vets with a disabilities as judged under an alternate VA criterion, impacting some 3700 veterans int he state.

But … I’m not seeing it. It seems to complicate property tax matters significantly, to the tune of some $1.8M a year. Seems there should be a better way here. I’m not sure of my NO vote — I want to do a bit more research — but that’s the way I’m leaning.

Amendment H: Judicial Discipline Procedures and Confidentiality: YES

In current judicial discipline proceedings, matters are handled by other judges, and the proceedings themselves stay confidential unless the disciplinary panel of judges selected by the state supreme court decides on public sanctions. That just feels a little too cozy and self-adjudicating to me.

The new arrangement would have an independent board consisting of judges, lawyers, and citizens, and charges would be made public at the beginning of processes — which sounds like sauce for the gander to me.

Amendment I: Constitutional Bail Exception for First Degree Murder: YES?

I swung from maybe-no to maybe-yes for this. My initial reaction was to not go along with something that further cracks down on bail, which is the reverse of (good) current trends.

(Bail is a one-size-fits-all way to let rich people get out of jail while awaiting trial, and to keep poor people in jail, getting more poor because they lose their jobs because they are in jail, and making them desperate to get things done with.)

But this one requires a bit more reading before treating it as a straightforward bail question.

Colorado law already allow judges to deny bail for particularly heinous crimes such as first degree murder where (a) the death penalty could be imposed, and (b) “the proof is evident and the presumption is great” of guilt.

That’s how things stood since the state became a state … until in 2020 the state (appropriately) abolished the death penalty. Good move, state, but, oops. Suddenly a vicious axe murder where the accused was found standing over the body with a bloody axe in their hand became a case where judges were required to offer bail because no crime could incur the death penalty.

This measure basically restores the bail status quo ante.

On that level, I’m inclined to vote Yes. There is the potential for miscarriage of justice (they only seem guilty) to occur, but I think the overall rule feels sound.

Amendment J: Repealing the Definition of Marriage in the Constitution: YES!

In 2006, Colorado (back in its red-leaning days) passed a “Definition of Marriage” constitutional amendment: one man + one woman = Constitutional Marriage!

In 2015-2015, both the state supreme court and SCOTUS ruled (correctly) that bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, invalidating that amendment … which still remained on the books.

The current SCOTUS seems to be licking its chops to overturn that Obergefell precedent, which could suddenly make that wretched Colorado DOMA provision take effect again. Bah.

And the only argument presented against this new amendment is … well, gay marriage is icky and sinful and wrong, so we should await SCOTUS to get rid of it so we can go back to respecting good, pure, honest, different-sex, Christian marriages like those celebrated at the Church of Elvis in Reno, Nevada.

Double bah.

Amendment K: Modify Constitutional Election Deadlines: NO?

Basically requires various election filings and public publication of ballot measures in newspapers to happen sooner. The argument is that it will  make life more convenient for election officials. To me, it’s just feels designed to make it more difficult for citizens to impact elections. I’m unconvinced it’s necessary or beneficial, thus No.

Amendment 79: Constitutional Right to Abortion: YES!

The 2022 SCOTUS Dobbs ruling basically said there was no federal protection for abortion, so states could do what they wanted. So here’s where Colorado can follow that guidance. Not only does this amendment establish the right to an abortion in the state constitution, it gets rid of language that prohibited the state from covering it under Medicaid or state employee health insurance.

There are basically two arguments offered against this:

  1. It might make it hard to pass new laws restricting abortion! Duh.
  2. People shouldn’t have to pay taxes to cover things they object to! Please try that argument with the IRS as to why you shouldn’t have to pay taxes to support “welfare queens” (or the “military-industrial complex”).

Amendment 80: Constitutional Right to School Choice: NO.

This would enshrine the right to K-12 “school choice.” It would not immediately change any laws, but would clearly lay the groundwork that parents should get paid for homeschooling, or that religious schools should get my state tax dollars (see #2’s argument in the previous amendment — I’ll admit to my inconsistency if they admit to theirs).

As a former public school teacher, and as someone whose kid went through public schools — I just say No.

Ballot Propositions

Proposition JJ: Retain Additional Sports Betting Tax Revenue: YES

This state (under the insidious influence of Douglas Bruce) fell into the trap of tax measures being required to refund any taxes above certain limits. In the case of the (I didn’t vote for it) legalization of sports betting a few years back, any tax revenues brought in over some voter-approved limit get refunded to the casinos. This proposition keeps the money and sends it to where the rest of it is sent to: water conservation and protection projects.

I am not a fan of “sin taxes” to support things that the government should be paying for. But sending tax refund checks to casinos and betting parlors is ridonculous. Yes.

Proposition KK: Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax: YES

Again, sin taxes are often sketchy (if it’s worthwhile funding crime victim services, mental health services for vets and youth, and school safety programs, then pony up and do so without using a whipping boy to make it more attractive and thereby incent the state to keep that revenue flowing as well as incenting bootlegging).

That said a 6.5% tax on guns and ammo isn’t going to break anybody’s bank.

So sure, as reinforced by the Arguments Against of “GUNS! FREEDOM!” and “I will be killed by Venezuelan dog-eaters because I won’t be able to afford an AR-15!”

Proposition 127: Prohibit Bobcat, Lynx, and Mountain Lion Hunting: NO?

This would make Bobcats and Mountain Lions (Lynx are already protected) illegal to hunt.

I’m not a hunter, and tend to feel a bit queasy about the whole subject, but neither Bobcats or Mountain Lions are endangered species, so that would tend to make me think that current hunting/culling of those predators is working pretty decently. We do have a surplus of deer in the state, so increasing those predator populations some might not be a bad idea, but I’d rather see the state wildlife folk gauge that based on, oh, science, rather than “Oh, it will be fine if we let mountain lions increase their populations and not worry about hunters any more.”

(As a note, 500 mountain lions are successfully hunted — I won’t use the awful term “harvested” — each year, of an estimated 4,000 stable population.)

Proposition 128: Parole Eligibility for Crimes of Violence: NO.

Basically this tweaks the formula of what percentage of a sentence for violent offenses must be served, and how earned time impacts sentences. It will probably pass because it is a “tough on crime” proposition, which are always popular, but basically it means that someone sentenced to a 20-year sentence will most likely serve 17-19 years instead of 14-19 years …

… which seems a fairly trivial difference, esp. as it removes some incentives for convicts to behave and better themselves.

Proposition 129: Establishing Veterinary Professional Associates: YES?

This would create a new category of veterinary workers, basically working off of a Masters degree rather than a Doctorate, with an eye to increasing access to veterinary services in rural and less populated areas. It’s sort of like the proliferation of different types of nurses / physician’s assistant categories.

That said, there seems to be some value here, and the “Against” argument that “the state board that would oversee this hasn’t given specific criteria for the role, so who knows what crazy thing might happen?” seems kind of weak.

Proposition 130: Funding for Law Enforcement: NO.

This proposition slices off $350M as a one-off fund to go to recruiting more police and retaining the ones they have (i.e., increase salaries), with the feel-good addendum of the state paying a $1M death benefit to the family of state or local law enforcement offices who are killed in the line of duty.

Despite the advocates’ cry of impoverished police departments, I haven’t seen any actual numbers presented. In general, I don’t think the state should be funding local law enforcement. This just seems like a money grab for law enforcement without any demonstration that it will actually impact crime.

Most law enforcement have pensions that pay out to surviving families, or death and disability insurance that does same. If that’s not adequate, then address that in a more coherent way. And I mean, $1M for the family of an heroic police officer who does in the line of duty sounds great, but why just limit that to cops? Are there no other valuable and/or dangerous professions where the state should start paying out big dollars upon the death of a worker?

Proposition 131: Establishing All-Candidate Primary and Ranked Choice Voting General Elections: YES.

The current system basically guarantees that either the person the Democrats nominate, or the person the Republicans nominate, will win the state or federal position they are running for … and the two-party partisan constituency of electoral districts makes that, in too many cases, a partisan slam-dunk.

Ranked Choice Voting lets people vote for the person they actually like most, rather than being forced to choose between the D and the R, without the fear that they are “throwing their vote away.” And the accusations that it is “difficult to understand” or that it will cost zillions of dollars to explain seems highly patronizing to me.

I am less sanguine about All-Candidate Primaries — I feel it’s less necessary if RCV is in play — but I’m not strongly opposed to it.

Bottom line, this weakens political parties (who are the folk most vigorously opposing it), encourages people to vote for who they want (vs. who they think is likely to win), and arguably promotes more moderate candidates. Those are all good things.

Net-Net

So, there we are: 8 I am inclined to vote for, 6 I am inclined to vote against. I’ll be doing a bit more research on some of those; if I change my mind, I’ll let you know.

Oh, yeah, I have a blog, don’t I?

Yes, the chirping crickets are real

Wow. I’ve been doing a piss-poor job of updating the blog here.

Yeah, yeah, all the normal reasons. Job really stressful. Busy with stuff at home. But ultimately it really is about prioritization: I’ve doing plenty of stuff with my quotations blog, and even my gaming blog has been getting some love.

What I usually do here has traditionally been “my life” (boring), “my pop culture stuff” (uninspiring of late), and “my politics”.

Aha.

Politics has been — a wildly stressful hot mess.  Trump & Co. are simultaneously terrifying and fury-inducing in their smug proto-fascism and very direct threat to people I love (and, hell, to me under certain not-necessarily-the-worst-case scenarios). Biden’s problems filled me with existential dread (since somewhat alleviated by Harris — but that’s a whole other set of posts). And, with everything else going on, it’s just hard to write about and face that terror and dread and fury in a way that isn’t just incoherent keyboard smashing.

Sigh.

(And, yes, feel free to mutter “Trump derangement syndrome” … and keep walking on.)

Can’t promise I’ll be more active here, but it’s bubbled to the top of my attention again, so … let’s hope for the best.

Stress Brain word cloud
This is my brain on stress. Any questions?

Catering to the torches and pitchforks encourages more torches and pitchforks

And weakening the rule of law out of fear doesn’t make anyone any safer

Timothy Snyder has a good piece here on the dangers involved in the “commentariat” pushing SCOTUS to a “pitchfork” ruling on Colorado ‘s pushing Trump off the ballot.  By saying Colorado Supreme Court should be overruled because its ruling is “divisive” or will “inflame” the January 6th folk who were carrying around virtual torches and pitchforks, the politicos and pundits on both sides of the aisle would fundamentally weaken the rule of law … and simply encourage the folk waving pitchforks to wave them more, knowing they will get their way.

snyder.substack.com/p/the-pitc

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

The Pro-Active Pardon

Haley and DeSantis belittle the rule of law by preemptively declaring they would pardon Trump were they elected President

Is it must me, or is there something deeply unserious about both Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis pledging they would, of course, pardon Trump of any federal convictions. Regardless of any further evidence. Regardless of what judges and/or juries decide.

Sure, DeSantis insists it’s just akin of Ford pardoning Nixon to help “re-unite a divided country.” Except, pardoning Trump wouldn’t reunite anything. For Trump opponents it would be seen as complete and utter politics. For Trump, and his mob, it would be taken as an exoneration. And Trump would be stirring up the next insurrection, unabashed and emboldened.

