I watched the hearings from start to finish. They were gripping. The first fact that was established was that the people closest to Trump told him that he had lost the election. His Attorney General William Barr told Trump in no uncertain terms that his claims that the election was stolen were “bullshit.” The outcome was not affected by election fraud, Barr said. Barr said his refusal to accept the result was hurting the country. Ivanka testified that she believed Bill Barr.
But unlike every other American president, Trump refused to admit he lost. He listened to Rudy Guiliani, Sidney Powell, and Michael Flynn, who encouraged his fantasy that he could overturn the election. His advisors tried to separate him from the loonies, but they were unsuccessful.
He and his lawyers filed 60+ lawsuits alleging fraud, but all of them failed because of lack of evidence.
Trump encouraged his zealous MAGA followers to believe that the election was rigged and stolen. His extremist followers—the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers—were eager to help. On December 19, after meeting with Guiliani, Powell, and Flynn, he tweeted to his followers to come to DC on January 6, the day the election results were to be certified. He predicted “it will be wild.” On January 5, Steve Bannon said that on the following day, “All hell will break loose.”
The Proud Boys and the Oath keepers were there, as were thousands of other MAGA zealots. Trump encouraged his followers to March on the Capitol. He said that everything hinges on Mike Pence “doing the right thing,” I.e. refusing to accept the results from states where the votes were close.
When the mob attacked the Capitol, they chanted “Hang Mike Pence.” They sought Nancy Pelosi. No one knows what they would have done had they broken into the chambers while members of Congress were present.
The committee showed video of the insurrection that had not been seen before. It was a violent and wild scene, with men beating police officers repeatedly, using clubs and even flag poles as weapons. It was a scene of carnage. The video was powerful and shocking. As the video ended, Trump’s voice was superimposed, saying something like “There was a lot of love that day.” But the scene of his MAGA buddies pummeling and brutalizing cops was not loving.
Through the hours in which the mob stormed the Capitol, Trump refused to call for help. He did not call out the National Guard or the Secretary of Defense or Homeland Security. Mike Pence, from his secret location, called desperately for help. So did other Republican members of Congress. But it was hours before reinforcements arrived.
Just for the hell of it, when the hearing was over, I turned on FOX News. It was sickening. Laura Ingraham ridiculed Liz Cheney and said she was interminable and boring. No mention of the evidence of Trump’s lies and inaction. Most outrageous was Ingraham’s spin: Our democracy was never at risk. The Democrats and traitor Cheney exaggerated, she lied. No, democracy was never at risk. So what if hundreds and thousands of violent insurrectionists tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power, a tradition that began with George Washington. So what if the Trump mob beat up the law officers. So what if one of the police died of a stroke and four committed suicide.
What if the cops had not held the mob out as long as they did? What if they had seized Pence, Pelosi, Schiff, Raskin and others they hated?
No threat to our democracy? How could Laura Ingraham lie so egregiously with a straight face?
Trump issued a statement about the blood assault on the seat of the US government:
“January 6th was not simply a protest, it represented the greatest movement in the history of our Country to Make America Great Again,” he wrote in a statement.
Dana Milbank wrote this after watching the hearings last night:
Liz Cheney was addressing her fellow Republicans. But more than that, she was speaking to posterity.
“I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible,” she said at Thursday night’s opening hearing of the Jan. 6 House select committee. “There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain.”
The Wyoming congresswoman, daughter of the former vice president, and vice chair of the committee, outlined for the country, and for history, two contrasting stories about the bloody insurrection.
One was a tale of honor and duty. Officials in the Justice Department and White House, to a greater extent than was previously known, confronted Trump about his election lies and repeatedly threatened to resign if he followed through with his darkest impulses.
The other was a tale of brutality and deceit by Trump and a small band of loyalists. They knew he had lost, and yet, as Cheney put it, “Trump oversaw and coordinated a sophisticated, seven-part plan to overturn the presidential election and prevent the transfer of presidential power.”
In perhaps the most chilling moment of the hearing, Cheney spoke of former White House officials’ testimony about Trump’s bloodthirstiness toward his own vice president. “Aware of the rioters’ chants to hang Mike Pence, the president responded with this sentiment, quote, ‘Maybe our supporters have the right idea.’ Mike Pence, quote, ‘deserves it.’ ”
I never thought I would say this but it’s true: Mike Pence saved our democracy by refusing to follow Trump’s demand to hand him the election that he lost. Pence followed the Constitution and foiled the coup.
And after watching the hearings, I sent $100 to Liz Cheney’s re-election campaign.
.

I’ll bet dollars to donuts that a connection will be established between the Willard Hotel “war room” and the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers with Mike Flynn as the liaison of logistics, coordinating the coup.
LikeLike
” ‘Christian’ crowdfunder hosts campaign for Tarrio and other Proud Boys.”
John Eastman, Michael Flynn, Steve Bannon, …., none shy away from their goal for theocracy. The “whining” Pat Cipollone who Cheney chose to paint positively…For those men, their church denies women leadership roles and that discrimination is accepted by all of society under the banner of religion. IMO, that acceptance validates for them, the privilege and deference that they expect more broadly. They plot to avoid losing the entitlement.
Trump’s guy, Jason Miller, was in one of the videos presented at the hearings. In 2021, he was at a CPAC conference in Brazil. Bolonsaro is Brazil’s strong man who is compared to Trump. Bolonsaro’s campaign slogan is Bullets, Beef and Bible. Reporters describe Bolonsaro as speaking casually about violent rape.
Jason Miller’s child with his lover was born 6 mos. after the birth of his 2nd child (with his wife). His lover who worked with him to elect Trump appears to have been thrown under the bus during the aftermath of the events. She claims Miller talked about pregnancy termination, which he denies. Her conservative religion prevented her from getting an abortion. She filed suit to get financial support from Miller.
We should deny power to the people who put Trump in as president and who got his judges confirmed. They haven’t demonstrated a belief in democratic values and equal rights. Their interpretation of rule of law, its intent and letter, is dangerous to a Republic.
LikeLike
I heard yesterday that Brazil will become a majority Protestant nation in a few years. While this was discussed in relation to canonization of saints, it made me think of the fascist Bolsonaro, and wonder what relationships might exist between his rise to power and the rise of Protestantism
LikeLike
The following is not intended to be a defense of Bolsonara’s opponent, Lula. It provides info. only. 5-11-2007, Irish Times, “Lula told Pope Benedict XVI that he wanted to preserve Brazil’s secular state…(as explanation) The Vatican attempts to have obligatory religious instruction reintroduced to all of Brazil’s state-run junior schools.”
Bolsonaro says he is Catholic (his wife is evangelical). An article from the present in which the author appeared to think Lula would replace Bolsonaro (didn’t happen) suggested that a substantial number of Catholic voters did not plan to support Bolsonaro.
We can look at western democracies and identify them as secular. Religion’s role in their politics is demonstrably less than in the U.S.
I don’t know if Brazil has an evangelical organization that equates to the almost 50 state Catholic Conferences created for the sole purpose of politicking for the bishops.
LikeLike
Btw- The “whining” Cipollone never did resign from Trump’s administration.
LikeLike
One of Cipollone’s 10 kids worked for Laura Ingraham’s program.
Laura credits Cipollone for her religious conversion.
LikeLike
Linda I guess you are right, then. All Catholics are bad. CBK
LikeLike
I never could stand the Cheneys. However, in a rational world, the Republican party would be rallying around Liz Cheney. She showed intelligence and integrity last night, which the GOP desperately needs. As for Laura I and Fox Entertainment, well, they are liars. No surprise.
LikeLike
I totally agree with you, Cindy. I disagree with just about every position that Liz Cheney holds, however I can ‘agree to disagree’ and still see her as an honest person.
The GOP did this to themselves, and they drove most honest people out. The true villains are Big Money and Newt. However, there are fewer and fewer honest Democrats, as well. The tail is wagging the dog in this country.
LikeLike
That slimy amphibian
LikeLike
Hmm, “There are fewer and fewer honest Democrat’s as well.”
I think that is a very misleading allegation. Yes, there are dishonest Democrats but compared to the large majority of todays Fascist Republican Party, even the dishonest Democrats look good, like a glass half full without any leaks standing next to an empty glass full of holes that cannot hold water.
LikeLike
Daedalus,
Saying “there are fewer and fewer honest Democrats” is no different than a parent saying “there are fewer and fewer union teachers who aren’t lazy”.
It is a meaningless phrase that serves only one purpose — to demonize union teachers in order to empower those who hate unions.
I don’t want to get into an argument with you about whether union teachers are definitely more lazy than they were years ago or not. Because that would serve the purposes of the anti-union anti-public school crowd just as much as my getting into an argument about whether there are fewer honest Democrats today.
I hope you aren’t deluded enough to believe that turning every discussion about the corruption of the pro-charter pro-privatization industry into a discussion of whether union teachers are more lazy than they were in the past or not would be HELPFUL. If you do, then I suspect you are simply anti-union, not someone who cares about public schools.
The same is true if you turn discussions of the far right, neo-fascist mainstream Republican party into discussions about whether or not there are fewer honest Democrats than ever before. It isn’t about making this country better. It is about pushing the favorite narrative of the right wing.
Let’s not be useful idiots for the far right agenda and frame the issues the way that helps empower the far right. Are there fewer honest Democrats? Are there fewer honest (or hard working) union teachers? Why in the world does that matter at this time in history?
LikeLike
Well, I’ve been a ‘Union Teacher’ and a ‘non-Union Teacher’, and I didn’t change a bit. Upon occasion, the ‘Union’ had my back, however in a ‘non-Union’ situation, the parents of my students had my back.
Why do teachers need someone to ‘have their back’? Well, I suppose it’s because human society is ‘social’, and some can become ‘outcasts’. Odd dynamic.
LikeLike
“Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi, and Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming, had blistering words for Trump and about the threat he poses to American democracy. They made it clear that, for all his ongoing bluster about stolen elections, Trump knowingly spread claims about election fraud that people closest to him knew were false, tried to use the apparatus of government and the courts to cling to power, and when all of that failed, sat back approvingly in the White House as a mob of his supporters stormed the Capitol threatening to hang his vice president…The hearing used the videotaped testimony of some of Trump’s closest aides and allies to show that the Trump campaign and his White House had known well that Joseph R. Biden Jr. won the 2020 election. It showed how Trump and his loyalists had used a calculated campaign of lies to bind his followers and build support for his attempt to stay in power, through extralegal means and violence.”
LikeLike
I really do hate that the NYT reporters still feel like they need to use weasel terms like “what they described as an intentional scheme…”
It WAS an intentional scheme. The other side hasn’t even been able to come up with anything and the undisputed evidence is right out there!
No doubt during the Nuremburg Trials, today’s NYT journalists would be writing “Prosecutors talked about what they described as concentration camps where prosecutors claimed that Jews were sent to gas chambers. Prosecutors claimed that many Jewish children were killed in Nazi gas chambers.”
Truth is still presented as debatable far too frequently in the NYT if it is the Democrats telling the truth. The NYT reports on specious Republican attacks on Democrats as if there was a tremendous amount of evidence proving they are true.
LikeLike
It’s responsible journalism, nycpsp. They’re reporting what people said, not whether it’s true or not; it’s not an opinion piece. That’s what I expect of the NYT. I particularly liked this article because it reports the “Main Takeaways,” without a mention of the irrelevant claptrap Republicans mounted in defense on other media. And itemizes the strong evidence backing up the claims. Show me a piece where they’re reporting Republican claims as truth, or imtimating there’s a tremendous amount of evidence backing up their claims, and I’ll be outraged.
LikeLike
April 5, 2022 “More Evidence Bolsters Durham’s Case Against Democratic-Linked Lawyer”
May 19, 2022 “Key Witness in Durham Case Offers Detailed Testimony of 2016 Meeting: A former F.B.I. official said Michael Sussmann, a lawyer accused of lying to the F.B.I., told him he was reporting Trump suspicions on his own, not on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s campaign.”
(FYI, lucky for our democracy, a jury actually listened to the evidence – instead of doing what NYT journalists did and listened to the talking points – and acquitted him in a few hours)
Oh yes, and no punches pulled here in this DEFINITIVE and utterly misleading statement that the NYT wrote in their 5/22/22 article about the same case:
“The F.B.I. looked into the matter, which involved a server for the Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank, and decided it was unsubstantiated.”
One would have to read Empty Wheel (Marcy Wheeler) blog to know that the FBI investigation here was similar to that first FBI investigation into the Michigan State doctor who abused all those gymnasts that found there was just no evidence of all that the doctor did anything wrong. It was like the FBI investigation into the charges against Brett Kavanaugh. A sentence like the above is entirely misleading.
A laughably cursory investigation by the FBI is presented as if it is thorough and comprehensive when their findings help the Republican narrative. When there is endless corroborated evidence about what happened during January 6, it is presented as an “opinion” because presenting the truth as the truth “helps” the Democrats.
But when presenting nonsense as the truth “helps” the Republicans, the NYT is right there pushing their evidence-free narratives as truth.
LikeLike
NYCPSP,
I agree with you on MSM treatment of Biden. The Times publishes articles frequently that predict despair and loss for him. He never gets a break from the negative coverage.