Ford could barely get away with pardoning Nixon — and, in fact, it sank his chances of a second term — because he was respected and liked going into the job, and wasn’t seen as being part of Nixon’s corrupt coterie. He was deeply criticized for poor judgment in pardoning Nixon, but it wasn’t seen as as partisan corruption. That would hardly apply to either Haley or DeSantis doing the same thing for Trump — especially, in the circumstances they describe, he would already be convicted, something Nixon never was.

Do I really think that Haley and DeSantis think Trump shouldn’t be punished for what he did, or that they are seeking some sort of cleansing national unity? Of course not. At the most obvious, they are hoping  to garner presidential votes by appealing to the Trumpist mob. More likely, they simply want to tee themselves up as being part of the MAGA movement that, however the election in November turns out, will propel them to future power.

washingtonpost.com/politics/20

The Unbearable Lightness of Being Kim Jong Un

“People aren’t paying attention to me? How rude! Better make some new threats!

Sounds like Kim is feeling a bit neglected. Like his favorite former US President, he hates it when people aren’t paying him attention.

To be fair, he doesn’t sound much different from … Ron DeSantis?

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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″]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

Lindsey folds. Again.

Lindsey Graham deserves to either be remembered forever, or forgotten forever.

As Lindsey Graham takes the last, squishy bits of spine he had left, carefully places it in Ziplok bag, and leaves it in the back of Trump ‘s fridge, somewhere between 2003 KFC leftovers and a container of Putin’s favorite borscht.

thehill.com/homenews/senate/43

[visual-link-preview encoded=”eyJ0eXBlIjoiZXh0ZXJuYWwiLCJwb3N0IjowLCJwb3N0X2xhYmVsIjoiIiwidXJsIjoiaHR0cHM6Ly90aGVoaWxsLmNvbS9ob21lbmV3cy9zZW5hdGUvNDM4MzMwNy1ncmFoYW0tYmFja3RyYWNrcy1vbi1lYXJsaWVyLWphbi02LWNyaXRpY2lzbS1vZi10cnVtcC1pdC1kZXBlbmRzLW9uLXdoYXQtdGhlLWNvbmR1Y3QtaXMvIiwiaW1hZ2VfaWQiOi0xLCJpbWFnZV91cmwiOiJodHRwczovL3RoZWhpbGwuY29tL3dwLWNvbnRlbnQvdXBsb2Fkcy9zaXRlcy8yLzIwMjMvMTAvQVAyMzI5NTU5ODk2MTMzNi1lMTY5ODg0NDExNjQwMS5qcGc/dz0xMjgwIiwidGl0bGUiOiJHcmFoYW0gYmFja3RyYWNrcyBvbiBlYXJsaWVyIEphbi4gNiBjcml0aWNpc20gb2YgVHJ1bXA6IOKAmEl0IGRlcGVuZHMgb24gd2hhdCB0aGUgY29uZHVjdCBpc+KAmSIsInN1bW1hcnkiOiJTZW4uIExpbmRzZXkgR3JhaGFtIChSLVMuQy4pIG9uIFN1bmRheSBhcHBlYXJlZCB0byBiYWNrdHJhY2sgb24gZWFybGllciBjcml0aWNpc20gb2YgZm9ybWVyIFByZXNpZGVudCBUcnVtcOKAmXMgYWN0aW9ucyBvbiBKYW4uIDYgYW5kIHN1Z2dlc3RlZCBpbnN0ZWFkIHRoYXQgaGlzIHByZXNpZGVudGlhbCBpbW11bml0eSBkZWZlbnNlIHdhcyDigJxhIGzigKYiLCJ0ZW1wbGF0ZSI6InVzZV9kZWZhdWx0X2Zyb21fc2V0dGluZ3MifQ==”]

Trump just likes being mean to people

Trump’s rule: If you don’t have something nice to say about someone, say it even louder.

I find it difficult to believe that Trump has particular feelings, one way or the other, over care and treatment of transgender kids, except that it makes a convenient cudgel for him to rile up the troops.

“DeWine has fallen to the Radical Left. No wonder he gets loudly booed in Ohio every time I introduce him at Rallies, but I won’t be introducing him any more. I’m finished with this ‘stiff.’ What was he thinking.”

I mean, DeWine is about as reliably Right as you can find. But after taking the time to look at what the Ohio lege’s gender-affirming health care ban would do, he took a principled stand and said, “No, this is going to hurt people.”

Which just teed him up for Trump’s criticism because, hey, hurting people is what Donald is all about.

thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/438

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

Nikki Haley tries to dance around Slavery and the Civil War

Because the only acceptable answer in the GOP is that the Civil War was about Big Government!

It makes little difference what Nikki Haley actually believes. She simply cannot be trusted. She has shown herself adept at saying things that sound relatively sane one sentence, and then making appeals to the MAGA Right with the next.

She is either a fanatic herself, or (my belief) disingenuously willing to glibly court the fanatics.

And she is still arguably the least-worst of the folk at-all-possibly-getting-the-GOP-nomination-for-President .

politico.com/news/2023/12/27/h

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

UPDATE:

Aaaand … Nikki Haley backtracks, admits that, yeah, slavery was the cause of the Civil War … which will doubtless draw more criticism from both sides.

She then deflects and says the person who asked the original question was a “Democratic plant” … which is altogether possible, but doesn’t address her inability to give the answer she knows is true in the first place.

So Haley is willing to tell the truth about the Civil War when forced to, but not when she isn’t. Got it.

forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2023

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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″]

Boebert bails on her Congressional District

If you can win in your own district … move to another!

So, scared (and rightfully so) that she will lose next year if she stays in her own CO-3 district, given how much folk have grown to dislike her shenanigans there, Lauren Boebert is carpet-bagging over to CO-4, where old school reactionary Ken Buck is retiring from.

That makes the Dem running again in CO-3 less likely to win that solid-red district… but I doubt the CO-4 GOP are going to be any more tolerant of Boebert’s bad behavior.

9news.com/article/news/politic

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

Florida’s school book bans go beyond sex, gender, and race

Florida’s race to get rid of Evil Sex Books has swept up a number of Jewish authors

But, hey, let’s talk about how “liberals” are anti-Semitic.

“Florida district pulls many Jewish and Holocaust books from classroom libraries”

A global bestseller by a Jewish Holocaust victim; a novel by a beloved and politically conservative Jewish American writer; a memoir of growing up mixed-race and Jewish; and a contemporary novel about a high-achieving Jewish family are among the nearly 700 books a Florida school district removed from classroom libraries this year in fear of violating state laws on sexual content in schools.

The purge of books from Orange County Public Schools, in Orlando, over the course of the past semester is the latest consequence of a conservative movement across the country — and strongest in Florida — to rid public and school libraries of materials deemed offensive. While the vast majority of such challenged and removed books involve race, gender and sexuality, several Jewish books have previously been caught in the dragnet.

The Orange County case is unusual for the sheer volume of books removed — 699 including some duplicates, according to documents the district provided — and for the unusually large number of books about the Holocaust and Jewish identity included among them.

timesofisrael.com/florida-dist

“Presidential Immunity for me but not for thee”

Trump says that if he doesn’t get full immunity, he’ll prosecute Biden without it. “Merry Christmas”

Short Trump: “Presidents get total immunity. But only me. Biden I will totally prosecute for shit.”

What an asshole.

“Trump rails against special counsel Jack Smith in Christmas Eve posts”

The former president said Biden would be prosecuted without presidential immunity for the way he handled the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 and his handling of the U.S. southern border.

Trump said in another post that Smith is one of Biden’s “misfits and thugs” who are going after him “at levels of persecution never seen before in our country.”

“It’s called election interference. Merry Christmas!” Trump said.

thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefin

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

The Unbearable GOPness of Being Earl

Earl is the recipient of more GOP awards than you can imagine. Also, he’s a deadbeat.

Some time in the shadows of the past … the Republican Party decided I was Earl.

I am not, in fact, Earl. But, based on my mobile phone number, receiving texts, they think I am. Oddly enough, they also think I live in the ZIP code where I work.

After a week or two of getting 5-6 texts a day, I set the texting number to spam, so it didn’t show up in my notifications … but it continued to download, and when I upgraded my phone, the spam setting got lost, meaning I was subject to a flood of Earl texts.

GOP elephantLooking at them this time around, they’re actually kind of fascinating. Yes, I have gotten enough Democratic Party texts to realize that this is not just a GOP thang. But on reviewing them in bulk, a few fascinating trends still stand out:

  1. MONEY. The important thing is getting money. Not swaying Earl to particular partisan positions, or rooting for (or against) particular people,  but getting Earl to send the GOP … MONEY.
  2. But, for the most part, that’s not done by appealing to Earl as a recruit in ideological beliefs. It’s done by making Earl part of the team … the few … the chosen … the elite.
  3. There’s lots of urgency, though. Earl must donate right now or else he, and the country, but most importantly he, will lose something important.
  4. There’s a fair amount of shaming that goes on. When Earl doesn’t answer the call, the disappointment, the sadness, the bewildered loss, is palpable.
  5. On the other hand, there’s plenty of carrot to go with the shaming stick. No matter what Earl does (or, in this case, doesn’t) donate, the GOP is always willing to honor him for purported past glory and as someone really important to the cause.

In short, it’s a campaign very little about politics, and very much about tribes, and the shame of not supporting the tribe, or the righteous and acknowledged joy of doing so.

Bear in mind, Earl’s texts have been coming to my phone for months, 4-5 times a day. Unless he’s giving through other paths, he hasn’t been a Loyal, Stalwart Supporter from this firehose. But the algorithm throws out carrots and sticks regardless of what Earl does. Earl is just a cog in the Great Money Machine that is the Republican Base.

Here is the saga of Earl over the course of January, with links and other identifying markers (except the name!) scrubbed.

Ronna McDaniel: Happy New Year from everyone at the Republican National Committee!
May 2023 be a year filled with blessings & good fortune.

One of a passing few messages without a link to send money.

You’ve been given a 30 MINUTE EXTENSION to activate your 5000% IMPACT INCREASE! What are you waiting for?? CLAIM: (link)

Only 30 minutes more to give money? Noooooo!

Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)

Wow! A Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase! I’ve always wanted to make an impact …

In recognition of all you’ve done for the GOP, please accept this GOP Golden Elephant! It even comes with a 300% IMPACT INCREASE: (link)

Oh, no! I lost my 5000% impact increase. Oh, wait, three hours later …

Your 5000% IMPACT INCREASE was just extended. Claim it NOW & help CRUSH our Extended End-of-Year Goal! Act NOW >> (link)


You’ve been granted access to our 2023 Platform Audit before almost ANY OTHER PATRIOT. Make your voice HEARD >> (link)

I guarantee that, after I audit the platform, the party will ask me for money.

Earl, YOU’VE BEEN UPGRADED! To confirm your Republican Diamond Club Status, press HERE >> (link)

Republican Diamond Status! Wow! I wonder what it takes to actually confirm that …?

Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)

Again?

We CRUSHED our End-of-Year fundraising goal! To show our gratitude, we’ve EXTENDED your 5000% IMPACT until MIDNIGHT TONIGHT. ACT: (link)

Hey, I’m back to 5000% Impact!

OFFER EXTENDED! There’s still time to claim your 5000% impact increase & help CRUSH our Extended End-of-Year Goal. Act: (link)


INFORMATION REQUESTED: Your response to the Republican Verification Canvass will represent the ENTIRE (ZIPcode) area! Answer: (link)

I find it interesting that the GOP thinks I (Earl) live in the ZIP code of where my office is. It is, indeed, a fairly high-income and likely Republican population. Which makes it a bit weird that I (Earl) will get to represent the entire ZIP code’s population in myh answers to the Republican Verification Caucus.

Republican leaders have selected YOU for our Lifetime Achievement Award! Your award even comes with a 250% INCREASE! 1 HR to ACCEPT: (link)

Only one hour! Eek!

You’ve been given a 30 MINUTE EXTENSION to activate your 5000% IMPACT INCREASE! What are you waiting for?? CLAIM: (link)

Wait, that’s a bigger impact, but a different time of increase, but it isn’t part of a Lifetime Achievement Award. I feel so confused!

DON’T MISS OUT! We need YOU to take the Presidential Preference Poll & help select our NEXT Republican Presidential nominee. ACT >> (link)

Are you suggesting that the national party actually selects the candidate, not the state primaries and caucuses? Weird!

EXTENDED OFFER: Claim 5000% IMPACT on ALL contributions to prepare the Republican Party for 2023! DEADLINE: MIDNIGHT >> (link)

My 5000% is back! But with a new, even closer deadline!

In recognition of all you’ve done for the GOP, please accept this GOP Golden Elephant! It even comes with a 300% IMPACT INCREASE: (link)

Another GOP Golden Elephant? Or is this the same one? Is it 300% of 5000%, or is this a different offer? It’s all coming too fast (or too slowly, every 3 hours or so).

Your 5000% IMPACT INCREASE was just extended. Claim it NOW & help CRUSH our Extended End-of-Year Goal! Act NOW >> (link)


FINAL REMINDER
Your Republican Advisory Board offer will be REVOKED unless you ACT >> (link)

Oh, no! I will be thrown out of the tribe!

You won! The GOP selected you to receive a 5000%-IMPACT extension! We only give out a few per month! Active for 30 MIN. CLAIM PRIZE: (link)

I feel very special. One of the very few to get that 5000% Impact Extension Prizes!

CHOSEN, Earl. The Republican Party chose you for a personal 5000%-IMPACT Extension. Are you going to claim it? Donate NOW: (link)

At last, an actual call to Donate.

We trust that YOUR opinions represent the ENTIRE (ZIP code) area! Take the 2023 Republican Platform Audit NOW >> (link)

I suspect MY opinions, in fact, do not.

ATTENTION CANDIDATE: Complete the GOP’s Official Survey to join the Republican Advisory Board. DEADLINE: MIDNIGHT TONIGHT >> (link)

The Republican Advisory Board? I will be able to advise Republicans if I just complete an Official Survey? Wow!

You’ve been given a 30 MINUTE EXTENSION to activate your 5000% IMPACT INCREASE! What are you waiting for??
CLAIM: (link)

What, in fact, am I waiting for?

You didn’t respond to our last text. We selected the BEST PATRIOTS for a 50X-IMPACT Extension. You’re the last 1 remaining! Donate: (link)

Oh my God! Of all the BEST PATRIOTS, I am (and I am sure I can believe this) the only one who didn’t respond to that 50X (or 5000%, whichever sound more impressive) impact extension. The shame of it!

Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)

But even if I didn’t give any money from this number for many, many months, I get a Lifetime Achievement ( and all-important Impact Increase) … this feels like a mixed message.

Is this still Earl’s number? You STILL haven’t told us. Who do you want to see in the White House?
Respond HERE>> (link)

Oh, no! They’re onto me!

Membership Pending: Complete the GOP’s Official Survey & secure 1 of the last remaining spots on the Republican Advisory Board. >> (link)

But I’m still being offered one of the last remaining spots!

PLEASE CONFIRM
To accept your GOP Gold Club Membership, press HERE >> (link)


ABBOTT OR BIDEN: Who do YOU think is handling the border crisis better? Tell us HERE >> (link)

Ooooh. Tough call. I’m sure that Earl would be a much more impartial observer of this than me.

You’ve been given a 30 MINUTE EXTENSION to activate your 5000% IMPACT INCREASE! What are you waiting for?? CLAIM: (link)


Take the Congressional Agenda Survey & tell us what Republicans should focus on! 1 HR.
Act NOW >> (link)


You are officially invited to join the Republican Diamond Club. Claim your membership HERE >> (link)

My cup runneth over.

This is your opportunity to provide the GOP with critical insight into YOUR AREA! Complete the 2023 Platform Audit HERE: (link)


Better late than never! Welcome Biden to the border for the FIRST time by signing our Southern Border Postcard! Add your name NOW: (link)


INFORMATION REQUESTED: Your response to the Republican Verification Canvass will represent the ENTIRE (ZIP code) area! Answer NOW: (link)


As a respected conservative leader, we need to hear from YOU. Fill out your Republican Sample Ballot NOW: (link)


Republican leaders have selected YOU for our Lifetime Achievement Award! Your award even comes with a 250% INCREASE! 1 HR to ACCEPT: (link)


Looking to make a HUGE difference for the Republican Party? Join the GOP Gold Club before your invitation EXPIRES: (link)

Audits! Post cards! Sample ballots! Lifetime Achievement Awards! Gold Club invites! Who can possibly deserve all this attention?

Is it time to end Biden’s FAILED POLICIES & secure our southern border? 1 HR to respond. Take the poll NOW >> (link)

I suspect this may not be a broadly representative poll.

Border numbers are in, and the crisis is continuing to spiral out of control! Is it time to END THE BIDEN BORDER CRISIS? Vote NOW >> (link)

Gosh, if the crisis is continuing to spiral out of control … well, yeah, I guess it’s time to end the crisis.

Earl, it’s time to fill out your Republican Sample Ballot. You can do that HERE >> (link)


Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)

I am, in fact, a winner! The GOP texts tell me so!

Are you awake, Earl? We chose YOU to join the Republican Advisory Board, but you FAILED to accept the spot! Hurry & claim: (link)

I feel so ashamed!

Republican leaders have selected YOU for our Lifetime Achievement Award! Your award even comes with a 250% INCREASE! 1 HR to ACCEPT: (link)

Wait, I’m down to only a 250% increase! Oh, no!

We are sending results from the Presidential Preference Poll to GOP leaders in 1 HR. Can I include your name, Earl?
Act: (link)

Wow … the GOP leaders will see my name? Wow!

This is SAD! We selected YOU to complete our 2023 Audit, but you NEVER RESPONDED. Take the Platform Audit NOW >> (link)

I feel so ashamed. The GOP doesn’t love me any more.

Earl, YOU’VE BEEN UPGRADED! To confirm your Republican Diamond Club Status, press HERE >> (link)

The GOP loves me again!

As a respected conservative leader, we need to hear from YOU. Fill out your Republican Sample Ballot NOW: (link)

That feels a bit blunt.

Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in your area & never responded! Fill out your Republican sample Ballot: (link)

OMG, I was SELECTED but never responded! What madness seized me?

Your Congressional Agenda Survey is ENCLOSED. We need your response in 1 HR! Complete HERE: (link)


Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)

They love me.

IS YOUR PHONE OFF? You were HAND-SELECTED to represent the (ZIP code) area & NEVER RESPONDED! Take the 2023 Platform Audit NOW: (link)

They love me not.

LEVEL UP!
You’ve reached ELITE company by qualifying for the Republican Diamond Club! Join NOW >> (link)

They love me.

We’re sending results from the Presidential Preference Poll to GOP leaders in 1 HR. Can I include your name, Earl?
Act: (link)

Again, my name!

This is SAD! We selected YOU to complete our 2023 Audit, but you NEVER RESPONDED. Take the Platform Audit NOW >> (link)

I am ashamed!

You satisfied all the criteria for an RNC MERIT BADGE! Accept your award, and 200% INCREASE, before it EXPIRES >> (link)


Republican leaders have selected YOU for our Lifetime Achievement Award! Your award even comes with a 250% INCREASE! 1 HR to ACCEPT: (link)


As a respected conservative leader, we need to hear from YOU.
Fill out your Republican Sample Ballot NOW: (link)


Earl, YOU’VE BEEN UPGRADED!
To confirm your Republican Diamond Club Status, Press HERE >> (link)


We chose YOU! As our BEST PATRIOT, we want you to represent your area & take the Congressional Agenda Survey. Take it NOW >> (link)

Ha! Even though I never responded to the 2023 Audit (SAD!), I got a merit badge, a Lifetime Achievement Award, a Sample Ballot, A Diamond Club Status,  and was chosen as a BEST PATRIOT! So there, 2023 Audit!

MISSING INFORMATION: Your response to the Republican Verification Canvass will represent the ENTIRE (zip code) area! Complete NOW: (link)

This is SAD! We selected YOU to complete our 2023 Audit, but you NEVER RESPONDED. Take the Platform Audit NOW >> (link)

Wait, has the 2023 Audit seized control of GOP opinion of me?

Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)

Nope! I won! HA!

Should gas stoves be BANNED!?! 1 HR to take the official GOP Poll.
Act NOW >> (link)

So is this policy decision to be based on … polls? Let’s take a survey on the speed limit, too!

But, credit where credit is due, this is an actual policy question. Wow!

Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in your area & never responded! Fill out your Republican sample Ballot: (link)


Are you awake, Earl? We chose YOU to join the Republican Advisory Board, but you FAILED to accept the spot! Hurry & claim: (link)

They’re onto me!

Republican leaders have selected YOU for our Lifetime Achievement Award! Your award even comes with a 250% INCREASE! 1 HR to ACCEPT: (link)

I get an increase? Wow! Such a gift for my lifetime achievement!

We are sending results from the Presidential Preference Poll to GOP leaders in 1 HOUR. Can I include your name, Earl? Act: (link)


Did Biden LIE about the “misplaced” classified documents? Poll closes in 1 HR! Vote NOW >> (link)

I’m sure that poll will be considered very important.

And the award goes to … YOU, Earl! Accept your GOP Golden Elephant HERE >> (link)

This is the HIGHEST rank the Republican Party can bestow, Earl. Accept your RNC Merit Badge HERE >> (link)

The HIGHEST rank!

INFORMATION REQUESTED: Your response to the Republican Verification Canvass will represent the ENTIRE (zip code) area! Answer NOW: (link)

Wow!

This is SAD! We selected YOU to complete our 2023 Audit, but you NEVER RESPONDED. Take the Platform Audit NOW >> (link)

Oh, no!

Jim Jordan has announced plans to investigate Big Tech’s COLLUSION with the Biden Administration. Sign the petition NOW & SUPPORT >> (link)

I’m sure that Jim Jordan will base his strategy on what Earl has to say.

Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in CO & never responded! Take the Republican Verification Canvass: (link)

Oh no!

You satisfied all the criteria for an RNC MERIT BADGE! Accept your award, and 200% INCREASE, before it EXPIRES >> (link)

Tell me more about those rigorous criteria!

The (ZIP code) area will be KEY to taking back the White House. Will you take the Presidential Preference Poll? 1 HR: (link)


Conservatives are working to EXPOSE the Radical Left & need your help. Sign up for the Republican Diamond Club before it’s too late! (link)


Are you awake, Earl??
We chose YOU to join the Republican Advisory Board, but you FAILED to accept your spot! CLAIM >> (link)


This is the HIGHEST rank the Republican Party can bestow, Earl. Accept your RNC Merit Badge HERE >> (link)


INFORMATION REQUESTED: Your response to the Republican Verification Canvass will represent the ENTIRE (zip code) area! Answer NOW: (link)


Earl, we’ve never done this for anyone. We reopened the Patriot Life Membership list for the next 20MIN. Claim your spot: (link)

“20MIN!”

The results you provide us will play an important role in our CO strategy. Help stop the Democrats’ agenda! >> (link)


We’ve texted you SO MANY TIMES! Please, Earl, we NEED your name on our Petition to FIGHT Big Tech COLLUSION!
Sign HERE: (link)


Republican leaders have selected YOU for our Lifetime Achievement Award! Your award even comes with a 250% INCREASE! 1 HR to ACCEPT: (link)

There are those mixed messages again.

Have a drink on us! Celebrate America & the GOP by showing off these elegant GOP Whiskey Glasses! There’s a limited supply, so ACT: (link)

There’s actually been a remarkable lack of swag solicitation until this text. Kind of weird that the GOP is pushing drinking as their gauge of elegance.

MISSING INFORMATION: Your response to the Republican Verification Canvass will represent the ENTIRE (ZIP code) area! Complete NOW: (link)

Wow. so not asking many people, I guess.

We’ve texted you SO MANY TIMES! Please, Earl, we NEED your name on our Petition to FIGHT Big Tech COLLUSION! Sign HERE: (link)


Should gas stoves be BANNED!?! 1 HR to take the official GOP Poll. Act NOW >> (link)


Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)


HOW MANY TIMES ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK? Submit your Republican Sample Ballot! We’ve asked you SO MANY TIMES!
Act NOW >> (link)

But will you ever stop asking?

Do you want Pres. Trump to return to Facebook & Twitter? Vote NOW >> (link)

Wait, I get a vote on that? Has someone told Zuck and Elon?

To: Your GOP Nominee
From: Earl
Happy Valentine’s Day!
*Autograph your name HERE -> (link)

Wait … how do you know who my choice of nominee is?

Republican leaders have selected YOU for our Lifetime Achievement Award! Your award even comes with a 250% INCREASE! 1 HR to ACCEPT: (link)

Can I get a list of those leaders?

This is SAD! We selected YOU to complete our 2023 Audit, but you NEVER RESPONDED. Take the Platform Audit NOW >> (link)


This is the HIGHEST rank the Republican Party can bestow, Earl. Accept your RNC Merit Badge HERE >> (link)

Mixed messages, Ronna.

Earl, we’ve never done this for anyone. We just reopened the Patriot Life Membership list for the next 20MIN. Claim: (link)

Never done it for anyone!

Guess what Earl?? YOU WON! Accept your Lifetime Achievement Award & Impact Increase NOW >> (link)

Understandable how I won such an award, since you also reopened the Patriot Life Membership list!

Republicans MUST achieve success in 2024! Support the BRAND-NEW Take Back the White House Fund! Donate NOW >> (link)

This message seems positively pedestrian.

We’ve texted you SO MANY TIMES! Please, Earl, we NEED your name on our Petition to FIGHT Big Tech COLLUSION! Sign HERE: (link)


Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in your area & never responded! Fill out your Republican sample Ballot: (link)

Oh, no!

This is the HIGHEST rank the Republican Party can bestow, Earl. Accept your RNC Merit Badge HERE >> (link)


This MUST be wrong, right? We have you marked as “Not Listed” for holding Big Tech ACCOUNTABLE. If this is wrong, fix it here: (link)


GOOD NEWS: A spot opened up & you’re officially invited to become a Patriot Life Member. Claim offer NOW >> (link)


Are you awake, Earl??
We chose YOU to join the Republican Advisory Board, but you FAILED to accept your spot! CLAIM: (link)

Getting whiplash here. Am I a disgusting, unawake (un-Woke?!) layabout, or am I a recipient of a Merit Badge, an invitation to be a Patriot Life Member (filling that rare open spot!), and an invitation to join the Republican Advisory Board?

FIRST Democrats wanted to BAN your gas-powered vehicles, NOW they want to BAN your gas stove.
Had enough? ACT: (link)

And those disgusting Democrats managed to do those things without actually doing them! The nerve!

Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in CO & never responded! Take the Republican Verification Canvass: (link)


We’ve texted you SO MANY TIMES! Please, Earl, we NEED your name on our Petition to FIGHT Big Tech COLLUSION! Sign HERE: (link)


You were nominated over almost ANY OTHER PATRIOT in CO for the GOP Golden Elephant! Why haven’t you accepted? CLAIM >> (link)


This is SAD! We selected YOU to complete our 2023 Audit, but you NEVER RESPONDED. Take the Platform Audit NOW >> (link)

I feel so ashamed, because you wanted me so badly and I never called.

The RNC Award Committee selected YOU for our highly coveted GOP Golden Elephant! Claim your benefits HERE: (link)

All is forgiven!

Ronna McDaniel: I’m proud to share I was re-elected to run the RNC for another cycle! Will you help build momentum for 2024? ACT >> (link)

Why is it you’ve lost momentum, Ronna?

Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in your area & never responded! Fill out your Republican sample Ballot: (link)


Earl! Where’s your response to the Presidential Preference Poll?? Complete HERE: (link)

Uh-oh!

You’ve been PRE-SELECTED! Claim your 600% INCREASE & help CRUSH our End-of-Month Goal! 1 HR >> (link)

Well, if you’re only going to offer a 600% Increase, rather than a 2000% Increase like earlier this month, why should I pay any attention to you?

You were nominated over almost ANY OTHER PATRIOT in CO for the GOP Golden Elephant! Why haven’t you accepted? CLAIM >> (link)


HOW MANY TIMES ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK? Submit your Republican Sample Ballot! We’ve asked you SO MANY TIMES!
Act NOW >> (link)

I’m beginning to think you’re onto me!

We’ve RARELY do this, Earl. You’ve been CHOSEN to become 1 of the FIRST to receive the GOP’s 600% IMPACT Offer.
Claim: (link)

I’m not sure it’s all that rare, to be honest, looking at your history over the course of the month.

Are you awake, Earl? We chose YOU to join the Republican Advisory Board, but you FAILED to accept your spot! Claim NOW: (link)

Oh, no! Will they still have a quorum?

NOTICE: The GOP upped your impact to 650% for 1 HOUR. Don’t share. This special link is for you only, Earl. Donate: (link)

Oooh … I get my own, special, unique link, which is incremented one tick from the link on the previous text message.

Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in CO & never responded! Take the Republican Verification Canvass: (link)

How exactly would I have represented them?

For the FIRST TIME in 2023: We’re activating an End-of-Month IMPACT INCREASE!
Find out how much: (link)

Yes, it’s incredible how at the end of the first month in 2023, you are activating an end-of-month fundraising thing for the first time in 2023!

Earl, we never do this for anyone. We just reopened the Patriot Life Membership list for the next 20MIN. Claim your spot: (link)

“20MIN!”

We just released our FINAL LIST of Lifetime Achievement Award Nominees! See if you made the cut >> (link)

I’ll betcha I did, if I donate something.

You were nominated over almost ANY OTHER PATRIOT in CO for the GOP Golden Elephant! Why haven’t you accepted?
CLAIM >> (link)

Does it come with an actual elephant? Because that would be awesome.

Earl, Our End-of-Month goal is CRUCIAL to taking back the White House. EVERY CENT counts. Will you chip in? 700% Impact: (link)

That is a remarkably mundane fund-raising request.

HOW MANY TIMES ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK? Submit your Republican Sample Ballot! We’ve asked you SO MANY TIMES! Act NOW >> (link)


You’re in the 95th percentile of ALL our supporters. Will you keep your TOP spot? Contribute ASAP for a 700% IMPACT! HURRY >> (link)

Oh, no! I might lose my top spot of contributors! Eeek!

Earl, we never do this for anyone. We just reopened the Patriot Life Membership list for the next 20MIN. Claim your spot: (link)

Didn’t you just do that a few days ago?

Make your FIRST EVER contribution of 2023 & help Republicans keep pace so we can CRUSH our fundraising goal. Act NOW >> (link)

So it’s good (for certain values of “good”) to know that the texts aren’t completely random, but that there’s some tracking of contributions going on.

We’ve authorized a 750% IMPACT for the NEXT HR to help CRUSH our End-of-Month goal! This offer is for YOU, Earl.
Claim: (link)

Where’s that 2000% one? I know you can do it, GOP!

Earl! Where is your response to the Presidential Preference Poll??
Complete HERE: (link)


This is the HIGHEST rank the Republican Party can bestow, Earl. Accept your RNC Merit Badge HERE >> (link)


Is something wrong? You were SELECTED to represent the GOP in your area & never responded! Fill out your Republican sample Ballot: (link)

And again with the mixed messages.

One final note. The link on each text was slightly different, incrementing alphabetically (/aca, /acb, /acc, /acd …). Thus, if Earl clicked on a given text, the GOP would know which one made him actually click.

I’m sure there’s nothing they’d do with that information.

At any rate, while I suppose I should feel faintly guilty for keeping Earl from his Very Important Texts and Opportunities to Accept Rewards and Respond to Surveys and Give Money … I can’t also help feeling that Earl might be a bit more relaxed without the GOP sending his text messages every 3-4 hours.

Until he sends them money and gives them his actual mobile number.

The Early Post-Midterms View

Things actually went pretty well in Colorado, and a lot less dire than expected nationally.

So looking at Colorado’s races, I’m pretty happy. the Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer, and AG, all went pretty strongly blue.

On ballot measures … most of what I voted for (link and link) passed. Some important ones, like school meals funding were a pretty resounding success.

Of course, we also cut the income tax rate. 🙄

The three liquor bills look like they are going down to defeat, although 125 is still very close at this moment.

Dems won for the US Senate seat (soundly), and US House Districts 1, 2, 7, and my own 6 (go, Jason!). The usual gang of idiots took 4 and 5. The new district 8 looks like it might go blue, but it’s pretty tight.

Most importantly, from a state reputation basis, House District 3, a West Slope country-conservative area, just might be sending Boebert home, which would be a real relief no matter how the House overall goes. We’ll see.

On a national level, it’s still unclear how the House and Senate will end up — very tight in each chamber, which will hamper either side from extremes. Still, I’ll hate to see Jim Jordan and MTG doing their committee chair zaniness with even the barest sliver of a majority.