LikeLike
Oh, No! I actually agree with you!
After the clear NYT distortion (with no later ‘mea culpa’) related to the ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’, which cost the lives of millions, I don’t see how anyone can trust the NYT.
LikeLike
Catherine King
The problem comes in when there are organized and well funded efforts to tear down the wall of separation that the framers very religious men themselves, saw as paramount.
There is no denying that there is an organized well funded illiberal effort to attack Democracy and the Separation of Church and State . . Thus endangering the liberty and religious liberty of all . It is certainly appropriate to call these people out for who they are and what they profess.
And what they profess can be seen in Budapest or Moscow .Which explains their affinity to the authoritarian leaders of those Nations. Who
are living demonstrations of what Jefferson said;
“in every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. he is always in alliance with the Despot abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. it is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them ”
LikeLike
Joel A reasoned response. However, apparently you are not reading my responses to Linda, especially over time. And I’m not going to repeat them here except to say, it’s not what you think, unless you think misunderstanding is a rampant disease. CBK
LikeLike
bethree5
This would not be the NYTimes that ran this story on Gas prices last fall .
“It is displayed along highways across the country, including in areas where a gallon has climbed as high as $7.59 — as regular gas did in Gorda, Calif., in October.”
“A driver in Belleville, N.J., cut his cable and downsized his apartment to save money for gas. A retiree in Vallejo, Calif., said he had stopped driving to go fishing because the miles cost too much in fuel. An auto repairman in Toms River, N.J., doesn’t go to restaurants as often. And an Uber Eats deliveryman said he couldn’t afford frequent visits to his family and friends, some of whom live 60 miles away. ”
The National Average was $3.41 at the time. About 55 cents higher than its 2018 peak which would have been the last time the World Economy was healthy . (Before Trumps Trade war. ) Also far lower than peaks in 14 and 08 . The redeeming factor about the NY Times is it does have columnists like Neal Irwin who pointed out at the time that relative to increased incomes and increased gas millage . The price of gas was not a real burden. Of Course few Americans get past that headline of $7.59 to go on to read Irwin.
Economists talk out of both sides of their mouth most claim that inflation can not be driven by the media.
While a CNBC guest economist pointed out last fall that “inflation is an expectations game. ” A wage price spiral takes place when workers anticipate higher prices and seek higher wages which then are passed on to consumers as higher prices. ”
Without Unions not much chance of that . 70 % of inflation in past cycles was driven by wage increases . Today wages represent 8% of inflationary costs passed on . Record corporate profits account for 53% of inflationary costs .
Some one got the message as to what consumers were expecting and took full advantage of it. Inflation used to be considered a negative for corporate profits.
And of course this was the NY Times that sat on the FBI investigation of Trump in 2016 throwing cold water on both an outside and its own reporters story that the Trump Campaign was being investigated while announcing Clinton’s emails were being investigated.
The NYT not quite living up to my expectations of the Nations paper of record..
LikeLike
Joel, NYC, be three and Daedalus,
Democracy rests on knowledgeable people like you and the people that you and others can persuade.
This morning, after reading the salient points you made, I was reminded again about the odds against our republic.
LikeLike
Hah! Well, I finally caught up on all the responses to my laying down of the gauntlet. Y’all have presented many examples to crush my theory. Motto corrected: “All the news that’s fit to print, and a lot that isn’t.”
LikeLike
I think the NY Times piece that I posted here laid out in clear words how Trump has been documented — incredibly WELL-documented, incontrovertibly documented — to be at the center of a multi-pronged plan to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election. Other media sources have done the same.
To be fair, the NY Times was one of those media sources that helped to make Hillary Clinton’s innocuous emails a much bigger story than Trump’s Russian conspiracy, which is carefully and clearly documented in a variety of investigations, including in the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Volume V.
“the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 presidential election…Manafort’s presence on the Campaign and proximity to Trump created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. Taken as a whole, Manafort’s highlevel access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and associates of Oleg Deripaska, represented a grave counterintelligence threat…Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian effort to hack computer networks and accounts affiliated with the Democratic Party and leak information damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign for president. Moscow’s intent was to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the U.S. democratic process…While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump’s electoral prospects. Staff on the Trump Campaign sought advance notice about WikiLeaks releases, created messaging strategies to promote and share the materials in anticipation of and following thdr release, and encouraged further leaks. The Trump Campaign publicly undermined the attribution of the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia and was indifferent to whether it and WikiLeaks were furthering a Russian election interference effort.”
Click to access report_volume5.pdf
LikeLike
“Jan. 6 has also become a somewhat misleading shorthand for something bigger: a monthslong campaign by Trump and his allies to subvert American democracy and cling to power by reversing an election…Over the past year and a half, much has come to light about how they went about it, embracing one tactic after another in a way that led a federal judge to conclude that elements of it likely amounted to a criminal conspiracy…There was a failed legal strategy that clogged the courts with fantastical conspiracy theories. It was followed by a plot to twist the Justice Department into backing Mr. Trump’s repeated lie that the election had been rigged and stolen from him, and consideration of proposals that he direct the military or the Homeland Security Department to seize voting machines…Those were followed by a strong-armed attempt to subvert the Electoral College process and bludgeon Mr. Pence into taking part, all leading to the violent effort to keep Congress from formally affirming Trump’s loss on Jan. 6.”
“Trump’s simple lie found an eager audience in a broader movement fueled by hard-right groups who believe the United States, with its increasing racial and ethnic diversity, is being stolen from them. The message of a stolen election was not entirely new…For years, allies of Mr. Trump had promoted the false “Stop The Steal” narrative that elections were being stolen in districts across the country, particularly in cities with large numbers of Black and Latino voters that are typically won by Democrats. In 2016, an organization called Stop The Steal, affiliated with the political operative Roger Stone, encouraged Trump supporters to swarm city voting locations in search of fraud, sparking alarm about voter intimidation…After Trump lost, the ‘Stop the Steal’ narrative became a self-fulfilling prophecy and then a movement, promoted by a cast of lawyers, provocateurs, ideologues and others with an interest in keeping him in power…Among those who emerged as the biggest promoters of the lie were the lawyers Sidney Powell and L. Lin Wood, against whom a federal judge has ordered sanctions; the former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who was pardoned by Mr. Trump weeks after the election after twice pleading guilty to lying to the F.B.I.; Patrick Byrne, the former Overstock chief executive; the MyPillow executive Mike Lindell; a retired Army colonel named Phil Waldron; and Ron Watkins, the administrator of the online message board 8kun, who played a major role in spreading the baseless QAnon conspiracy theory, whose adherents believe that top Democrats worship Satan and run a child-trafficking ring.”
“More than 60 lawsuits were ultimately filed by an army of lawyers, some employed by Mr. Trump’s Republican allies, others working directly for the Trump campaign…ll of this unfolded as several people close to Mr. Trump were telling him that he had been soundly — and legally — defeated…a campaign data expert informed Trump ‘in pretty blunt terms’ shortly after the election that he was going to lose. A week, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security, announced that there was no evidence of fraud in the election…After scores of cases were rejected — often with scathing words from judges — the State of Texas tried a Hail Mary, filing an unusual request directly to the U.S. Supreme Court that challenged election procedures in four key swing states: Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin…The Texas lawsuit asked the court to block those states from casting their electoral votes for Mr. Biden and to shift the selection of electors to the states’ Republican legislatures. That would have effectively handed Mr. Trump the election and required the justices to throw out millions of votes…he Supreme Court — in the hands of a conservative majority bolstered by three Trump appointees — rebuffed the effort in a brief unsigned order…”
LikeLike
It’s always possible (but, highly unlikely) that some journalist will take the names cited in the article and construct a correlation with their religious beliefs.
LikeLike
Linda writes: “It’s always possible (but, highly unlikely) that some journalist will take the names cited in the article and construct a correlation with their religious beliefs.”
First, you never answered my earlier question about why such questions are important to you or to anyone for that matter.
But second, everyone has and answers for themselves their religious questions, even atheists (their answer is some version of NO).
But probably most others (e.g., journalists) understand that point; and also understand, as you seem not to, that our country is based, in part, on the freedom of religion.
Religious bigotry is not something you want to put on your resume. CBK
LikeLike
Very good, Linda. I think we need to consider these unpleasant possibilities. There’s a reason our country was founded with an aim to suppress religious influence. Most of the world’s worst atrocities are done in the name of ‘God’. Yet, here we are, again.
LikeLike
Daedalus Your note gives evidence that misunderstanding of religion, not to mention its absence, is not only a problem of the right wing. CBK
LikeLike
Agreed.
LikeLike
Daedalus Most critiques of religion focus on only the bad and overlook the good, but also the historical resilience of the religious question and the many forms its answers take.
t’s almost laughable (if it weren’t so true and horrible) that the totalitarian either obfuscates the fact and fear of their own death at some point in time, OR openly or obliquely entertains the idea that THEY are God, or at least their own stunted version of (what Eric Voegelin refers to as) their libido dominandi.
I do believe that when Trump said that he saw a lot of love out there (when they were tearing up the Capitol) that his empty soul was in vacuum mode. He saw it all as an expression of LOVING HIM.
We should put a picture of Trump next to “libido dominandi” in the dictionary. CBK
LikeLike
I think the general message of most religious texts promotes a cohesive ethic, a message that people need to value each other. Unfortunately, most don’t get that message (not even the ‘leaders’). This makes religion a divisive, rather than cohesive, force. It doesn’t need to be that way.
LikeLike
Daedalus-
Thank you for your comment at 12:27.
In light of the overturn of Roe and the SCOTUS 2020 decisions in Biel
and Espinosa, Democrats do not have the luxury of ignoring conservative religion’s adverse impact. To ignore Leonard Leo’s successes is tantamount to throwing in the towel for democracy. For example, Leo’s two GOP federal judges overturned a verdict against gerrymandering rendered by Ohio’s Supreme Court. When we add in the Jan. 6 threat from Christian nationalists, it makes the case even more compelling for us to act against theocracy.
LikeLike
Linda… I hope I’m responding to your comment at 2:26..(I really dislike this format)
It appears that you might be in Ohio. I grew up in Ohio and went to school there (undergrad and grad). I remember when Jerry Springer was mayor in Cincinnati, and when Cleveland was shockingly segregated, yet sane. Worked summers at Republic Steel on a crew that was 90% Black, and lived on the edge of the ‘East Side’, where I would dive in to hear great music.
I no longer live there, but with every atrocity I hear about, my heart just drops. Honestly, the film of cops shooting a Black kid with a toy gun just broke my heart. What is wrong with Ohio? I don’t think I would recognize it, today. Then, again, I grew up with such hopes in the ’60’s, and almost all of them have been dashed.
I now live in Tennessee (for financial reasons) I find my neighbors to be very friendly and honest people, however rather racist and ‘Christian’. But, they are no more bigoted than people in New Jersey or Ohio. It really is time that people in the ‘North’ stop pointing the finger at others and take care of their own significant faults. The more they pretend superiority, the more they promote division. Are we a ‘country’, or not?
LikeLike
Daedalus– I am a New Jerseyan. It seems strange to hear you put us in racist-wise with Ohio and Tennessee.
I’ll grant you, as someone raised in mostly-white rural upstate NY, I was shocked at the residential racial segregation I encountered in NYC/ LI & NJ when I moved to the metro-NYC area in the early ‘70’s. You rarely heard racist talk where I grew up; it was considered ignorant and low class. I suppose that’s because it just wasn’t a factor. But there was no zoning, no manipulation of RE ownership. You lived mixed: middle class alongside poor Appalachian-style hicks; there was enough space between you to ignore differences. The uniting concept was freedom from govtl restrictions, so that came with the territory. The only sort of “bigoted” talk I heard was against downstate urbs whose residents were imagined as 100% welfare, living off our state taxes [although no talk about whether Joe Hick next door was on welfare]. Oh, & also “bigoted” talk about intellectual elites.
I have certainly met people with knee-jerk racism in both NYC/LI and NJ, but they were from “greatest” and “silent” generations. In NYC it was residual resentment from block-busting of ‘50s/ ‘60s. In NJ it was residual resentment from the ’68 urban riots. My millennial sons have always consorted with a wild assortment of regional cultural types, & mixed-race couples are not unusual in their (& younger) generations.
I mean, how racist can we really be in NJ? We’ve been re-distributing the lion’s share of property taxes to poor [all-black] urban schools for 40 yrs. Our social safety nets are among the most generous of all the states.
LikeLike
Well, I owned a house in Scotch Plains. I couldn’t believe the distinct lines. One block was ‘Black’, and the next was ‘White’. I also couldn’t understand why (as a parent volunteer) I could ‘draft’ so many talented Black kids onto my Little League team despite our winning, year after year, and being the last to pick. One of my two assistant coaches (a black gentleman) had to spell it out to me over a beer in my back yard. He said, “Well, isn’t it obvious?”.
To me, of course, it wasn’t obvious, however in NJ, it appears that it’s ‘racism as usual’ and everyone simply understands that that’s how it is. Sad.
LikeLike
Daedalus,
Your example about team drafts reflects what happens very often in probably every community. Fox’ talking point about America as a race-blind nation perpetuates a fraud and, only racist ditto heads enjoy spreading the absurdity.
LikeLike
You know, Linda, you are probably correct. I’m just an oddball that thinks color isn’t important, and that talent and training make far more of a difference.
Year after year, we drafted last (because we had won the previous season). And, year after year we continued to win, even though everyone else had a pick before we did. Now, I could say that our coaches were WAY better (let me take a bow), however, it wasn’t just ‘training’. There was obvious talent that others were unwilling to incorporate into their teams, and they paid the price.
Now, if only our country could learn the same lesson.
LikeLike
“I’m just an oddball that thinks color isn’t important, and that talent and training make far more of a difference.”
Wait a minute! Talent and training make FAR MORE of a difference than color? So color is a factor but not as important as skill?
LikeLike
Did you read my post? The point was that my ‘coaching staff’ totally ignored color and focused entirely on skill and talent (same thing?). This approach was enhanced due to the fact that one third (one) of the staff was Black. What a tremendous advantage this gave us over the generally racist leaders of other teams.
So, what does that tell you about our country and our potential impact upon the rest of human society?
LikeLike
I was commenting on the coupling of your avowed colorblindness with your choice of words. There should have been no “far more” in your comment. If you are truly color blind, talent and skill should be your only criteria as, I suspect they were. However, I would contend that none of us are colorblind–black, white, Latino, Native American, Asian. You may have been good about not creating a pecking order around race or ethnicity. I am, too, but I am white and aware that I have had privileges not afforded to everyone.
LikeLike
As humans, we all notice differences. No two people are alike. We also tend to ‘classify’. However, some of us think of ‘differences’ as an opportunity to learn, and others feel threatened and attempt to ‘protect themselves’ by avoiding (even killing) ‘the other’.
I have an Astronomy background. To me, the ‘odd’ invites a more comprehensive understanding, not a reason for building fortifications.
I also worked (summers) at an AEC facility, where I learned (and scoffed) about ‘secrecy’. Secrecy is the opposite of science. It is the cult of killing ‘the other’.
LikeLike
Nope. Color is totally irrelevant. When I was a kid, I didn’t even notice color. Then, I went to school in Cleveland, and then New Jersey, I then I learned about the importance of ‘color’.
LikeLike
So you recognize that people of color may be/ are treated differently even if you didn’t notice it.
LikeLike
Yes, indeed. In fact, as I said, I was shocked to see how much that was the case.
LikeLike
You say color doesn’t matter yet you regret Recinstruction. I don’t understand the contradiction. Southern whites terrorized the black population.
LikeLike
Didn’t I already answer this? You appear to be calling me a hidden racist and a liar because??? Perhaps your antagonism arises from a need to identify yourself?
LikeLike
I think you need to learn more about the necessity of Reconstruction and its benefits—and the way that pro-Southern historians distorted it to future generations, even up to the present.
LikeLike
I know Scotch Plains. It’s very similar to the Westchester suburb I was brought up in (which, at the time, was more rural than suburban).
Don’t think I’m going too far out on a limb when I say that Daedalus saw more racism in that Northern enclave than in his Southern town in Tennessee…which is not the “standard line”.
Please know, Daedalus, that there are many here in the north who are under no illusion, whatsoever, regarding the existence of racism in our region. Connecticut, at one time (maybe even now?), had the highest KKK enrollment in the nation. And NYC/Boston were not exactly havens for African-Americans before or during the Civil War.
On a personal note: there were some on my different sports teams who got down on me for befriending and admiring the athletes on the neighboring, mostly black school. But those people were in the minority. Prejudice/racism seems to vary from home to home/block to block/town to town.
It says a lot to me that, generations after the fact, that long time residents from Tennessee and other southern states are still angered by what’s conceived as a heavy handed one size fits all implementation of the Reconstruction.
I see a parallel here with the debates regarding religion. All of these large scale endeavors, organizations (religious, political, etc), and plans are subject to negative intervention. The carpetbaggers are a perfect example and comparing them to today’s hedge fund managers and multi-billionaires is spot on, to my view.
Money doesn’t always equate to generosity, kindness, and intelligence. Too often it attracts greed, competition, and aggressiveness. But the good will is still there and positive results can and do occur. It seems that the negative forces had a lot of sway both during and after the Reconstruction. I’m looking forward to checking out Diane’s recommended series.
LikeLike
Thanks, ‘gitapik’. I seem to have difficulty responding to certain postings (for instance, your reply to the Linda original).
I totally agree that the absurdity of racism may be universal among our species. Wish I could have had you over for a beer with my ‘assistant coaches’ back in the day.
And, that brings to mind the importance of sports (at a lower level and separate from the ‘entertainment’). I primarily coached ‘individual’ sports (swimming, tennis, and, well a bit of baseball). But the object was not only for the individual to win, but for the team to win. For that to happen, the individual had to do their best (involving training), but they also had to feel a cohesion with their team members so that they could revel in a team victory. Yet, we’re talking sport, here. There’s no way that hate and exclusion enter into a healthy attitude.
I must apologize for picking on New York (city) so often. I realize that there are good people scattered everywhere (as do you). In my current town, we have ‘retirement communities’ and people come down from ‘the North’ to live in ‘gated communities’. I sold my limited produce at a ‘farmer’s market’ in one such community, and I did, indeed, find that even in these neighborhoods, there were plenty of decent people. However, there were also enough of the toxic/racist/regionalist types that they many STILL (after 170 years) considered themselves ‘superior’. Odd.
LikeLike
“ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC covered the hearing live. As well they should…Fox News did not…Fox News didn’t just stick with its prime-time lineup of Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham…it sought to actively undermine the hearings…Fox News ran Carlson’s and Hannity’s shows without commercials…As Carlson’s hour gave way to Hannity’s, the committee was in the process of showing a 12-minute video of the attack on the U.S. Capitol by an angry mob, urged on by Trump…”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2022/06/09/how-cable-news-except-fox-covered-jan-6-hearings/7577317001/
LikeLike
FOX demonstrated fear. Fear of truth.
LikeLike
Carl Bernstein: “ it’s very important to understand the progression from Richard Nixon’s criminality to Donald Trump’s criminality. They are both criminal presidents of the United States…But then Trump went further. He is the first seditious president in our history. How did that happen? He decided he would not abide by the election, the duly constituted, free election of Joe Biden as the president of the United States, and staged a coup to keep Biden from taking office.”
“The law calls for the election of the president of the United States to take place at 1:00 p.m. on January 6. And there was a great effort, a conspiracy extending to the president, to keep that 1:00 p.m. appointment from happening. And the object of all of this, including the demonstrations and breaking into the Capitol of the United States by the insurrectionists, was to keep this election of the president from happening, so Trump could stay in office, and Biden could not…But the idea of the president of the United States trying to stage a coup such as this is extraordinary, insidious, and we have never seen anything like it in our history.”
Bob Woodward: “there’s so much hate in the politics of Nixon and of Trump. But what really struck us, when you look at all of this, Trump is staking his claim now that the election was stolen. Well, he lost. He did not win. And Carl and I and Bob Costa, who I worked with on “Peril,” spent a lot of time looking for evidence to suggest or show that this was — the 2020 election was fraudulent and stolen…There is zero evidence. It just doesn’t pass the commonsense test. But I agree with Carl. It really was sedition, sedition, action by Trump trying to overturn it.”
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/woodward-and-bernstein-reflect-on-the-parallels-between-watergate-and-the-capitol-attack
LikeLike
The difference between Nixon’s time and Trump’s is that during the intervening years, there was a formation of an alliance between conservative Catholics and evangelicals. The resulting political power is described in the Ryan Girdusky interview posted at Pat Buchanan’s site.
LikeLike
Linda We can be discerning by considering the source, on both counts. CBK
LikeLike
Linda– “The difference between Nixon’s time and Trump’s…”
There are two main differences.
1.The Southern Strategy, spearheaded by Goldwater & later Nixon, in the ‘60’s-‘70s. It encouraged racist Southerners threatened by the end of Jim Crow and Civil Rights Laws to move to the Republican party [which also began pushing RNC to the right].
2.The neoliberalism/ globalism of the ‘80s & after, which included union-busting, & disappeared living-wage mfg-sector jobs, which started under Carter & was massively expanded under Reagan. That drove traditionally-union, working-class Dem/s into Rep party.
Separately we must also acknowledge the explosion of younger people buying into born-again Evangelism, starting in the late 70’s, in the wake of the political and moral turbulence of the late-‘60s/ ‘70s.
The union of rw Catholics and Evangelist Protestants began slowly, starting in late ‘70s [Weyrich’s brainchild], & grew gradually until by a dozen yrs later, Catholic John Kerry’s run for presidency in 2004 was undermined to some extent by the stark difference between GWBush’s pro-life & Kerry’s pro-choice positions.
I think one can argue that by 2004, the marriage of rwCatholics and Evangelist Protestants was powerful enough to put a small dent in a pro-choice Dem presidential campaign. However, it was a footnote. Facts are, the economy was doing great in 2004. I suspect even my politically-very-liberal husband may have voted Rep in 2004 [I didn’t!] But the marriage of rw Catholics to Evang Prots was a footnote then, and it’s still a footnote now. Catholic D vs R vote typically mirrors the national vote. Catholic vote in 2020 was 49% Trump, 50% Biden. Compare to national vote 47% Trump to 51% Biden. Compare to white Evangelist vote: 84% Trump, 15% Biden. Yes, you can hone in on white Catholic vote: 57% Trump 42% Biden if you wish, but what difference does it make when the overall Catholics incl non-white average out to 49%R-50%D? Despite the so-called “marriage,” Catholic voters do not closely resemble Evangelist voters at all.
What this really tells you is that white Catholic voters are somewhat influenced by the machinations of the hierarchy, but not very. And non-white Catholic voters, even less so.
LikeLike
Bethree,
I understand the points you’ve made- a few additional observations.
Politics are the past, present and an extrapolations into the future.
Your analysis ignores the success of Leonard Leo and its implications for the future. A weaker argument, because it’s characterized by more facets, might focus on the success of Fox hosts like Laura Ingraham who blend their religious beliefs with their politics.
Secondly, there are difficulties in reconciling the political drivers you identify with the spending for current GOP ads that tout, Jesus, guns, babies. There may be a bellwether campaign in Ohio to support or weaken a portion of your view. It’s the race for Portman’s Senate seat. The Democratic candidate’s T.V. ads announce, “If you want a culture wars candidate, I am not your guy….”
Thirdly, the 1964 Civil Rights Act did not initially include women because unions opposed it. How much male union members were influenced by the gender bias in their conservative churches would be an interesting area of research.
Fourth, the jury is still out about the future of Hispanic voting. A shift in tone by a GOP candidate, away from anti-Brown rhetoric, a Bush-like or N.J.’s Christie style, IMO, wins among those with conservative family values.
Fifth, your analysis ignores the source of money behind Weyrich- Charles Koch, who funds the right wing and whose network has ties to
conservative religion. A couple of links are to the Board of the Catholic University of America located in D.C. and there’s Ilya Shapiro at Georgetown Law in D.C.
LikeLike
Something fundamental inside me broke irreparably on January 6. I came to the realization that the fundamental faith I had in Americans’ ability to eventually figure it out, no matter how bad things might become, was wrong. I realize now it was a hypocritical faith built on the same fictions of American “exceptionalism.” And the reality of Ukraine no longer has me thinking things are unimaginable anymore. Lloyd’s arguments, for example, resonate with me more and more with each passing day. There will be violence. Just like the Big One in California, it may be next year, it may be in decades. But it’s going to happen. If Republicans get their way, there will be an explosion that will pit neighbor against neighbor. And as history has demonstrated time after time is that the viciousness of enemies who know each other tends to be more vicious and relentless.
LikeLike
…tents to be relentless.
LikeLike
Let’s dream a bit. Let’s suppose Trump is found guilty of treason, and the case isn’t overturned by today’s Supreme Court. We’re looking as a ‘less than 1% chance’, I would say, but…
In that case, wouldn’t Fox be an ‘accessory’ the the crime?
LikeLike
Like you, Greg, I’ve become cynical (realistic) about the state of our country and the prospects for the future of our species. It’s beginning to look like a toxic bloom, to me. The ‘Earth’ will recover, but it ain’t gonna be nice for most (if not all) humans.
But, I’m old, and too poor to make a difference. As a wise Frenchman once instructed, I now spend most of my time tending to my own garden. I did what I could, and dedicating your life to teaching demands optimism, but one must be satisfied with truly helping a few students, hoping that they can do the same for others. Unfortunately, ‘You can’t fool Mother Nature’.
My sister-in-law now has a dying dog (age 16). The dog will die, however the trick is to ease that dog through the process with as little pain as possible.
LikeLike
That wise French guy was a fiction. But he spoke for his author, I suppose. And welcome to Tennessee. My father’s family migrated here in 1806.
LikeLike
So true about the ‘fiction’. However, it’s tempting to think he spoke for the writer.
LikeLike
I sincerely hope you are wrong about where this country is heading, but I fear you may be right. We need to figure out a way to “stop the steal” of our democracy.