It’s clear, regardless, that the people who kept it from being the predicted “Red Tsunami” were, on the one hand, Donald Trump and his coterie of sycophants who not only endorsed some of the worst candidates out there, but forced all the others to bravely nod in support of his daftness. And, on the other hand, the conservative majority of the Supreme Court, through their Dobbs ruling, mobilized a lot of turnout against GOP candidates who were, at best, trapped into being stridently anti-abortion (or who were).

Democracy, and our nation, are by no means out of the woods. But things are looking quite a bit less bleak than they were a day or two ago.

Another Look at Colorado Ballot Propositions 2022

As I sit down to vote, any changes of mind?

I pretty much stand by what I originally evaluated for my votes on ballot propositions this year.  There are two that I was not sure about, though, and one other I wanted to reevaluate.

Proposition 122 – Access to Natural Psychedelic Substances
YES

One proponent framed the question very well: is adult possession of magic mushrooms sufficiently dire enough to warrant destroying someone’s life through criminal prosecution? Hard to understand how.

On the other hand, the critiques of the proposition are inane. “It’s fentanyl all over again!” No, it’s not, in any way, shape, or form. “Ordinary people shouldn’t do these drugs because they won’t treat them as a spiritual sacrament!” Sorry, I eat bread and drink wine, too, outside of Mass. “It’s all a Big Pharma plot!” While not discounting Big Pharma’s ability to plot, this controlled access proposal seems a reasonable first step.

I’ll be voting Yes.

Some further reading:

Proposition 124 – Increase Allowable Liquor Store Locations
NO

Basically increases the number of liquor licenses which may be held by an individual or company. I wanted to give this one another look because there are some inequities in the current law that, in the coming several years, will disadvantage independent liquor stores.

Net-net, Prop 124 is a good thing if it helps local liquor stores expand and stay competitive with supermarkets, which will soon begin to get more licenses than they do. It’s a not so good thing if it helps big outside liquor companies (e.g., BevMo, or Total Wine) come into the state and supplant local liquor marts.

Give that the Trone brothers, who founded Total Wine, have each dropped almost a million dollars into this tells me that’s the intended direction.

I think there are better ways to help local liquor stores compete, so I’m going to vote No, but I strongly suspect that it will be voted in as a Yes.

Some further reading:

Proposition 125 – Allow Grocery and Convenience Stores to Sell Wine
NO

Should grocery stores be able to sell wine, too? (Also sake, mead, and hard cider, but wine is the biggie here.)

The issue being presented to consumers is, of course, convenience — though the donations from Albertsons Safeway, Kroger, and Target make it clear they see it as a big windfall for themselves.

The argument against is the impact on independently owned liquor stores. The best counter is that the same claim was made about grocery stores carrying beer, and today there are more independent liquor stores than there were when that proposition passed. I’m not convinced that actually applies, though, esp. given how independent stores have said their beer sales have dropped; kicking out the second of three legs from those stores (beer, wine, hard liquor) would have, I think, a more serious effect.

I will likely vote No, though I suspect it will pass.

Some further reading:

Oh, and that other stuff to vote for?

I’ll be voting a pretty straight Democratic ballot this year, as far as candidates go. While I’m not a rapturous fan of Polis or Bennet, for example (though I do like my US Rep, Jason Crow), their opponents are either lunatics or clearly disingenuous in their intentions — and my presumption in 2022, without strong proof otherwise (which would have kept them from getting on the GOP ballot in the first place) is that any Republican candidate is or will be a Trump supporter, happy to work alongside MTG and Jordan and Goetz and Cotton and Cruz, and enthusiastic to see civil rights protections rolled back, increased church-state entanglement, and democratic norms and governance broken down.

Vote!

A First Look at Colorado Ballot Propositions 2022

Eleven proposals to change the lawbooks or the state constitution.

We’ve quite the crop of ballot proposals this year. I just received the family’s state ballot guide, which gave me a first thorough look at them. I’ll be interesting to see which are snoozers, which get a lot of ad spending, and how the voting on them will go.

One thing of note is that there aren’t any real Culture War issues on here. Not even any Personhood Laws (a rare treat). That’s kind of nice for a change.

Anyway, here’s my first pass, after reading the summaries, the pros/cons, etc. I’ll revisit this before the actual election, when various wiser heads have analyzed them more closely.

These three Constitutional Amendments, proposed by the Legislature, require a 55% supermajority to pass:

Amendment D – New 23rd Judicial District Judges
YES

So we have an new judicial district in the state, but the mechanism for putting judges on it seems a bit sketchy. This solve that by actually defining a clear process. The arguments against seem kind of vague.

Amendment E – Extend Homestead Exemption to Gold Star Spouses
YES

Currently, if you are over 65 and have been in your house for 10+ years or vets with a service-related total disability, you (or your surviving spouse) can claim a partial exemption on your property. This adds surviving spouses of service members killed in the line of duty or of vets whose death results from a service-related injury or disease.

While I think sometimes we go a bit nuts over supporting vets (“Wanna teach in school with no training? No problem!” as they say in Florida), this seems a reasonable thing to do.

The arguments against are basically that it doesn’t help everyone and it might help someone who doesn’t need it. Neither argument is convincing.

Amendment F – Changes to Charitable Gaming Operations
NO

Didn’t we just fend something like this off an election or two ago? This would basically drop the age of non-profits able to run bingo or raffles from five years to three years, and let them hire paid workers to run the games.

The basic result would be more profit-making operations in-state “helping” non-profits run these games. I don’t think we need that.


The following two statutory amendments were proposed by the Legislature and require a simple majority to pass:

Proposition FF – Healthy School Meals for All
YES

Rather than operating a bureaucracy of tracking which kids get free lunches and which don’t, and stigmatizing those who do as the poor kids, and letting families on the edge of eligibility rack up lunch costs … why not just make lunch available to everyone? Makes sense to me.

The arguments against are basically that families with income over $300K shouldn’t have to pay more taxes, especially for meals for freeloading middle-classers, and shouldn’t we just give more money to schools instead of doing this? (Worth noting  the people making these arguments never argue in favor of more money to schools when those ballot propositions come up.) None of that sways me from the good this will do.

Proposition GG – Add Tax Info Table to Petitions and Ballots
NO

Every election, we get a nice thick booklet about all the ballot propositions that includes tables with tax impacts. This proposal would add those tables both to petitions (which might make sense) and the ballots. Ugh. We don’t need longer ballots, esp. since the goal here is to try to dissuade voters at the last second about all the scary taxes. Bah.


The following six statutory amendments were placed on the ballot by citizen petition and require a simple majority to pass:

Proposition 121 – State Income Tax Rate Reduction
NO

Brought to you by the usual gang of strangle-government-in-its-bed idiots.

Proposition 122 – Access to Natural Psychedelic Substances
Yes?

This is one I’ll want to read up more about. While the arguments about Magic Mushroom Madness aren’t very convincing, neither are the arguments that, hey, it’s natural, therefore safe and groovy for psychiatric treatment.

Tending yes, but tentatively.

Proposition 123 – Dedicate Revenue for Affordable Housing Programs
YES

By and large, esp. with Colorado housing and rental prices climbing so high, I’m inclined to go with this specialty program. That the opposition argues that this will cut into TABOR refunds in the future is an even better argument for it.

Proposition 124 – Increase Allowable Liquor Store Locations
NO

The first of three ballots over Colorado’s commercial normalization over alcohol and transition away from the old Blue Laws. This one accelerates / expands the ability of retail liquor stores to own more locations, ostensibly in competition with supermarkets. That’s only likely to help bigger chains, though, and I tend to think the transition process that was established previously is just fine. (I could be argued around on this one, but that’s my first impression, at least.)

Proposition 125 – Allow Grocery and Convenience Stores to Sell Wine
No?

I’ve been going back and forth on this one, honestly. On the one hand, convenience! On the other hand, not sure I want more of my grocery store dedicated to wine space, and the impact on existing liquor stores, large and small, is concerning.

Leaning No, but may change my mind.

Proposition 126 – Third-Party Delivery of Alcoholic Beverages
YES

This does two things. First, it  allows for third-party companies (e.g., DoorDash) to delivery alcohol alongside groceries and take-out food and everything else. Second, it permanently allows take-out and delivery of alcohol from bars and restaurants, which was first introduced in the early COVID days and is currently scheduled to end in 2025.

Both of those things seem like good conveniences to me, so I’m a solid Yes.

What $100 Million Ad Campaign Would Jesus Do?

An effort to attract back unchurched young adults has a good message, but the wrong target

A $100 million ad campaign is being launched to attract young adults back to Christianity.

This week, an alliance of Christian media ministries announced the launch of an extensive $100-million-dollar national ad campaign to share inspirational messages about Jesus Christ with “skeptics and seekers.”

The “He Gets Us” campaign features stark ads with messages such as “Jesus was homeless,” “Jesus suffered anxiety,” and “Jesus was in broken relationships.” They direct people to a website where they’re then connected to national ministries and local congregations.

As an example …

So let’s put to the side whether spending $100 million to actually help homeless people, anxious people, or people in broken relationships would be more in keeping with Jesus’ actual message.

The problem, I think, is that the target of the campaign is totally misaligned. The research that went into it actually makes the case.

Starting in April 2021, a representative sample of 5,000 U.S. adults answered an online survey designed by Haven, followed by additional quantitative polling and interview-style qualitative research. […]

Skeptics of Christianity represent one-fourth of the U.S. population, according to the research. Half of them, “especially those with children,” are open to learning about Jesus, if obstacles can be overcome, Haven states. The biggest obstacle: Jesus’ message has been distorted as “hate-filled.”

Based on these insights, Haven’s goals became to “communicate that Jesus is for everyone and is a worthy example to live by”—and that his teachings are “positive for society as a whole.”

I mean, that’s cool — but maybe a more productive goal would be figuring out how “Jesus’ message has been distorted as ‘hate-filled.'”

I suspect the problem for “young adults” is not with Jesus’ message or perceived relevancy. It’s that they see Jesus’ ostensible reps here on earth spending their money on jets (and ad campaigns) and preaching to mega-churches (and the press) about how those young adults’ gay friends are going to hell, and how wealthy companies should get tax breaks because capitalism is God’s way, and if you just donate enough money then God will reward you with a bunch of money, too. Oh, and that Jesus’s representatives should take over the country on behalf of all the white people.

One Nation Under God
This is the message the Religious Right sends about Jesus.

I believe the evangelical Religions Right — the brand of Christianity that has spent the last fifty years elbowing itself in front of the microphone as the One, True Representatives of Christianity in the US — has done more with its venality and cruelty to drive people away from Christianity in this nation than any “sex, drugs, and rock and roll.”

More impactfully, by the Religious Right locking themselves in with the Republican Party in the pursuit of the power to force their agenda on the rest of the nation, they have become associated inextricably with folk like Trump, Cruz, McConnell, DeSantis, Gaetz, MTG, Boebert, Hawley, etc.

Trump and Bible
This is the face of US Christianity to too many people.