LikeLike
Well said, RT
LikeLike
No one hopes I am wrong more than I do. The evidence is not comforting nor does it give a reason for hope. The people I most fear are self-proclaimed centrists. A large portion of them make up the Duke Effect, saying or appearing to say one thing in public and then very differently in the voting booth. They believe deep down that they will lose something they have now if real egalitarian policies are ever adopted.
LikeLike
GregB writes: “They believe deep down that they will lose something they have now if real egalitarian policies are ever adopted.”
I have often thought about this “deep down” sense of things in relation to the racist’s fear of being “replaced.”
Speculating, of course; but I have wondered if such an articulation of the feeling (of being replaced) is a misinterpretation of a deep set feeling and fear of losing a centuries old sense of existential authority that has come “down” to us by just being white.
In other words, egalitarian policies have hidden in them a set of existential stairs going downward, and away from a long-time but falsely rooted arrogance.
BTW, and still speculating here, my guess is that the misinterpretation also applies to the fear of women that is so obvious in many men. I’m 75. I’ve been “patted on the head” for offering something intelligent to the conversation more times than I can count. CBK
LikeLike
Thanks, CBK. I don’t see much in your position to which I disagree.
LikeLike
Sorry, CBK but that is just too hard for me to imagine– that deep-down “existential authority of just being white.” I personally see future in human terms rather than racial terms, so does my immediate family, & my extended family, going back more than 50 yrs.
I think we are not outliers— among extended families whose elders were fairly well-off, whose Greatest Generation offspring married outside their class/ interests/ nationality-culture, whose Boomer offspring adopted black kids, married Asian and Hispanic and gay partners, whose millennials are open to marrying whatever race (as evidenced by dating/ marriage patterns). Yes, the clan was mostly academic [other side innovative mfrs with similar histories], which trends away from received culture. And every male going back to turn-of-20thC progenitor couple chose challenging [not pattable-on-head] mates. OK maybe we are a minority— 5% 10%? 15%?
And I’ll note I’ve seen the same patterns in families whose late-19thC/early 20thC clan progenitors came to US chased away from their home countries by pogroms/ poverty et al—by the time you get to Boomer generation, their kids are marrying not only outside the faith but a different culture altogether.
The people I am describing have tended to gather in cities/ metro suburbs/ collegetowns—but many of them today—not just millennial but their boomer parents– are scattering to other kinds of states in order to obtain living-wage jobs, or to stretch limited retirement funds. They will incubate there.
LikeLike
bethree5 I am not saying people cannot change, but changing one’s socially inherited racism, sexism, or any other “group bias” that we have been raised in, and where no one raised questions about it until we were older, takes, first, a recognition, and then a decision, and then the creation of a new habit that, over time, sinks down into the unconsciousness where those old biases have taken up residence and where change is notoriously slow.
So that’s what I meant by “deep down.” One thing I think that happens with the unreflective and therefore unrepentant racist and sexist (et al) is their sense if being privileged in the world and where the “other” is concerned, right from the get-go.
If that privilege is threatened, it first inspires fear as it is existential . . . we feel it. My speculation is that the fake “replacement” idea reaches “down” to that level of unconscious and not yet articulate feelings of fear . . . that somehow, we will lose our existential sense of being privileged.
Don’t worry about it though, I’m just speculating. CBK
LikeLike
Trump’s conduct on January 6 and afterward deserves heavy condemnation and for principled people – including principled conservatives – that conduct disqualifies him for serving again as President. But the rioting by the mob wasn’t all that consequential; no one was armed and there was no serious threat to anyone’s life other than a cop shooting an unarmed woman. The serious problem is that Trump tried by other means to overturn an election that he lost as a result of his own repulsive personality, a personality that alienated millions of persuadable voters who were open to voting for him but who just couldn’t stomach his adolescent antics.
But almost everyone on the Left wants the even worse consequences of the summer 2020 riots to be memory-holed. Around three dozen people died, and hundreds of small businesspeople were financially ruined by the estimated $2 billion of property damage in the “mostly peaceful” protests. Few rioters have even been charged with criminal violations, amd most of those who were charged have had the charges dismissed or pled down to misdemeanors. In addition, the recent effort to kill a Supreme Court justice has received minimal coverage in the media. Imagine that the intended victim had been, say, Sotomayor. Rather than being covered on page A20 of the NY Times as with the Kavanaugh incident, there would be front page stories and saturation TV news coverage for weeks. Just one more reason why a large majority of the public no longer trusts the news media to cover politically-themed topics fairly.
LikeLike
Kelly,
It is simply false the the 1/6 tirade was no consequential. One police officer died of a stroke. Four police officers committed suicide. Over 100 more were seriously injured. Is that inconsequential?
A mob tried to overturn a free and fair election.
A mob entered the U.S. Capitol by force and overran the building in an effort to subvert the Constitution.
All of this was encouraged and inspired by the sitting President, who refused to acknowledge that he lost.
Yes, this was an effort to stage a coup. To subvert the Constitution. To destroy our democracy.
Yes, this was consequential.
It was more consequential than anything caused by BLM.
LikeLike
Impossible to place a dollar value on human life, but $30 million in damages to the Capitol ain’t chump change.
https://www.npr.org/sections/insurrection-at-the-capitol/2021/02/24/970977612/architect-of-the-capitol-outlines-30-million-in-damages-from-pro-trump-riot
LikeLike
“But the rioting by the mob wasn’t all that consequential; no one was armed and there was no serious threat to anyone’s life other than a cop shooting an unarmed woman.”
Read that one a couple of times. Here’s another version, I’m sure many of you could do better: “But the Watergate burglars weren’t armed, they were bungling fools who were no serious threat to anyone’s life, other than a bunch of grandstanding Democrats who were just plain political.” This is right up there with the “we can’t do anything about guns because people are always going to violate laws” schtick.
LikeLike
Kelly: what about the BLM riots and The K threat is not an argument. Did Trump not attempt to remain in office? Was the riot not the logical result of Trump’s ridiculous assertions? Has there ever been any greater threat to peaceful transfer of power?
Even the rebellious southern states who seceded in 1860 did not dispute the election itself.
LikeLike
Kelly Johnson just acknowledge that there are (with a few exceptions) no principled conservatives in the Republican party.
“Trump’s conduct on January 6 and afterward deserves heavy condemnation and for principled people – including principled conservatives – that conduct disqualifies him for serving again as President.”
Is Kelly Johnson opposing all the Republicans who say what Trump did was fine?
If not, she is unprincipled herself.
Also the fact that Kelly is unaware of all the threats made to Supreme Court Justices and other progressive leaders who aren’t far right wing like Kavanaugh speaks volumes.
If she cared about kids’ lives as much as she cared about the lives of right wing Supreme Court Justices, she would support gun laws and not the Republican party who insist that easy access to guns is necessary but they will gladly provide armed guards for the privileged Supreme Court Justices. Notice that the Republicans aren’t telling Kavanaugh to live in a home with one door, no windows, and having his family carry weapons to protect him. Because they know that isn’t a solution. It’s just something they say because they believe children are expendable.
LikeLike
The mob insurrection had consequences–several deaths, even more injuries, trauma, millions of dollars in damages, …the list goes on. This was an attempt to overturn the government. The crowd was out of control in the national capitol building. Would the mob have hanged Mike Pence? I think there was a good chance of that happening. And what would it have done to Nancy Pelosi? Those men calling her name–“Naaaancy”–didn’t sound like they were playing around. By the way, “the recent attempt to kill a Supreme Court justice” was thwarted because the miscreant basically arrested himself. (I am not excusing him.) Please stop the false equivalency and the deflection and attacks on the media and recognize that January 6 was an event that put democracy in danger.
LikeLike
Cindy, well stated. On Jan 6, the mob sought nothing less than the overthrow of the government and the Constitution
LikeLike
Kelly deliberately believes or parrots the false equivalency construct of the right wing. There are only a few possible motivations.
(1) Like Meghan McCain, Kelly wants to protect his/her financial assets which he/she believes are at risk from Democrats. (2) Kelly’s beliefs are carved by his/her conservative religion which Kelly believes are at risk from Democrats. (3) Kelly feels threatened by disorder and authoritarianism assuages those insecurities. Or, (4) Kelly doesn’t want to lose the unmerited privilege of being white, male, Christian and/or straight.
LikeLike
That you would classify the sort of police beatings we saw on video as “not all that consequential” must be some sort of normalization created in your mind by recent mass shooting deaths. A neighbor of mine lost his eldest son a few years ago from a fluke accident that caused his head to land heavily on a sidewalk curb– similar to what happened to the Capitol policewoman who testified yesterday, who was forcibly pushed by the mob from her defensive position. It wasn’t the accident that killed my friend’s son, it was the resulting TBI that infused him with deep depression and anxiety: he took his own life with the meds for his constant severe headaches, after being convinced from weeks of disability that he would never be able to lead a full life. Google TBI and find many who have met the same end.
LikeLike
Beth: so sorry that happened to your friend.
LikeLike
Thanks, Roy.
LikeLike
Kelley Johnson: got any stats on the summer of 2020 BLM protests causing injuries/ deaths that we could stack up against the Jan 6 beatings of police officers/ one shooting death/ ensuing heart attack, stroke, & suicides?
Asking seriously. I don’t know, because I live in an area [NJ] where many massive peaceful protests were held, & am not aware of anything similar.
LikeLike
Other commenter have already pointed out that Kelly Johnson’s comment is sheer propagandistic lunacy.
So, is Kelly a Trump seditionist?
Sure sounds like it.
LikeLike
A seditionist acts on his or her beliefs.
Thought crimes don’t get punished.
LikeLike
FOX NEWS
🤪 🤪 🤪 🤪 🤪 🤪
Breeding Insanity Since 1996
LikeLike
Also….
With Bernie Thompsons last video clip of interviews with convicted rioters, notice how most of these men–MEN–use the words (paraphrase), “Trump invited us,” and “what Trump asked of me,” and so forth. How flipping deluded does one have to be, how desperate are they in their lives, and what does this show about where they are in life to think that they have a personal connection to the former president that makes it sound like he called them up on their phones to help him out? That’s the power of 1. propaganda, 2. the despair and hopelessness people are feeling in their lives.
LikeLike
Excellent points, Yoss. These people aren’t ‘nuts’, they live in a society that limits and controls their sense of worth to the point that they become violent. Some societies are more violent than others, and the US promotes violence to an extraordinary degree.
LikeLike
Taking the longview, Daed, looking at the history of how America has gotten to where it currently is, Jane Mayer does an excellent job in her book “Dark Money” which was the first in many books that document how the post-WWII liberal order changed into the neoliberal Washington consensus, from the Powell Memo and Nixon & Volker Shocks to Reaganomics to repealing Glass-Stegall; how the “excesses of democracy” of the 60s and very early 70s scared the crap out of the ruling wealthy business elites into organizing politically to promote a Hayekian system of capitalism which has fostered the economic inequalities and insecurities that produce a population ready and willing to embrace someone like Trump, much to the relief of the Owners of America.
LikeLike
Out to buy ‘Dark Money’, instantly. However, your description leads me to assume that it’s a ‘kinda’ mirror of my own thoughts. Still, looking in a mirror can be pleasant. Thanks.
LikeLike
Yoss-
Koch funded Paul Weyrich, co-founder of the religious right and ALEC.
LikeLike
Yossarian,
Trump DID tell them to come! They are no more “deluded” than the people who signed up for the military after being bombarded with messages like “Uncle Sam Wants You”.
“Uncle Sam Wants You” made some Americans feel that they were being asked to perform a duty.
Trump’s non-stop call to his supporters for help on January 6 made those people believe they were being asked to perform a duty.
THEY WERE RIGHT! They weren’t deluded about what they were hearing.
LikeLike
nyspsp, I’m not sure why you’re making this parallel. Sure there were ‘Uncle Sam Wants You” posters in the VNW era, but those who signed up voluntarily weren’t being exhorted by the kind of cult cachet of social media, & didn’t have a cult leader calling them out to some deluded mission to abort US govt election procedure.
What we got that couldn’t be ignored were “Greetings” letters mailed directly to those being drafted into war. No parallel.
LikeLike
bethree5, I am responding to this:
“notice how most of these men–MEN–use the words (paraphrase), “Trump invited us,” and “what Trump asked of me,” and so forth. How flipping deluded does one have to be, how desperate are they in their lives, and what does this show about where they are in life to think that they have a personal connection to the former president that makes it sound like he called them up on their phones to help him out?”
Are these men “flipping deluded”? Or did Trump ask them to help him “win” the war against those who “stole” the election?
Some people voluntarily signed up to fight in a war – they weren’t “deluded” about being asked to do so by Uncle Sam or by Trump.
LikeLike
Trump cannot accept that he lost the election because he – in his own mind – is not a loser. Everything else follows from that delusion. His grandiose position is that his followers support him because they “love” him. His staff and Javanka too, offer no resisitance because that’s just “how he is”. That his delusion endangers democracy and civil society is of no concern to them at all. Mary Trump tried to warn us to little avail.
The careless characters Tom and Daisy are amateurs in comparison.
LikeLike
Would someone please wake up A.G. Garland?
LikeLike
I don’t think Garland is asleep at the wheel. Silence from the DOJ, not leaks about investigations is SOP, though we’ve become accustomed to a lot of noise since Comey about Clinton’s emails.
Check out Marcy Wheeler’s blog at https://www.emptywheel.net for painstaking documentation of cases as they wend their way through the courts.
LikeLike
I love Marcy Wheeler.
Something that went unnoticed by most people is that William Barr’s handpicked hack John Durham has been trying to prosecute good people for invented crimes — the purpose of which is to scare off any investigations into Trump or other criminal behavior that helps Republicans.
Our democracy dodged a nuclear bomb last month thanks to 12 jurors who came back with a quick verdict of not guilty on charges that the NYT so-called liberal journalists had been telling the public right up to the verdict were “very serious” with copious evidence of this person’s guilt and elevating John Durham as a truth-seeker instead of a political hack willing to prosecute “enemies” of his right wing agenda.
Instead of calling out the Republicans’ complete abandonment of principles, the NYT legitimizes them with their so-called journalists simply amplifying right wing talking points. Marcy Wheeler was one of the few people who listened to evidence and reported on it correctly, while NYT reporters listened to their Republican sources and wrote whatever narrative the right wing believed was important.
LikeLike
Linda, Mueller didn’t do the brave thing, clearly. He didn’t even come right out and say in his report that Trump broke the law. Instead, he listed a great many instances of Trump breaking the law, and then he said, a) if we had found that Trump was innocent of wrongdoing, we would be saying that, and we are not saying that; and b) it’s up to Congress, not the DOJ, to act on this. So, he took the weasel way out. And then, ofc, Barr simply lied, telling the American people that the report exonerated Trump when it so clearly did not–a truly shocking action on the part of the chief law enforcement officer in the country.
LikeLike
Mueller’s report was a great disappointment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Christine. Consider this conversation, reported on the emptywheel site. Notice that Garland doesn’t say that a former president can be investigated, tried, and convicted for crimes that he (or she) committed while in office. No sirree, Bob. He says that the Office of Legal Counsel memo preventing the DOJ from bring charges against a sitting president is “limited to acts while the person was in office,” which suggests that a President has immunity for acts he (or she) committed while in office. That’s horrifying. It’s weasel language that skirts the question that everyone knows is the pertinent one: Can a FORMER President be charged by the DOJ for illegal acts committed while he was in office. A lot of conservatives are with Richard Nixon on this: “If the president does it, it’s not illegal.” That’s, ofc, appalling. Utterly undemocratic. It gives to the president the powers of an absolute monarch. This is the same position taken by the Monarchists against whom we fought a Revolutionary War. Surely, in Hobbes’s words, we all need to live under “a common power to keep [us] all in awe,” or as Queen Elizabeth I wrote in 1601, “The Royal Prerogative [is] not to be canvassed, nor disputed, nor examined, and [does] not even admit of any limitation.”
LikeLike
Bob-
Charitably, I could say that Mueller was not the hero the nation needed. But, he didn’t even do his job minimally. He acted as the dreaded milquetoast CYA bureaucrat.
LikeLike
Shhh! His chaperone is napping.
LikeLike
LOL!!!
LikeLike
Was some of the bolt of fabric that Robert Mueller was cut from used to craft Garland?
LikeLike
Linda, when I started working in DC in the early 90s, I had two good connections who were best friends, one Democratic, one Republican. The advice they gave me, one they thought was the most important element of the legislative process: “Remember, when you win politically, make sure your opponent gets something to take away from the table.” That mindset, which dominated DC from Pearl Harbor until the 1994 midterms, is obsolete, almost exclusively because of Republicans. Muller and Garland have that mindset, as too many Democrats still do. We are in an existential crisis and they don’t seem to get it, as all deluded centrists do. I joked with some friends the other day, “After January 2025, it may be up to Germany to save Democracy from American fascism. Ironic, no?”
LikeLike
“After January 2025, it may be up to Germany to save Democracy from American fascism. Ironic, no?”
No, just appropriate. They have already experienced the fall of their democracy. History has taught them some things that we seem all to ready to forget.
LikeLike
Greg,
Thanks for the insight.
LikeLike
I so agree, Bob. Watching Lawrence O’Donnell Wed. night (he really is the best around & persevered, even though MSNBC threatened to cancel his show many, many times), stating that Garland put his foot in his mouth RE: the federal investigation into the police response in Uvalde. it45 should have been prosecutred LOOONNNGGG ago, &, now, it’s even looking like it may be it47. Shame!
Yet another lousy (why, Arne Duncan, of course) Obama (dis)appointment. Garland is a wimp.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s hard for those of us who like the idea of democratic government to grok how these people could possibly support the notion that a President can do anything he wants, but bear in mind that this is a common political ideology. It’s how rule by strongman works, in any gang or criminal syndicate or cartel, in any fascist country, in any religious cult, in so-called Communist countries like the former Soviet Union and China, etc. A lot of people LIKE the idea of rule by strongman.
LikeLike
Totally agree, Bob. AND, I love that you used ‘grok’. Don’t know how many of us are left who know what that means.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Daedalus. Wonderful to hear that you are also a member of the Grok Preservation Society!
LikeLike
And, ofc, another sci fi writer also gave us a slew of essential terms, like karass and granfalloon.
LikeLike
Bob @ 7:57pm– And probably exactly how it works under our Constitution if you examine all the details. Because Founders didn’t imagine all the faults in the “checks and balances” as outlined. How did the Euro’s/ Nordics get it right? [i.e., parliamentary system]? I’m guessing, they just had a lot more history on what can go wrong.
LikeLike
Grokking gives me indigestion
LikeLike
Almost no one is talking about the other completely insane and criminal fake electors conspiracy.
LikeLike
Trump attempted to overturn the election results by MANY separate means, all running in parallel.
Several different varieties of seditious conspiracy.
AG Garland: It is your duty to charge Donald Trump with seditious conspiracy. All the Joe Dumbos are being charged, but the guy who directed it all gets a pass?
The MOST fundamental principle of our legal system is supposed to be that of equal justice under law.
As SomeDAM said here yesterday, it is not the Department of Just Us.
LikeLike
Of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy to defraud the United States, and seditious conspiracy.
LikeLike
I believe that the 1/6 committee will get to the fake electors conspiracy.
LikeLike
Capitol Police officer, Caroline Edwards, whom the mob knocked unconscious and pepper sprayed, testified in person about the attack: “It was carnage. It was chaos.”
Caroline Edwards: quote – “When will we be set free? When will we be set free of the memories and scars of that day? When will I be free and full again?” she wrote in a statement about her trauma after Jan. 6, according to NBC News. And: “Free of the fear that my brain injury will cause me embarrassment at the best of circumstances, and further injury at the worst.”
Her testimony exposes the lies of the GOP and right wing propagandists who claim that the insurrection was not an insurrection. Slime like Tucker Carlson try to minimize the illegality and violence of the right wing mobs of that day of infamy.
LikeLike
The two GOP descriptions of the day are infuriating. The mob that beat the crap out of the police were “tourists.” Or as the Republican National Committee agreed, the violent mob was engage in “legitimate political discourse.” FOX heads agree that nothing happened on Jan 6.
LikeLike
Diane FOX is code for Delusional. cbk
LikeLike
The GOP has no shame for its laughable deception.
LikeLike
F.O.X.
Fearmongering, Obfuscation, and Xenophobia
LikeLike
Diane I never thought that anyone would REALLY hang or otherwise kill either the Vice President or Nancy Pelosi, or anyone else. But I do now.
It would not surprise me if Trump didn’t WANT them to kill Pence, at least before he verified the election. CBK
LikeLike
Most of the MAGA crowd went along for the ride. I sincerely believe that the leaders of the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers would have killed Pence, AOC, Pelosi and others they hated. Once a mob gathers, people give leave of their senses. They do crazy things.
LikeLike
Diane To me, A if not THE most important thing that came out of the program was the PLANNING of it. My bet is that there’s more to come on THAT issue. CBK
LikeLike
Most of the Republican Senators and Representatives went along with this ride, too. They were inside objecting the certification of the states’ electors’ votes even as the mob was outside also attempting to prevent the certification of the states’ electors’ votes. Even AFTER the insurrectionist mob stormed the Capitol, some of the persisted in their objections. Collusion with sedition.
LikeLike
Frankly, Bob, I find it hard to understand how Republicans who were in hiding on Jan6 are now insistent that nothing much happened that day. All of their lives were in danger, although I suppose the rioters wanted Democratic blood, not Republican blood. And now they insist the rioters were “tourists” who chose unusual ways to enter the building (by force).
LikeLiked by 1 person
In other words, the Republican Party is now an antidemocratic mob. Clearly. This is truly frightening. It’s the most frightening thing about all of this.
LikeLike
There were out of control people there who were dangerous. But the real danger was from the people who planned the insurrection. The 11/9/2020 issue of the New Yorker had an article by Jane Mayer: “Why Trump Can’t Afford to Lose.” In it, she quotes Tony Schwartz, who stated “this period between November and the Inauguration in 2021 is the most dangerous period.” This article was written before the election but appeared after it. Trump’s business dealings were so shaky that the only thing holding them together was his position as president.
LikeLike
Thank you, Ms. Watter! This is just what General Milley thought, too.
LikeLike
To Retired Teacher, @11:47 AM, 6/10:
“The GOP has no shame…”
Of course they don’t, why should they? No government body (& w/the Dems in the leadership positions) holds them accountable. The closest I can think of was Beto O’Rourke shouting down aBUTT last week.
BTW, I wish that Matthew McConaughey HAD run for governor. Celebs, esp. homegrown ones, are very popular. (Have you read his book? Not a mere celeb or pretty face, but a pretty smart guy.)
He probably could have won.
The GoOPny Squad will double down on Beto, & I’m betting he’ll lose. Again, I really hope I’m wrong.
LikeLike
Matthew McC is hardly a raging liberal, but he’s proof you don’t have to be one to object to the slaughter of children. If he can use his celebrity to move the Senate on common sense gun laws, God bless him. We can’t go on like this.
LikeLike
I wish he had never made those car commercials, though. That was not a person I had any desire to ever know. I hope he is just a damn good actor that needed the job. His Uvalde speech was inspired. He spoke from his heart.
LikeLike
Catherine– Trump, I think, skates along on the surface of things: his life experience [or whatever he managed to take from it] does not help him imagine the real-life consequences of his actions—probably because he was always rescued from or wiggled out of serious consequences of his actions— which reinforced a generic lack of imagination or empathy to imagine what those consequences might feel like to those on the receiving end. This allows him to play life (and presidency, and post-presidential political manipulator) as a game of negotiation and accrual of power, where there are no downsides: whatever doesn’t turn out right will always work out OK for someone quick on their toes: there will always another negotiation, when it comes to assigning blame.
LikeLike
Diane Linda may or may not understand why I post the below OP-ED from the Los Angeles Times, but I thought it may help others here understand what’s going on in the Catholic Church and why “broad brushing” is so inappropriate. CBK
ALL QUOTED BELOW
With bishops like these, it’s hard to be Catholic BY: JACKIE CALMES
To flip the famed line from “The Godfather Part III,” just when I think I might return to the Catholic Church, they pull me back out.
“They” are the church’s archbishops and bishops, in particular those in the United States, who not only advocate for the church’s teachings against gay rights, contraception and abortion, which is their right, but also repeatedly enforce them in ways that often seem un-Christian and downright wicked. All the while, the church’s pedophilia scandal persists into a third decade because of the clerics’ cover-ups.
What would Jesus do? Not act like these guys.
On Monday, two weeks after the archbishop of San Francisco, the archconservative Salvatore Cordileone, ordered that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi not receive Communion because of her support for abortion rights, leaders of the Colorado Catholic Conference sent an open letter condemning state lawmakers who’d voted for an abortion rights bill.
The Denver archbishop and three bishops admonished the lawmakers not to take Communion until they performed “public repentance” and confessed their sins to a priest.
In contrast, they praised four Republican legislators who opposed the bill. Increasingly, church leaders overtly ally with the Republican Party, despite its general hostility to policies beneficial to needy people once they’re born, to immigrants and to those on death row.
The clerics’ “pro-life” actions in California and Colorado came even as Americans were reeling from news of mass shootings, including the massacre of fourth-graders. Four bishops wrote a letter to Congress calling for “reasonable gun control measures,” but where’s the muscle and outrage comparable to that against abortion rights?
Seven months ago, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement on the sacrament of Communion that stopped short of singling out the pro-choice President Biden for sanction, but only after much debate. While conservative bishops are often critical of the progressive pope, uncommonly so, Biden had just enjoyed a warm meeting with Pope Francis, who blessed the rosary the president routinely carries and urged him to keep taking Communion.
As Francis says, the Communion wafer that Catholics believe incorporates the body of Christ “is not a prize for the perfect.”
With the Supreme Court expected to soon overturn abortion rights after a half-century, the divide between Catholic bishops and rank-and-file church members is likely to widen. A majority of the justices, five, are conservative antiabortion Catholics.