These “young adults” now see those deplorables as the representatives of Christ (because they claim to be  and/or there are plenty of religious types willing to assert they are), and it’s profoundly unappealing to them.

After all, who’s going to be believed as to what Jesus’ message is?  A slick ad campaign, or the religiously-anointed political representatives of the church trying to kick people off welfare, force LGBTQ folk back into the closet, require rape victims to give birth, suppress the vote of people of color, lock down the borders to desperate refugees, kick homeless out of town, and legalize discrimination under the banner of “religious freedom” … all with the blessing of various groups and ministers saying that this is all being done in Jesus’ name.

There are a lot of Christians and churches that aren’t into all that, to be sure, that focus on charity and compassion and humility — but they’re not the ones parading around, wrapping themselves in flags and waving around crosses. They’re not the ones crowing about how Christianity is all about  nationalism, capitalism, partisanship, guns, and power.

Trump being prayed over
This may garner some votes, but it probably doesn’t encourage “young adults” to go to church.

Maybe Jesus’ ad campaign shouldn’t be focused on trying to draw unchurched young adults to faith. Maybe it should be focused on changing the hearts of those who are driving those young adults away from Christianity. Because right now they’re drowning out Jesus’ words, whether or not He Gets Us.

Yes, Putin is acting because he sees weakness. But …

… it’s not the weakness that the GOP is nattering about

After decades of on-again, off-again muttering, Vladimir Putin has sent his Russia (and his Belarus) to invade his neighbor, Ukraine.  There are a lot of internal reasons for him to be doing this — NATO expansion is not one of them, but his own sense of mortality and history more likely are — but the result is arguably the largest military operation on European soil since the end of WW2. And it’s a conflict that will not only mean blood and suffering in the Ukraine, but further weaken the bonds of the international order and trigger further wars, if not in Europe then elsewhere.

One of the most amazing elements of the whole tragic affair so far, though, has been this sort of thing:

House GOP weakness tweet
Stay classy and patriotic, House GOP

I mean, clearly, the era of “partisanship stops at the water’s edge” is long over (if it ever really existed), but the Republican Party’s eagerness to score whatever political points they can, in any way, under any circumstances, has reached new depths.

(Not to mention nonsensical ones: how is the President, leaving the podium and exiting the room, after briefing the press, a sign of weakness? But, following the rules of the Big Lie, the GOP simply repeats its Trump-led mantra of “Sleepy Joe” and pretends it’s being witty.)

As the situation around Ukraine worsened, the GOP had a single message: that Vladimir Putin was moving in his perceived national self-interests (which Fox folk like Tucker Carlson say seem perfectly legit to them!) because Joe Biden’s “weakness” was taunting him on. Or, put another way: This never happened under Donald Trump’s presidency! Putin respected Trump’s strength and resolve, and would never have dared do such a thing! Biden’s weak! Trump is strong! [insert sounds of beating on chest here]

Trump strong! Trump smash!

Leave aside for a moment the lack of merits as to Putin’s casus belli here (which many in the GOP and GOP-adjacent seem to be flirting with simply accepting, out of some slavish devotion to Putin as a Strong Man who is anti-“woke” and pro-Christian and anti-LGBTQ and pro-“family” and therefore rings all those chimes for the far Right). Leave aside that, even if Joe Biden had literally invited Russia to invade Ukraine, invading another sovereign nation is Not Cool, and is still an action that Putin — who has previously invaded other parts of Ukraine, not to mention Georgia — still decided to do, on his own initiative. Leave aside a degree of American hypocrisy about sovereignty and flimsy justifications for invasion.

Did Joe Biden’s “weakness” contribute to Putin’s terrible (or, if you listen to Donald Trump, “clever”) decision to invade Ukraine?

Yes. But not the way yahoos like Trump and Cruz and Tucker will have you believe.

But Putin didn’t invade while Trump was Prez. That shows Putin doesn’t respect Biden!

Is it actually a bad thing that a murderous, anti-democracy autocrat, someone who beats, jails, assassinates, or disappears his opponents and critics while retaining supreme power for decades, on behalf of himself and his kleptocratic buddies, doesn’t respect the sort of person Joe Biden is?

That actually strikes me as a good thing.

Well, what I mean is that Putin respected Trump’s strength and resolve! 

Hardly. Putin got nearly anything he wanted from Trump. Trump went along with the fait accompli of Crimea annexation. Trump did his darnedest to roll back those “worthless” sanctions that had been placed on Putin’s regime because of them. Trump weakened Ukraine’s defenses, removing a GOP plank to send arms to Ukraine, and then delaying and leveraging arms shipments to get the Ukraine government to politically damage Joe Biden (you might recall there was an impeachment about it and everything). Trump weakened NATO, trying to recast it as a transactional, mercenary arrangement, downplaying the value of that alliance and, in fact, of any alliances, and casting doubt that, if another NATO country were attacked, he’d actually fulfill US Article 5 obligations to step in. Trump showed over and over again, from Iraq to Syria to Afghanistan that he’d pull troops out of anywhere because he wasn’t interested in world order or commitments or principle, only in his own ego and what made him look good. Trump raised Putin’s image on the world stage, calling him strong and smart and ruthless and powerful. Meanwhile, at home, Trump divided America, taking partisan gaps and wrenching them further open with a crowbar.

Why on Earth would Vladimir Putin ever endanger that? After investing in monkeywrenching the 2016 presidential election and, to his great surprise, being rewarded with a Donald Trump winning the damned, thing, why would he ever do anything that might antagonize or weaken his greatest global ally, witting or unwitting?

Putin and Trump
BFFs

No, no, Putin knew Trump was strong and resolute and would strike out at anyone who crossed the US. He’d never admit it, but he feared Donald Trump.

If Putin feared Trump, it was to this degree: Trump is, even if you have him accurately pegged as an unprincipled narcissist, unpredictable and savage. Crossing him too publicly, in a way that offended his ego, affected his support, endangered his chance of being carved into Mount Rushmore, was to risk not only an ALL CAPS EARLY MORNING TWITTER SCREED!!!!!! but possibly something even more damaging.

Does anyone doubt that Trump would be willing to threaten — if not carry out — lobbing nukes if he took it into his head (and his sycophants suggested it was a good way to look strong)? A man who was so bound up in his pride that he was willing to sit by while a violent mob stormed the US Capitol on his behalf, and seriously considered deploying the military to overthrow the 2020 election?

Yeah, even a bad guy fears a crazy desperado with a gun. That’s still not a good thing.

Not a real photo but part of a real quote

But Biden is clearly weak. He didn’t prevent the invasion of Ukraine. Putin knew Sleepy Joe’s weakness would let him do whatever he wanted.

It’s worth noting that those who make this argument are extraordinarily vague about what should have been done to prevent Putin’s act of war. They simply wave their hand and say that it would never have happened under Trump, without even bothering to suggest what Trump would have done to stop it.

(They don’t have to because, of course, it’s not a rational argument.)

But there is one nugget of truth, at the last, in their accusation.

Joe Biden is weak.

Because America is weak.

McCarthy & McConnell
Party over Nation

Joe Biden is hobbled by the profound partisan divisions in the US, divisions led by a GOP that is still dominated by Trump and Trumpism, and who are more interested in pulling down Joe Biden than in stopping Vladimir Putin. Putin knows this. Indeed, he’s actually done what he can to engineer the whole situation.

What are the chances that the US will stand firm and united in doing what it can to stop, mitigate, or punish Putin’s actions? Zero. Nobody is actually going to suggest sending in US troops. That leaves economic and political retribution, and the effect of that will take years, even assuming it is maintained for that long. And the GOP will be right there, unwilling to offer realistic solutions, just claiming that Biden “lost” Ukraine (or even that Russia was justified in their actions and that Biden was a loser anyway for not realizing that).

Putin, whatever his reasons for invading Ukraine, has to have seen this as the perfect moment, not because Joe Biden is a weak man, but because he oversees a government that is weakened by internal division, by an opposition party that sees Biden as their real target and Putin, if not an ally, then a tool to use against him. Which makes them tools in Putin’s hand for long-term success.

Putin wink
Beyond his wildest dreams

And if the GOP hamstring Biden from systemic, sustained action against Putin, and manage to put Trump (or whoever is the Trumpiest candidate they can agree upon) in the White House in three-plus years, will that person simply do what Trump did, shrug and work to lift any remaining sanctions? Write off NATO as a bad and expensive idea and let it shift for its own?

What will that weakness encourage Putin to do next? What will it encourage the rest of Europe to do to appease him?

What will it encourage China to do?

What will it encourage any nation around the world who see a richer, weaker neighbor, and knows we’re lurching backwards a century or more, to an era of “spheres of influence” and “might makes right.”

The GOP is correct in saying that Putin is emboldened by weakness.

But they’re the source of it. And the consequences will extend long beyond the Russian conquest of the Ukraine.

Some late thoughts on MLK Day

Quotations from the man himself.

The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968), was eminently quotable (though his tendency to re-use key phrases in multiple sermons, speeches, and writings, sometimes drives a quotation collector to distraction). Here are a few thoughts from him from my quotation collection that I find germane even today, over fifty years after King’s killing.

We must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we seek, but it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means.

“A Christmas Sermon on Peace,” radio broadcast, CBC (Canada) (24 Dec 1967)

King’s focus on peaceful protest and civil disobedience remains a challenge to this day.

A nation that continues year after year to spend more on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.

“Beyond Vietnam,” speech, Clergy and Laity Concerned, Riverside Church, New York City (4 Apr 1967)

King was writing during the Vietnam War, but the issue is just as real today.

Now Jesus himself saw the power that competition holds over men. He did not ignore it. Yet he does something with the conception of competition that hadn’t been done before. He takes the conception which has been used for lower purposes and rescues it from many of its dangers, by suggesting a higher method of its use. This is how he applied the term to his disciples. He saw them in danger of using it for low purposes. They wanted to compete for reputation and position — “which of them should be accounted greatest?” Jesus says so, if you must use the power of competition, if you must compete with on another, make it as noble as you can by using it on noble things. Use it for a fine, unselfish thing. “He that is greatest among you shall serve.” Use it for human good. Who shall be the most useful. Compete with one another in humility. See which can be the truest servant. It seems that Christ says, “Use it, but use it for higher and holier purposes. Use it not to surpass one another in esteem, but use it to increase the amount of usefulness and brother-help.” Such conceptions of competition lead to the surprising and ennobling position that there can be competition without hate and jealousy. Behold! You can struggle to beat and yet rejoice to be beaten.

“Cooperative Competition / Noble Competition,” sermon outline

King had a repertoire of turning around familiar talking points — in this case, rejecting the idea of competition being necessarily bad, but noting that it depends on what one is competing for.

We must not seek to use our emerging freedom and our growing power to do the same thing to the white minority that has been done to us for so many centuries. Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man. We must not become victimized with a philosophy of black supremacy. God is not interested merely in freeing black men and brown men and yellow men, but God is interested in freeing the whole human race.

“Give Us the Ballot,” Speech, Prayer Pilgrimage for Freedom, Washington, DC (1957)

King always made it clear that the struggle for equal rights for blacks was to the benefit of all Americans, not just blacks.

In the final analysis, love is not this sentimental something that we talk about. It’s not merely an emotional something. Love is creative, understanding goodwill for all men. It is the refusal to defeat any individual. When you rise to the level of love, of its great beauty and power, you seek only to defeat evil systems. Individuals who happen to be caught up in that system, you love, but you seek to defeat the system.

“Loving Your Enemies,” Sermon, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery (17 Nov 1957)

King saw the power of love going beyond sentiment to actual action.

We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail, and we shall still love you. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and we shall still love you. Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our community at the midnight hour and beat us and leave us half dead, and we shall still love you. But be ye assured that we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we shall win freedom, but not only for ourselves. We shall so appeal to your heart and conscience that we shall win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory.

“Loving Your Enemies,” sermon, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery (17 Nov 1957)

The summary of King’s teachings on peaceful protest and civil disobedience.

Now there is a final reason I think that Jesus says, “Love your enemies.” It is this: that love has within it a redemptive power. And there is a power there that eventually transforms individuals. That’s why Jesus says, “Love your enemies.” Because if you hate your enemies, you have no way to redeem and to transform your enemies. But if you love your enemies, you will discover that at the very root of love is the power of redemption. You just keep loving people and keep loving them, even though they’re mistreating you. Here’s the person who is a neighbor, and this person is doing something wrong to you and all of that. Just keep being friendly to that person. Keep loving them. Don’t do anything to embarrass them. Just keep loving them, and they can’t stand it too long. Oh, they react in many ways in the beginning. They react with bitterness because they’re mad because you love them like that. They react with guilt feelings, and sometimes they’ll hate you a little more at that transition period, but just keep loving them. And by the power of your love they will break down under the load. That’s love, you see. It is redemptive, and this is why Jesus says love. There’s something about love that builds up and is creative. There is something about hate that tears down and is destructive. So love your enemies.

“Loving Your Enemies,” Sermon, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery (17 Nov 1957)

Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting a false label on an evil act. It means, rather, that the evil act no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship. Forgiveness is a catalyst creating the atmosphere necessary for a fresh start and a new beginning. It is the lifting of a burden or the canceling of a debt. The words “I will forgive you, but I’ll never forget what you have done” never explain the real nature of forgiveness. Certainly one can never forget, if that means erasing it totally for his mind. But when we forgive, we forget in the sense that the evil deed is no longer a mental block impeding a new relationship. Likewise, we can never say, “I will forgive you, but I won’t have anything further to do with you.” Forgiveness means reconciliation, a coming together again. Without this, no man can love his enemies. The degree to which we are able to forgive determines the degree to which we are able to love our enemies.

“Loving Your Enemies,” Sermon, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery (25 Dec 1957)

Forgiveness is hard.

This simply means that there is some good in the worst of us and some evil in the best of us. When we discover this, we are less prone to hate our enemies. When we look beneath the surface, beneath the impulsive evil deed, we see within our enemy-neighbor a measure of goodness and know that the viciousness and evilness of his acts are not quite representative of all that he is. We see him in a new light. We recognize that his hate grows out of fear, pride, ignorance, prejudice, and misunderstanding, but in spite of this, we know God’s image is ineffably etched in being. Then we love our enemies by realizing that they are not totally bad and that they are not beyond the reach of God’s redemptive love.

“Loving Your Enemies,” Sermon, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Montgomery (25 Dec 1957)

In a time of division like today, words for thought.

Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary.

“On Being a Good Neighbor,” sec. 2, sermon, A Gift of Love (1963)

We sometime hear that the problems of poverty should be left to private charity. But even if that were adequate to meet the need (and it never has), it merely treats the symptoms.

The most dangerous type of atheism is not theoretical atheism, but practical atheism — that’s the most dangerous type. And the world, even the church, is filled up with people who pay lip service to God and not life service. And there is always a danger that we will make it appear externally that we believe in God when internally we don’t. We say with our mouths that we believe in him, but we live with our lives like he never existed. That is the ever-present danger confronting religion. That’s a dangerous type of atheism.

“Rediscovering Lost Values,” sermon, Second Baptist Church, Detroit (28 Feb 1954)

I have more respect for considered atheists than those who claim to follow a religion but, by their actions, do not.

As long as there is poverty in the world I can never be rich, even if I possess a billion dollars. As long as millions of people are inflicted with debilitating diseases and cannot expect to live more than thirty-five years, I can never be totally healthy even if I receive a perfect bill of health from Mayo Clinic. Strangely enough, I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be.

“Remaining Awake through a Great Revolution,” Commencement Speech, Morehouse College, Atlanta (2 Jun 1959)

Empathy and compassion.

It may well be that we will have to repent in this generation. Not merely for the vitriolic words and the violent actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence and indifference of the good people who sit around and say, “Wait on time.”

“Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution,” sermon, National Cathedral, Washington, DC (31 Mar 1968)

Sometimes waiting is appropriate. But sometimes it’s an easy excuse for not acting.

We need leaders not in love with money but in love with justice. Not in love with publicity but in love with humanity.

“The Birth of a New Age,” speech, Alpha Phi Alpha banquet, Buffalo (11 Aug 1956)

It may well be that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition is not the glaring noisiness of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. It may be that our generation will have repent not only for the diabolical actions and vitriolic words of the children of darkness, but also for the crippling fears and tragic apathy of the children of light.

“The Christian Way of Life in Human Relations,” speech, General Assembly fo the National Council of Churches, St Louis (4 Dec 1957)

A frequent theme of King’s, nudging audiences who thought of themselves too easily as the “good guys.”

Any church that violates the “whosoever will, let him come” doctrine is a dead, cold church, and nothing but a little social club with a thin veneer of religiosity.

“The Drum Major Instinct,” sermon, Ebenezer Baptist Church, Atlanta (4 Feb 1968)

It may be true that morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart but it can restrain the heartless. It may be true that the law can’t make a man love me, but it can restrain him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important also.

“The Other America,” speech, Stanford University (14 Apr 1967)

A riot is the language of the unheard.

“The Other America,” speech, Stanford University (14 Apr 1967)

In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.

“The Trumpet of Conscience,” Steeler Lecture (Nov 1967)

I must confess, my friends, the road ahead will not always be smooth. There will be still rocky places of frustration and meandering points of bewilderment. There will be inevitable setbacks here and there. There will be those moments when the buoyancy of hope will be transformed into the fatigue of despair. Our dreams will sometimes be shattered and our ethereal hopes blasted. We may again with tear-drenched eyes have to stand before the bier of some courageous civil rights worker whose life will be snuffed out by the dastardly acts of bloodthirsty mobs. Difficult and painful as it is, we must walk on in the days ahead with an audacious faith in the future.

“Where Do We Go From Here?” Southern Christian Leadership Conference Presidential Address (16 Aug 1967)

My personal disillusionment with the church began when I was thrust into the leadership of the bus protest in Montgomery. I was confident that the white ministers, priests and rabbis of the South would prove strong allies in our just cause. But some became open adversaries, some cautiously shrank from the issue, and others hid behind silence. My optimism about help from the white church was shattered; and on too many occasions since, my hopes for the white church have been dashed. There are many signs that the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. Unless the early sacrificial spirit is recaptured, I am very much afraid that today’s Christian church will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and we will see the Christian church dismissed as a social club with no meaning or effectiveness for our time, as a form without substance, as salt without savor. The real tragedy, though, is not Martin Luther King’s disillusionment with the church — for I am sustained by its spiritual blessings as a minister of the gospel with a lifelong commitment: The tragedy is that in my travels, I meet young people of all races whose disenchantment with the church has soured into outright disgust.

Playboy interview (Jan 1965)

King’s disappointment with white Christian church response to his message came through repeatedly — and with justification. 

Any religion that professes to be concerned with the souls of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them, and the social conditions that cripple them is a dry-as-dust religion. Such a religion is the kind the Marxists like to see — an opiate of the people.

Stride Toward Freedom (1958)

King focused on civil rights, legal equality before the law. But he also was a proponent of economic rights and justice as well.

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land! So I’m happy, tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

“I’ve Been To The Mountaintop,” speech, Memphis (3 Apr 1968)

King’s last public speech. He was assassinated the following day. 

 

 

 

Newt Gingrich is a Dolt (Holy Memory Hole Edition)

His take about the “crackdown” on conservatives is self-serving and inane.

Newt Gingrich, Dolt

I know I shouldn’t waste time discussing Newt Gingrich — the cut-throat GOP hack who bears a huge responsibility for the divisiveness of American politics today, almost a quarter century after he became Speaker of the House — but his commentary in Newsweek about the so-called war by the big tech giants on poor little conservatives distills down a bunch of current diatribes on the subject in a way that is, at least, illustrative.

When Twitter and Facebook decided to ban President Donald Trump, censor The New York Post and start erasing other people and institutions from their platforms, they started down a path which will have enormous consequences for them and for America.

When Google, Amazon and Apple joined in taking down Parler, a conservative social media platform, they reached critical mass in proving that an oligarchical cabal was potentially seeking to control public dialogue for all Americans.

Except it proves no such thing. It demonstrates, perhaps, that social media is largely concentrated in a few, most popular platforms — something encouraged, but not dictated, by those companies (something something free market something, isn’t that what you’re usually on about, Newt?) — but going from there to “seeking to control public dialog,” let alone “erasing people and institutions,” is a huge step.

Let’s start with a fundamental question, shall we? Or let’s make it two:

  1. Are social media companies (and their providers) required to give me an account so that I can use their tools?
  2. Are there any limits to what I can use that account to say?

We’ll get back to the first one shortly, because the second one is the key. And that brings us to Parler.

To be fair, it’s a nice logo.

On one level, I’m sorry to see Parler go, because I kept hoping it would drive the serious whackadoodles off of Twitter, rather than me having to block them or, when they go over the rails, report them. (Of course, what actually happened was those folk created Parler accounts, and then kept getting onto Twitter to talk about how horrible Twitter was, post their Parler account name in their profile, and continue to spew their normal nonsense.)

But nobody “took down” Parler because conservatives were “flocking” to it.

I could post, all day long, “Abortion is murder of a baby” or “Donald Trump is the greatest President ever,” and Twitter would never do a darned thing about it. I would expect to draw a lot of criticism, but those posts can be found all over Twitter (and, presumably, Facebook, a platform whose privacy policies I finally rid myself of months ago).

Why did Amazon (and Google and Apple) all get in the way of Parler’s operations by refusing to enable it? Because Parler refused to do anything about, quite literally, violent language and death threats on its own platform, and those companies didn’t want to be a part of that.

Here’s a page from the filing Amazon made in Parler’s lawsuit. It’s part of a list of comments Amazon presented to Parler over the course of months, complaining that Parler was in breach of the agreement with Amazon not to use its AWS servers to host violent content:

They seem nice.

Does Newt consider that “conservative speech” that needs protection?

Should Amazon be required to host it? Does Amazon’s own brand (let alone whatever corporate mission and vision it holds) take damage from such material being “powered by Amazon”?