The U.S. church hierarchy isn’t exactly playing single-issue politics. Opposing gay rights as well as contraception also remains the bishops’ preoccupations, at the expense of attention to poverty, social and racial justice, and nonviolence. Those latter issues are the ones that “my” church emphasized during my first 18 years, including 12 years in Catholic schools. Then came Roe vs. Wade in 1973, and the peace-loving church turned culture warrior.
I recall Masses during which the priests directed us churchgoers to use the small pencils and postcards provided in the pews to petition lawmakers against abortion. There were parish convoys to Washington to protest on the anniversary of Roe. And there were the periodic sermons, including one so graphic when I listened from the front pew with my preteen daughters that I switched parishes — and took another step away from the church.
Yet from early on, even as I accepted the church’s teachings and its authority to preach them, I questioned why those positions should bind the state, public officials (including the Catholics among them) and citizens of other faiths.
Again to quote Francis, speaking in this instance about LGBTQ people, “Who am I to judge?”
I’m hardly alone in my estrangement from the church. While Catholicism remains the nation’s largest denomination, the church has declined in membership from about a quarter of the U.S. population to roughly one-fifth. Polls consistently show that the hard-line positions of so many bishops are anathema to most of their so-called flock.
The bishops may be known as shepherds, but we’re no sheep. A poll of Catholics in mid-May from the Associated Press and NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 63% of Catholic adults said abortion should be legal in all or most cases; 68% said Roe should stand. Both percentages are in line with the views of the overall U.S.
Two-thirds of Catholic adults said Catholic politicians who are pro-abortion rights should not be denied Communion, and even more said that Catholics who identify as LGBTQ should be allowed to receive Communion.
Still, a Catholic diocese in Michigan recently said its pastors should deny the sacraments, including baptism and Communion, to transgender, gay and nonbinary Catholics “unless the person has repented.” That’s rich coming from “leaders” of a church in which a disproportionate number of priests are gay.
Thank God, literally, for the dissenters like Archbishop Michael Jackels of Dubuque, Iowa, who recently said that “protecting the Earth, our common home, or making food, water, shelter, education and healthcare accessible, or defense against gun violence… these are life issues too.”
It’s priests like him, and the sentiments they espouse, that entice me to return to the church. Yet there are just too few like him among the men in charge. The self-righteous Cordileones are setting the tone, in religion and politics. And they keep pulling me back out. @jackiekcalmes END QUOTED ARTICLE CBK
LikeLike
This article is excellent, and I suspect Linda would agree.
The disagreements you have with Linda may be more about semantics. Polls of Republicans in this country also show broad support for issues that the Republican party rabidly opposes.
When we all talk about the broad corruption of the Republican Party or their neo-fascist agenda – as evidenced by the fact that the two very conservative Republicans on the committee have basically been excommunicated from their party – we sort of understand that not all Republicans are that way.
I realize those distinctions are sometimes lost, but that’s always the impression I got from reading Linda’s posts. She is referring to the people who seem to be most empowered in the Church.
LikeLike
NYC Yes, I really liked that article. But unfortunately, it’s “sometimes yes, sometimes, no” with Linda’s posts.
It seems to me that she way-too-often plays “gotcha” with many people having a religious and particularly Catholic background, as if to say that we all think alike. *It’s bad, so there must be a Catholic in the background and that, in and of itself, is a bad thing. GOTCHA!”
In my view and from my experience, that’s pretty-much juvenile thinking, not to mention very much like what the right-wing Playbook for the Stupid Among Us requires.
Indeed, in our original exchange a long time ago, she accused me of “following” the authority of Diane as (she thinks) is the case where all parishioners follow their priests, like Jim Jones type following.
I have explained myself and made some clear distinctions more than once, that I thought would help; but nothing has changed. “Catholic” remains a monster in Linda’s basement closet. CBK
LikeLike
I love most of what Linda posts but I do not love her diatribes against all Catholics.
I am married to a Roman Catholic, and I don’t like to see her slandered.
The Pope is the most empowered person in the Church, and he seems pretty darn impressive to me.
LikeLike
I don’t write against “all Catholics”.
I write about theocracy’s aiders and abettors.
My goals are limited to drawing the connection between right wing politics and the vastly underreported schemes of the politicized American Catholic Church and its powerful right wing members who make evident that their motivation is religious and who have measures of success e.g. Steve Bannon who geofenced churches for Republican messaging, Trump’s Michael Flynn who said the nation should have only one religion, William Barr who said religion should be introduced at every opportunity, Kavanaugh and Barrett who falsely stated that Roe was settled law, etc.
Buchanan popularized “culture wars” rhetoric so as to distance conservative church bigotry against women and gay people from the actions of the GOP’s court and executive and legislative branches. Buchanan’s agenda is winning. And, yes, those who belong to bigoted organizations help the cause. The merit for a claim of changing an organization from within must to be vetted objectively to be a legitimate argument. It is currently the conundrum for some about remaining in the Republican Party.
I know many non-Christians who have highly developed senses of morality upon which they act. Individuals, whether they are Christian (like Pelosi or Bridgeland) or, who are not Christian, draw from their inner selves to steer their actions. An attempt to parse out the tenets of a person’s religion and then, to match them with observable behavior is difficult due to differing scriptural interpretations, changing values of the leaders who represent the religion, social and political constraints, etc.
People are successfully replacing democracy with theocracy, When they are clustered in set-ups that the author of Power Worshippers described, we can choose to ignore the origin of attacks against democracy or, we can expose them. I appreciate Diane’s willingness to let me express the situation as I see it.
Citing the good deeds of the religious, on the small or large scale (paid for with taxes) won’t advance the fight for democracy.
As a latest example of media’s religious selectivity, LAProgressive wrote about Mich. and school privatization. The focus was Betsy DeVos. Her motivation was linked to her church, Dutch reformed. (Her church has so few members it doesn’t make it into research reporting about political polls. I have the sense from reading that a majority of members may lean liberal/vote Democratic but, I could be wrong). The same LAP article identifies Ryan D. Kelley, the Mich governor candidate recently arrested in connection with Jan. 6. The article identifies his “battling CRT as a central tenet of his campaign ” and, his “guarding” of a community’s civil war statue. The article didn’t mention a Kelley interview with the right wing Church Militant, based in Michigan.
Respectfully, pinning one’s assessment of the power of the church-related political apparatuses in the U.S., to the most recent Pope in the Vatican is IMO, short-sided.
Does the disagreement with what I write relate to an error in my assessment that there is little awareness in the general public about the role state Catholic Conferences have had in furthering school privatization? Little awareness that the public’s tax dollars fund schools that are exempt from civil rights employment law? Little awareness that religious schools alter the American pledge of allegiance to conform to a sect’s doctrine?
LikeLike
Linda We are talking past one another. Until that stops, there is no point to it. And in my view, I am embarrassed for Greg when he writes about someone else’s simplistic interpretations.
You haven’t answered my question, however, twice asked: What is your point in unearthing everyone’s religious background, and then expecting the Press to do so also? To me, that has a fascist ring to it both personally and politically.
And before you misinterpret, I don’t think you are a fascist. But I do think you are not aware of the full implications of what you are saying and doing, nor do you seem to understand anything at all about living a religious life.
You will not eliminate the religious question or the many answers to it that we all either benefit from or have to live with. If that’s what you are after, which is what it seems to me considering the extremes you go to sometimes in your notes when I sense your “gotcha” teeth are bleeding, I suggest you start your own book-burning club. The extremes you go to, beyond what is true about your critique of our present situation in the USA and the overbearing influence of the Catholic and other churches, . . . those extremes are nothing less than twins to the extremes on the Right, and just as dangerous, should power come their way. CBK
LikeLike
CBK,
You will never persuade Linda to drop her obsession with the Catholic Church.
She will never persuade you that the religion to which you belong is the root of all evil.
I am married to a Roman Catholic. I am Jewish. Sometimes we disagree about religion, but we try to keep it a side topic.
Neither of us will ever convert.
Sometimes you just have to let it go.
When I look back on my life, I am embarrassed by some of the political issues that I used to get worked up about.
Now, my attitude is “let it be” unless it is a threat to the Constitution and democracy.
It is a free country ( most of the time).
We are free to practice our religion, no matter what others may think.
You owe no one any apologies for your religious convictions.
LikeLike
Hello Diane I have no illusions about changing Linda’s mind, much less her obvious anti-religious, anti-Catholic bigotry.
Linda regularly hides it, however, behind the real faults of the Church (and there are many) and the religious idiocy we can find in ANY religious movement, including atheism . . . which easily turns into totalitarianism when sheer power and greed, rather than religious ideology, are the drivers: think Stalin and Trump. (I think Trump would have let his crowd murder Pence and Pelosi, and not thought a thing about it except to justify it to others who would have complained about it. He may have even USED religious rhetoric to explain it away.)
Linda has said she feels she must continue (ad infinitum) to tell everyone here and elsewhere, I presume, about the horrors of religion and specifically of the Catholic Church (exaggerated by selective omission). I am not averse to exposing institutional fault that, AGAIN, I agree with and have posted here accordingly myself. But the anti-religion rhetoric is all people seem to want to hear without recognizing what similar horrors bleed through it from bigoted writers.
I AM averse, however, to letting anti-religious bigotry go by unaddressed on a quasi-public forum that I participate in, and the constant projection of someone’s not-so-hidden bigotry, over and over again. As Linda knows, you reach a lot of people here. I gain much from reading your blog and know that also; but similarly, how easy is the drift to convince others without opposing arguments (like GregB); and subsequently to witness the release of anti-religious policy into the public square. You are Jewish. Think the Holocaust where the shift was practically overnight. (Part of our problem here in the US is that a good number of the electorate remain ignorant of how quick things can turn.)
The funny thing is that the oligarchs will maintain their power regardless, once public institutions have gone away and been taken over, and when religious institutions are no longer useful, they’ll be “disappeared” in Putin-like fashion, also as were many religious people and institutions in WWII. They regularly lined them up and shot them.
As Putin was so clear in saying: “We don’t think like you do.” CBK
LikeLike
I understand your need to respond, CBK. As I would if someone frequently posted anti-Semitic comments. No matter what is said on this blog, the Church will survive. Every religion these days must clean its own house.
LikeLike
“Every religion these days must clean its own house”
Well said.
There are so many variables when dealing with large scale institutions. Religion. Politics. Education (oh yeah…that stuff). The aims and aspirations might be pure and noble…with some or many striving towards those ideals. But we are dealing with human beings; some of whom may have their own ideas of how to control and take advantage of the system and use it to further their own personal agendas.
I was brought up as a Presbyterian. My wife was brought up an atheist Jew. We are both doing all we can to build and maintain a positive presence within our personal spheres of influence. Start there.
LikeLike
Linda “*I don’t write against ‘all Catholics’. I write about theocracy’s aiders and abettors.”
You certainly do, on both counts; and like Diane, I appreciate a good critique of the Church . . . bring it on. (Spotlight the movie is a favorite of mine.) But much more than that: I don’t think you know yourself, or history, very well.
Just like many fascists in history (and as you quote so often) ride in wearing a flag and carrying a Bible while hiding their intentions, so anti-religious bigotry shields its contempt and hate in what negative truth they can find to hide behind, whatever their target. CBK
LikeLike
Linda and All On a lighter note, Linda writes, equating remaining in church membership to remaining with party affiliations: “It is currently the conundrum for some about remaining in the Republican Party.”
The prior head of the Republican party said that those who are staying R call themselves “Motel 6 Republicans.” They are just keeping the light on. CBK
LikeLike
Sorry, I wouldn’t characterize Linda’s comments as diatribes. I consider such comments to be both condescending and intentionally uninformed characterizations. I can’t speak for her, but I can explain why I disagree with this false description. I have come to the conclusion that Linda and I are both adherents to political cultures that are pluralistic, pragmatic and grounded in a generally agreeable type of ethical behavior focused on egalitarian policies that don’t discriminate, especially is those ethics are intimately connected to organizational injustices. She might not say it, but it comes down to the Golden Rule, respecting the life of every individual and the choices they make that hurt no one, and how to make public policy around these basic ideas.
I don’t condemn individuals who live by personal ethics that integrate them into a political system of pluralism and understand why it should be respected and nurtured. I do however, call out the hypocrisy of those who do not or will not see and act upon the many discrepancies between biblical interpretation, actual events, stated ethics, organizational interests, and the deferment of living well today for some nebulous afterlife, which even the most faithful have no f#c#ing idea about.
So please do not continue to claim that Linda’s condemnation of the the hypocrisy of the religion somehow offends anyone’s religious ideology. They are two separate, very distinct concepts. Shame on any of you for conflating them. Answer her questions. The people with “religious” ties to fascist political ideas have no ethics; their understanding of religion is as a bludgeon against anything with which they disagree and a source of power, not ethics. These simplistic attacks and insults have to stop. Try answering a specific allegation. When she points out that a Republican politician uses religion as justification for his or her actions, it the true believers of a code of religious ethics who should be screaming the loudest. When they don’t, how can we trust their opinions about anything? (How ’bout that legalistic sophistry in that sentence?)
LikeLike
GregB Since I have many times agreed with Linda’s criticisms of the Church here, and even posted similar criticisms, I can only assume you aren’t reading my notes, or at least reading them well enough to understand my objections that, again, I have said many times.
Of course, you need not read my notes or anyone’s here, especially with more than your own apparently uninspected (and wrong-headed) interpretive lenses in place, as I would call you to do in this case. But until you do, and until you clear away some of your own assumptions about these concerns, or about what I do or don’t do, it’s of no point to defend AGAIN what I have been saying all along.
Just one case in point, you say: “So please do not continue to claim that Linda’s condemnation of the hypocrisy of the religion somehow offends anyone’s religious ideology.”
It probably DOES offend some others’ religious ideology. But Greg, as far as I am concerned, that whole statement is SO VERY OFF BASE. I also condemn the hypocrisy of the church, and again have done so here, and I am so far from ideological about either religion in general or Catholicism in particular; or thinking “God in the clouds” kind of thought, as your note implies, it’s just silly to continue the discussion.
BTW, if in Linda’s notes you replaced “Catholic” with “Jewish,” or “Muslim,” “Atheist,” or “agnostic,” . . . . especially where she plays “gotcha” with a person’s religious background . . . . and then complains that the Press doesn’t do the same . . . Well, perhaps another time, another place. CBK
LikeLike
You are beating your head against a brick wall. You are obviously warped by your belief in the little man in the clouds. (snark alert)
LikeLike
speduktr No, no, no. You got it wrong. It’s the BIG MAN in the clouds. Sheesh. CBK
LikeLike
And it is more than interesting that QAnon cultists claim imaginary widespread pedophilia that is orchestrated by Democrats and the “deep state”, whatever that is, but will not acknowledge actual cases in the tens of thousands, if not millions, in the Catholic Church, in a variety of Protestant churches, orthodox synagogues, the Boy Scouts, and so many other “good, traditional” institutions. Don’t give me this,”we’re not all like that” schtick. Confront your church, stand up injustice instead of trying to rationalize to a few. Those few are your leaders. I’m as big a fan of Pope Francis as anyone, but has anything really changes since he’s been pope? He will go down as the Barack Obama of the Catholic Church, nice rhetoric, a wonderful symbol of lived ethical consistency, and few if any results to show. Yes, health care reform was a big deal, but as I and others have documented many times, “Obamacare” had virtually no input from Obama and is a collection of some Repbublicans least offensive ideas.
LikeLike
How can one continue to go to mass if one disagrees with the fundamental ideas of a religion? Hate to break it to you CBK, but organized religion is, by definition, an ideology. Religion does not have room for pragmatism. Human beings who profess to believe in a religion may claim to have pick-and-choose ideology, but you know what? It’s still an ideology if they claim to belong to it and, moreover, claim it has an impact on how one conducts one’s life. One cannot claim to be a believer in any religion and then dismiss the transgressions of its infrastructure. That’s what I call selective hypocrisy. Pick a lane CBK, Mary, and all you apologists who celebrate what you believe, condemn what you don’t like, and continue to be a member of the club. Have the courage of your convictions and start advocating for the things you condemn that your church supports.
LikeLike
GregB Give me your address and I’ll send you a mirror. CBK
LikeLike
Greg,
There are “column A, column B Catholics.” They pick and choose among their Church’s teachings. The same is true, I am guessing, for other religions as well. Only atheists are entirely free of religious belief and have no need to follow some teachings but ignore or oppose others.
I can say, as a Jew, that I have a strong cultural commitment to being Jewish, but I don’t keep kosher, I married a non-Jew, and I eat barbecue. I am not entirely sure what religious rules I have broken, but they must be many. I don’t feel any need to launch a campaign to make other people make the same choices I have made.
LikeLike
Ooh, That’s at good one. Doesn’t say a damn thing, But it’s a good one.
LikeLike
GregB The article: “Ooh, that’s a good one. Doesn’t say a damn thing“? Maybe not for you.
And that’s okay with me, because I don’t think you are as shallow as is indicated by it, and I have liked much of your writing here. But with such statements, you expose, if not shallowness, certainly your open contempt. CBK
LikeLike
Is this the equivalent of being anti-Semitic? Just wondering.
https://www.abuselawsuit.com/church-sex-abuse/accused-clergy
Is this a club you’re proud to be a member of? Is this a diatribe? Too simplistic? Bigoted? Let the false equivalencies begin!
LikeLike
Greg,
There are sexual predators in every religion, even among atheists.
I posted the story about the Southern Baptist Convention.
There have been sex abuse scandals among Jewish clergy, though I don’t know of a list.
There have been many reported sex abuse cases on college campuses, elite boarding schools, and public schools. Even families.
No group is free of sin.
LikeLike
Greg-
What you’ve written is important for people to read and understand.
Because you have a better grasp of commenters’ psyches than I do, you are able (and willing) to broaden this discussion away from the Church et.al.’s right wing politicking.
Unintentionally, I have reached a few commenters at a level that provokes them to insult me, misrepresent my comments and, to deliberately and wrongly conflate the tangible with something religio. Since the ideological, spiritual or whatever descriptor applies is the level where those commenters dip their toes or immerse themselves, I greatly appreciate that you confront them where they are at. I’m glad you are here to understand them and me.
LikeLike
Thanks for calling out Laura Ingraham & Fox “News” (I just can’t call it “news”). I did the same thing, turning to Fox, just to see what they were saying & it made my blood boil. How Ingraham, Carlson & Hannity, among others, can continually lie & mislead all of their ignorant viewers should be against the law. It’s maddening to hear the outright lies they put out to millions of viewers, most of whom believe it all. We all need to keep calling them out, but especially anyone with a wide reaching platform like you or Michael Moore or Bill Maher, et. al. Thanks for fighting the good fight!
LikeLike
Ingraham doesn’t separate her political positions from the beliefs that she attributes to her conservative religion. Hannity’s opinions and style may be related to his sect of upbringing or his later choice of sect.
It is media and influencers who are largely complicit in divorcing religion from politics when they profile political actors.
LikeLike
Linda Perhaps again, journalists understand that they live in a secular culture where freedom of religion abides, and where anyone’s religious affiliations are not up for grabs for hair-on-fire religious bigots to complain about.
Read that article I posted from the LA Times. The distinctions in the Church are clear in that and in many other related readings. Apparently, what you think is an egregious oversight in journalism is in fact an adherence to elements in the Constitution by civilized writers and to the tenets of secular discourse rather than tribal animosities. CBK
LikeLike
And even more…
Just read our former president’s reactions to last night’s hearings on his own social media platform as reported by Yahoo!. Wow, he is part and parcel of how our society has regressed to a lunchroom full of fat 8th graders. (Please pardon me, I didn’t like writing that.) To quote Richard Dreyfuss in “Close Encounters…” “I am an adult…if there is such a thing.” Seriously, where have they all gone?
LikeLike
Most 8th graders do better than that
LikeLike
The many conspiracies that Trump and his minions engaged in to subvert the 2020 election, If course, all of these are based on Trump’s Big Lie that the election was stolen.
The state courts/state legislatures conspiracy. Get judges in various states where the balloting was close to throw out the election results and turn the vote over to Republican state legislatures.
The Supreme Court/state legislatures conspiracy. Get the justices to throw out the election results in states where the balloting was close and turn the vote over to Republican state legislatures.
The state courts/alternative electors conspiracy. Get judges in various states where the balloting was close to throw out the election results and recognize alternative slates of Trump electors.
The Supreme Court/alternative electors conspiracy. Get the justices to throw out the election results in states where the balloting was close and turn the vote over to Republican state legislatures that would then recognize alternative slates of Trump electors.
The voting machines conspiracy. Use the department of justice, the military, or other authorities to seize voting machines and declare them fixed, thus eliminating votes done on those machines from the vote counts.
The state-level fraudulent ballots conspiracy. Get state voting agencies to declare some of the ballots in the state questionable, especially mail-in and absentee ballots, and then turn the vote over to Republican state legislatures or alternative slates of Trump electors.
The federal-level fraudulent ballots conspiracy. Get the Supreme Court to declare some of the ballots, such as mail-in and absentee ballots, in some states questionable and then turn the vote over to those states’ Republican state legislatures or alternative slates of Trump electors.
The V.P. refusal to certify/Trump electors conspiracy. Pressure Mike Pence to refuse to certify the votes from several states and to accept instead votes by alternative slates of Trump electors.
The V.P. refusal to certify/State legislatures conspiracy. Pressure Mike Pence to refuse to certify the votes from several states and to turn the voting back to Republican state legislatures.
The Congressional challenges to results conspiracy. Get Trumpist Congresspeople and Senators to challenge in the official certified election results at the meeting, overseen by Mike Pence, to officially accept those certified results. THIS ONE IS A REAL SHOCKER BECAUSE A GREAT MANY REPUBLICAN SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES COLLUDED IN THIS. When the mob stormed the Capitol, many Republican Congresspeople were inside enthusiastically carrying out their part in this conspiracy to overturn the election, and shockingly, these people are still in office.
The “find some votes” conspiracy. Pressure state election officials to make up enough votes to change the outcome in those states.
The insurrectionist coup conspiracy. Encourage mobs of Trump supporters to converge on the Capitol and prevent the certification of the 2020 election results.
Have I covered them all?
LikeLike
A lot of elected and appointed officials refused to collude, including A.G. Barr, U.S. military officials, Mike Pence, every state judge who heard on of the fraudulent cases brought by the Trumpanzees, the Republican-majority Supreme Court, many state election officials.
But a great many Senators and Representatives and state elected officials enthusiastically colluded with these efforts to overturn the election. THAT is truly shocking.
LikeLike
And, of course, there were many Trump attorneys and advisers who colluded in these various attempts to perpetrate a coup.
LikeLike
While I agree that this matter was egregious and that Cheney is doing the right thing in being a part of the investigation at the peril of her house seat, I would point out that the entire Republican Party beats much of the blame for all of this and more. Chaney’s father was party to more than one questionable policy both before and during his term as VP in charge of most stuff. Mitch McConnell suggested this morning that the attempt at Justice Ks life was the result of inflammatory rhetoric on the part of opponents of the Republican Ascendancy.
The Republican Party needs to realize that Trump is just the most obvious result of over forty years of dragging this country to the right.
LikeLike
Trump needs to be tried and convicted if democracy in America is to survive.
But the Trump part of this was entirely predictable. We know who Trump is. He’s a con man, a fraud, a mobster, a traitor, an idiot, and doubtless the least knowledgeable and most corrupt person ever to serve as president. The surprising thing would have been if he didn’t try to subvert the electoral process.
But the truly shocking thing to me is how many sitting congresspeople colluded in this–were inside attempting to prevent certification of the states’ electors’ votes at the very time when the mob was starting to storm the Capitol. THEY WERE IN ON THIS. The participated in an attempt to overthrow the will of the people, in the subversion of THE fundamental democratic process. This was a violation of their oaths, of course.
Will they ever be brought to justice for that? Nope. Many of the Dumbo Rambos outside will be, but they won’t. We have two justice systems, one for their ilk and another for “little” folk like you and me. That’s the message that comes through loud and clear from this.
LikeLike
The most recent example of a justice system without a blindfold is the delay in the investigation of Gen. John R. Allen.
Brookings hired him after the Petraeus scandal so the Institute’s leaders were well aware of his character. Qatar is described as a very large funder of Brookings- big surprise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Apples and oranges. There should be no rush to judgment here. This guy has a long record of service to his country, as opposed to Trump, who has a long record of service to himself and only to himself. Same with Petraeus.
LikeLike
One thing that bothers me about all this, Linda, is that it’s a terrible shame when people with the knowledge and experience of Allen and Petraeus are taken out of play by scandals. These are really important assets of our government, people who, unlike Trump and his Clown Car Posse, know what they are doing and how the world works.
LikeLike
I often think along these lines: Consider the average career diplomat in the United States. First, he or she was selected via one of the most competitive processes ever conceived by humans. You simply don’t gain entry unless you are among the very brightest. Second, these people receive enormous amounts of training. Third, they get a lot of practical experience. Compare this to the clowns we have in public office–to the likes of Trump and Greene and Boebert and Gaetz and Jordan and Paul and Cruz and Abbott.
LikeLike
This is a huge problem. Bright, knowledgeable people are fairly rare. In almost every other area of life, in every other field, we seek out expertise. We wouldn’t hire to run the California home landscaping company someone who wasn’t an expert in xeriscaping, who doesn’t know the difference in water demands of a hydrangea and a claret cup cactus. In Florida, we require people who braid hair or give massages, for crying out loud, to be licensed. And if we are going to have someone cut down trees at the apartment complex or business we manage or own, we will, if we have any sense at all, hire a certified arborist. (Exemplum: years ago, I rented office space from a guy who hired a couple random handymen to cut down a large tree. They ended up felling the tree on top of one of them, and the guy died.) But any moron can sit in the state legislature or run for Congress or the presidency of the United States. This is appalling and dangerous. At any rate, the cumulative training and experience of someone like Allen and Petraeus is extraordinarily valuable. We would be well served with someone like the latter, or like Mattis, in the presidency. Such a person would actually understand the daily presidential briefing or would know enough to clarify what he or she didn’t understand, unlike Trump, who couldn’t follow them, didn’t read, had to have big pictures drawn for him in orange crayon.