Amazon repeatedly went back to Parler with these complaints. Parler showed an inability / unwillingness to do anything about it.

I would suggest Amazon (who was providing the virtual file servers) and Apple and Google (who were providing the optional but commonly used tools to install the Parler application) were fully within their right, under their terms of service, to no longer do business with Parler.

The same case can be made, with a bit more fuzz, in the case of Twitter and Facebook vs. Donald Trump and his enablers. In Twitter’s case, they have allowed Trump to say whatever the hell he wanted to — true, false, or outright crazy — up until after the election. When he started, post-election, started asserting as fact items that were untrue, up to and including the certification of the results of the election, they started flagging his comments as untrue.

And when he started making inflammatory comments that had already, demonstrably, led to violence — and, in fact, was defending the violence and the people who had caused it …

… they decided he had too egregiously violated their terms of service, and chose to cut off their (free) service to him. And they did the same for others who were actively plotting, or supporting plots, of violence against the nation’s political system and, in fact, politicians.

Newt considers this “seeking to control public dialogue for all Americans.”

People noticed that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey had claimed the right to silence President Trump, who earned more than 74 million votes for reelection. The idea that a few oligarch billionaires could control the political discourse of America began to really worry people.

So there are two falsehoods in this statement.

First, nothing has been done to “silence President Trump.” Donald Trump remains one of the most powerful people in America. When he snaps his fingers, reporters gather, and the highest-rated cable “news” network in America hangs on and echoes his every word. His political operatives bury his potential supporters with blizzards of email sharing his opinions (and soliciting their money).

And as a private citizen, Donald Trump will remain (by his own claims) fabulously wealthy. He could buy or build whatever social media firm he put his mind to.

That two social media companies — two big ones, to be sure, but by no means the only way to communicate out there — have decided (accurately) that his actions violate the terms of using their service, they same as they would moderate any other individual, is by no means “silencing” him.

Heck, Donald — have someone rig up a server, connect it to the Internet, install WordPress on it, and build your own blog. Millions will flock to it. Zuckerberg and Dorsey aren’t obliged to do the work for you, any more than if Trump calls up Rachel Maddow during her show that she’s obliged to put him live on the air, or if Trump demands to have an opinion piece of his printed on the front page of the New York Times that they are obliged to do so.

Back when I was a kid, I can remember people saying that the Freedom of Speech didn’t mean that the government had to buy you a printing press.

(The Right has pressed forward for many years the idea that companies can have political and religious rights, and that companies with religious freedom should be able to not do business with whomever they want. Maybe if Twitter said it was about Jack Dorsey’s religious freedom, rather than about the company’s Terms of Service, Newt would back off.)

The second falsehood is that this “controls the political discourse of America.” The commentariat on the Right have long mocked the Left as being in an echo chamber on places like Twitter, and that the majority fo folk outside of Twitter think very differently. If so … then Trump not being on Twitter to give his opinion shouldn’t matter, should it?

Regardless, these take-downs were not about political opinion. Trump claiming he’s mastered China in foreign policy, or has been the best president possible about COVID-19, or that Joe Biden is a communist … none of that is what got him kicked off of Twitter.

This process of squeezing people out of the public square is inherently dangerous. As President Harry Truman warned, “Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”

George Orwell’s 1984 (which was about a Western democracy devouring itself and its citizens in a totalitarian nightmare) captured this terrifying concept of the technological management of memory and opinion.

Except, of course, Twitter and Facebook and Google and Apple and Amazon aren’t the government. Their actions also have nothing to do with “silencing the voice of opposition,” just not being part of enabling that voice.

The cancel culture and social media erasure movements are strikingly like Orwell’s vision of a “memory hole,” in which ideas that those in power no longer deem valid are destroyed so people can no longer access them.

As an amateur historian, I certainly have concern over knowledge and history being lost. But that’s more a problem with our digital society as a whole. If the “failing” New York Times went out of business and took its archives with it, that would be a horrible loss of history and opinion — though I suspect Newt would not be as passionate about it.

But, then, invoking “cancel culture” as a bogey-man is problematic in itself. Did Newt flock to the defense of the Dixie Chicks when they were “canceled” by so many in the country music world for speaking out against George W Bush and the impending Iraq War? “Cancel culture” is, at its heart, a matter of consumer choice in a free marketplace of ideas, something one would assume Newt favors. If I find a media personality’s opinions on something (for example) particularly objectionable, I’m within my rights to avoid that personality. I’m within my rights to share my opinion about it with others. Heck, I might even feel like that the companies that continue to do business with that personality are enabling their message, and complain to them about it — and those companies may, in turn, reevaluate their relationship with that personality either on its own merit or with how it affects their bottom line, and are within their rights to act on that reevaluation.

The results may not be pleasant, or “fair,” or something that Newt (or I) would agree with, but society is messy, and there’s really nowhere in that process where you can demand that it be stopped without infringing on other, just as important rights.

And none of that involves the government, so the First Amendment has nothing to do with it.

The House Democrats’ new rules (adopted Jan. 3 with 217 Democrats voting in favor), which eliminate “mother,” “father,” “son,” “daughter” and more than a dozen other “inappropriate” gender-specific words from the Rules of the House of Representatives is another Orwellian example of retraining us to only think “appropriate” thoughts and use “appropriate” language. Truman’s fears are beginning to come true.

If the House Democrats suggested that official House business refrain from using a racial or religious epithet in reference to members of those groups, would that be Orwellian, Newt?

In this particular case, it’s even more limited than that: a single rules document has had a whole range of gendered language changed (e.g., “seafarer” for “seaman”). In the same set of changes, references to “he or she” were changed to more specific, but ungendered, language. (Was the original change from “he” to “he or she” Orwellian?). And, finally, in that one document, words like “mother” or “father” were replaced by “parent,” and “son” or “daughter” were replaced by “child.”

Eek.

It’s not that words don’t mean things — in fact, the very reason for doing it is because words mean things — but this is less prescriptive than descriptive, reflecting how language and understanding of sex and gender roles as a society is changing. That may make Newt uncomfortable, but it’s not exactly Winston Smith time.

Some have argued that the protections of Section 230 make them indirect agents of the government. The Supreme Court has ruled consistently that private corporations acting as government agents are bound by the U.S. Constitution. Cutting off free speech is a violation of the First Amendment guarantee of liberties, and therefore the companies might be subject to fines and penalties for violating the constitutional rights of their customers.

If Newt is suggesting that businesses that have specific protections under law are arguably agents of the government, that opens a can of worms far bigger than I think Newt wants to go.

That said, I’m pretty sure you could get fired from your government job by posting on a government website, “White people need to ignite their racial identity and rain down suffering and death like a hurricane upon zionists,” First Amendment or not.

The guarantee against lawsuits made sense when we passed it in 1996 (while I was speaker), because it was an effort to grow what were then tiny, fragile companies. Those guarantees no longer make sense when you are dealing with gigantic worldwide institutions of enormous power and wealth.

One can argue whether having deep pockets magically changes whether a company should be sued for doing something or not (tort reform supporters — like, I believe, Newt, have argued the contrary for years, claiming that we need to change such laws because the allow frivolous lawsuits against big companies). But Newt is, intentionally or inadvertently, suggesting making the situation worse.

Because, yeah, in theory Google and Facebook and Twitter might change some of their moderation policies if they had a flood of lawsuits coming in. But, as noted, they are not the extent of social media. Would Parler have been able to stand up to the massive wave of litigation? Would WordPress.org, which hosts an array of blogs?

Heck, if I flag as spam or trash a comment as inappropriate or unpleasant or violent on this very blog, would Newt suggest that I should be a target of a lawsuit? (I mean, yeah, he might suggest it, but would he have an intellectually coherent basis for doing so?)

Third—and the approach I most favor—conservatives should simply create alternative communications systems to provide access for everyone who disagrees with the Left.

Well, duh. I think that’s the best solution, too.

It still backs into the problems that Parler had (and which other “we’re never going to moderate our forums, so come over here, conservative type” sites have had as well): without moderation, any social media site (left, right, or center) becomes a cess pit (see the Amazon material about Parler, above), and, legally, some moderation must, by law, take place, because not all “speech” is legal. Death threats and incitement to violence is not legal. Child pornography is not legal. Conspiracy to commit crimes is not legal.

Ironically, the genius behind the rise of Fox into the dominant news channel, Roger Ailes, had been driven out of political consulting by the Left because it feared and hated him.

That’s kind of a bizarro world interpretation of why Ailes voluntarily left political consulting to move into the media world.

Now, we have the latest effort by the left to rig the game, smother dissent, and dictate what we can think, say, and believe.

Weirdly enough, attempts to “smother dissent, and dictate what we can think, say, and believe” are more associated with conservative politics and religion, due to their inherent interest in preserving the status quo. Just saying there might be a little projection going on here.

(Yes, Leftists can be authoritarian as much as Rightists.)

Competition will destroy this left-wing groupthink machine much more quickly, decisively and safely than any effort to regulate or supervise the big internet giants, which will take massive time and effort to defeat their lobbying machines.

Go for it. Though I’d suggest that Facebook and Amazon, trivial evidence to the contrary, epitomize the Right-wing, big business, profit-at-all-costs model than anything the Right is liable to put in its place. But if Newt thinks that a conservative-focused social media / hosting company can (a) compete against Facebook and Twitter and Google and Apple and Amazon, and (b) not become a “big internet giant” and “groupthink machine,” any more than Fox News did not take on the worst aspects of being a big media giant and groupthink machine … there’s nothing stopping him from plowing his money into such an investment.

It’s a free country.

More than 74 million Americans voted for President Trump. At least half of them would be a potential market for an alternative social media-web hosting system. That would be a market of 37 million Americans. If only a small share of non-conservatives came to the new system, that would give it a potential market of more than 40 million Americans.

And over 81 million Americans voted for Biden. Given that only a  fraction of the US is on social media, Newt’s numbers here are kind of goofy. Twitter has 36 million active users in the US. Facebook has 190 million users (active or not) in the US — but most of them aren’t there for the politics (left, right, or center), but because their high school friends and family are there. The idea that a specifically conservative-driven social media / web hosting system would draw 40 million users seems … dubious.

But, hey, I’m not a media mogul. Again, go for it. Maybe Donald will invest, too.

I am convinced we Americans will reject domination by oligarchs and insist on our right to be free. We will not be thrown into the “memory hole” by a handful of rich liberals.

Newt never really does explain how banning violent accounts is somehow throwing Americans — even pro-Trump Americans — into the “memory hole,” but it sure sounds impressive.

But, then, Newt’s big into impressive, performative statements, like saying that 2020 is going to be a GOP blow-out like 2016, and like proclaiming he won’t accept Biden as President because, um, he’s angry about Biden. And that he and all the other people who are angry about Biden will mean a massive Republican win in 2022.

Of course, he also said that people angry about Clinton would mean a massive GOP win in 1998 — when the GOP ended up losing House seats, and Gingrich ended up losing his House Speaker job.

And so it goes.


Do you want to know more?