LikeLike
Bob-
About that vetting? Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn? We should all be thankful that, after the fact, Gen. Miley had an epiphany. After Jan. 6, Colin Powell had an epiphany about the Republican Party. I’ve read a couple of good articles, one was titled, what do you do about a whole collection of generals who have never won a war. (The generals land in lucrative jobs in the private sector.) A second article was titled, “The charmed life of Gen. Petraeus.”
Russian generals clearly are sacrificing. In the U.S., military engaged in combat, sacrifice. What do American generals suffer?
You’re right, if charges are brought against Allen, we’ll see if his consequences are the same as the guy who said he and Allen were doing the same thing for Qatar.
LikeLike
One part of this that I suspect will not get the attention it deserves is the way that the battlefield was prepared for this by the constant litany of lies and fear mongering by extremist right wing media and politicians about how everything was going so badly in America and how it was all the “Commie” Democrats fault and that they wanted to take away rights and culture and all the other things that had no basis in reality.
LikeLike
Yup. Murdoch plowed the field. Putin and Trump sowed it.
Fearmongering. Obfuscation. Xenophobia. F.O.X. “News”
Moscow’s Asset Governing America. MAGA
LikeLike
We knew that Trump didn’t believe the election was stolen when he asked Georgia’s Secretary of State to find 11,700 ballots.
LikeLike
Trump could have an insanity defense. Clearly, this man (I use the term loosely here) suffers from Malignant Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He cannot understand anything except in terms of how it affects him personally. When he said that there was no way he could lose unless the election were rigged, I think he simultaneously didn’t believe that and believed that. It’s a defense reaction that he has developed over a long life of being ignorant and stupid. At one level, he knows how incompetent he is. On another, he cannot accept this.
What is the nature of that incompetence? Well, he is both profoundly ignorant and profoundly stupid. How stupid do you have to be to think that “Well, I watch the shows” is an acceptable answer to a question from an interviewer about where one gets one’s military advice? How ignorant do you have to be to think that we should send astronauts to the sun, that foreign countries pay the tariffs when we place these on their goods, that stealth airplanes are actually invisible, that injecting disinfectants is a pretty great idea? How both ignorant and stupid do you have to be to think that a dementia screener is an IQ test?
So, this isn’t simple. On one level, Trump KNEW that he was going to lose, expected this. And on another, he totally could not accept that, had to assert to himself and to anyone else who would listen that this was impossible.
But he broke the law, and ignorance of the law is no excuse. Insanity, oddly, is sometimes treated as an excuse and sometimes not. This never really made sense to me. Consider two cases. In one, a person murders a bunch of strangers because he believes that a dog is speaking to him telepathically and telling him to commit these murders. Insane. Clearly. In the other, a person murders two Brinks truck drivers because he wants that money and sees the lives of these two others as simply an impediment to that end. Well, isn’t that ALSO insane, to think that way?
LikeLike
We say that, well, in one case you have a gross distortion of reality–I mean, come on, talking dog gods? But surely thinking that others’ lives mean nothing, are of zero value, is also distortion of reality. It’s not seeing things as they are. And it’s distortion of reality that characterizes psychosis.
LikeLike
Impulse control and the lack thereof?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Trump knows. But he puts himself in I know the opposite mode. It’s bizarre but actually not that uncommon. This is why Orwell made such a big deal in 1984 out of learning how to know simultaneously that 2 + 2 =4 and that it equals 5. Double think.
LikeLike
Totally agree with you diagnosis (but, I’m not a licensed psychologist). Seems clear to me, however…. (As clear as anything ever is in psychology).
LikeLiked by 1 person
BTW (& I am a well-known pessimist who ALWAYS loves to be proven wrong): I don’t see anything coming out of these hearings. Nothing. Zilch. Zip. Nada.
Again, I SO hope I am wrong.
LikeLike
I fear that you are right, but hope springs eternal. We’ll see.
LikeLike
Tragically, the practical consequence of the hearings might end up being sowing just enough lack of comfort with Trump to prevent him from being the Presidential nominee in 2024, thus clearing the way for DeSatan.
LikeLike
Note your tongue. My mother used to call that sort of talk “praying for the worst to happen.”
LikeLike
My mother used to call that sort of talk taking into account the worst-case scenario.
LikeLike
That phrase, “hold your tongue,” is really funny because literally doing so is almost impossible. It’s like the phrase “watch your head” (in the absence of a mirror).
LikeLike
Oh, and Roy, how’s the Cormac McCarthy novel? I’ve read one by him, and it was great. Extremely “you are there,” which is a great attribute in a fiction writer.
LikeLike
Bite your tongue. Damn autocorrect
LikeLike
Ah. I thought it was spozed to be hold your tongue. I prefer that one because it so perfectly captures the difficulty of the act. So many weird idioms. Bob’s your uncle. Pardon my French. Cold turkey. Earworm. Cock and bull story.
LikeLike
One of the clear facts about January 6th is that Mike Pence was among the heroes of that day. When push came to shove, when it came down to it, he refused to collude with Trump. He held the line and did the right thing. AND, he directed the response to the attack on the Capitol when Trump did not. I have made fun of Pence in the past for his toadying during his time as Trump’s VP. This was embarrassing to watch:
But on January 6th, Pence was a hero when a hero was needed. He didn’t just play Vice President, he was Vice President when real leadership was needed. So, thank you, Mr. Pence.
LikeLike
What was even more incredible was Pence called Dan Quayle—another mirth-provoking veep—for advice! Quayle give it to him straight, no chaser: accept the election results.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, Ms. Watter! I didn’t know this!!!
LikeLike
Bob and Cindy What bothered me about Pence calling Quayle was BOTH the irony of the specific people; but also that, in such a situation, Pence felt he had to call ANYONE for advice about how to act in his situation. It bothered me that Pence didn’t know what to do already. CBK
LikeLiked by 1 person
Calling Quayle for expert advice. That was pretty rich.
LikeLike
“It bothered me that Pence didn’t know what to do already. CBK”
My reaction, too.
LikeLike
speduktr About Pence calling Quayle, I’m all for reflecting and collaborating; however, in this case, it seemed to me that, if Pence was already clear about his loyalty (to the Constitution OR to Trump), he wouldn’t need to call anyone. Rarely are the moral outlines of our choices so clear, especially we should add, in politics. CBK
LikeLike
I applaud anyone who advised Pence to stand by his Constitutional oath. If Quayle did that, good for him.
LikeLike
Yup.
LikeLike
Another example of how far, far right the Republican Party has moved. An old-guard guy like Quayle, as rightwing as he once seemed, now looks comparatively moderate. The Repugnican Party has gone completely off the rails. A party of kooks, crazies, fascists.
LikeLike
The Mike Pence/Dan Quayle story is from Woodward and Bernstein’s latest book, and was discussed in the NYT and WaPo and more last fall.
LikeLike
Cindy Watter I remember reading about it at that time and that’s when it kept bothering me, . . . that Pence called Quayle.
I ran back and forth about it in my head about it. At once, I was glad that Quayle had the good sense to say what he apparently said, and to support (or lead?) Pence in his rejection of Trump and in the upholding his oath of office; but again, he was the Vice President. How could Pence NOT know what to do? Was he so enamoured with Trump, or so cult-like in his thinking, like Kevin McCarthy’s flip, he found it hard to be led by his own oath, and the character to stand behind it?
Of all people, and along with the Capitol Police who allowed time to evacuate, Quayle may have been at the center of the personal events that saved the day. I guess unless or until both he and Quayle talk about it, we’ll never know for sure.
I guess it’s no accident that TCM played “Judgment at Nuremburg” yesterday. CBK
LikeLike
I was listening to some talking heads last night who were going over what they had heard about the events surrounding January 6. There apparently was a movement to invoke the 25th amendment after the attack on the capitol, but Pence wouldn’t go along with it!!!
LikeLike
speduktr Amazing. Pence’s interior life must resemble a Jackson Pollock painting.
Also, have you thought about where the Russians are in this? I have trouble with the proliferation of bifurcated moral characters in this situation. Can it be just Trump? Or is there something else going on here for instance, Pence again, and where McCarthy is one way, then goes to Florida and comes back VOILA! as if he had drunk some sort of moral poison. They act like someone has threatened their children of something. What would make someone cave in like that? CBK
LikeLike
It does sound like Pence had something to fear about Trump, which makes his refusal to play Trump’s Jan. 6 game sound like he actually was acting with some integrity and courage. I’m sure you heard about his refusal to leave the capitol against the wishes of his protection detail. He apparently realized that if he left, Trump could go forward with his plot. As long as he stayed, the responsibility for ” counting” the electoral votes was his.
LikeLike
speduktr As they are saying on Face the Nation this morning, Pence “held the line” (ironically, from inside a garage, which recalls Watergate), along with a list of others, including lawyers in several Departments who threatened to resign, and the Capitol Police, and Georgia’s Raffensberger. But then Pence didn’t want to enlist the 25th Amendment even though he must have known that Trump literally wanted Pence (as the person responsible for accepting the votes and going against Trump’s wishes) dead.
Then there’s the wishy-washy-ness of William Barr, who quit, but before that, was so misleading during the impeachment trials; Trump’s air-head daughter; and even Liz Cheney who doesn’t want to shine the light on the other Republicans who were involved in the insurrection. (I don’t buy her argument, BTW.)
Pence DID grab the flag off the battlefield when he needed to, but because of the fuzziness of the “line” with our “leaders,” no one can know what to expect when the spine so easily goes to sleep, right after an attack of conscience and good sense. CBK
LikeLike
I think Liz Cheney has done a good job of shaming the Republican majority that failed to defend the Constitution. She has exhibited personal and political courage. She was kicked out of the leadership. Polls in Wyoming show that she is far behind her opponent (who vociferously opposed Trump in 2016). She has undoubtedly had threats to her life. I wish the entire Republican Party had her devotion to the Constitution.
LikeLike
Diane Well, we can walk and chew gum at the same time with Cheney. But my timing in criticizing her is probably off, in the light of what she IS doing and the risks she is presently taking. With you, I applaud her in this crucial moment in history, even if, when history plays out, we may find there is a personal vendetta behind some of it. (How could there NOT be where Trump is concerned?)
On the other hand, presently we can also speculate while we walk and chew gum. To give vent to my pessimism about politicians in general, as well as Cheney’s record of deeply conservative politics, my guess is that she has the Presidency in her sites. CBK
LikeLike
I never met Liz Cheney. I did battle with her mother Lynne Cheney. Very unpleasant. I have no reason to think well of any member of the family. But I respect Liz Cheney. She defied her party and has been ostracized and may lose her seat in Congress. I can’t imagine that the GOP would ever nominate her for national office. Her path to the presidency was likelier if she supported the Big Lie, like almost every other Republican.
LikeLike
Diane Same for me regarding the Cheney family. I guess we’ll see, said the blind man, as he took out his hammer and saw. . . . CBK
LikeLike
I hadn’t heard that Liz Cheney didn’t want to out the other Republicans. I didn’t get that impression from what she said during that first televised hearing. I disagree with her politics probably close to if not 100%, but I admire her integrity.
LikeLike
speduktr I heard on one of the programs (had to be either PBS, MSNBC, CNN, or BBC) that Cheney (in a relatively new development) wanted to zero-in on Trump and thought that focusing on other Congresspeople, even if guilty, would conflict with that focus. She may be right in that; but that doesn’t mean either that we cannot go back to it later, or that it doesn’t serves other more political purposes. (Sorry, I cannot remember exactly on which program or from which person I heard it.) It’s hard to stay tuned . . . so much going on. CBK
LikeLike
Concentrating on DT is smart, given the public’ams attention span. This makes the media focus on DT, too. Anyway, the word is out on all those bedwetters who wanted pardons.
LikeLike
Cindy Watter Another issue: Yesterday, one of the historian/legal commentators remarked that there IS precedent for what’s going on today about the question of accountability. He suggested that the post-civil war, up to now, is a living precedent for NOT holding responsible parties in “the South,” and their support of the emergence of Jim Crow for decades.
He suggested, and I think it deserves some serious thought, that we are in the problems we are in TODAY, precisely because of that ongoing precedent of lessening or even erasing accountability for that entire historical debacle, with its center point of slavery and the ingrained racism that has flowed from it. CBK
LikeLike
I agree with you. I don’t think anyone should escape consequences, but on the first day of the hearings, concentrating on DT was smart.
LikeLike
Don’t remember the post(er), but I’m totally in agreement: intense focus on one key figure (with mention of others) is very important in a proceeding if it’s to have a strong impact with an audience of at least 20 million. Too many distractions will make some turn away.
LikeLike
Reconstruction and the post Civil War amendments to the Constitution were efforts to hold rebels and traitors accountable. The end of Reconstruction put an end to accountability. You should see the Henry Louis Gates’ series on Reconstruction, on PBS. It is stunning.
LikeLike
Diane I wonder what will happen to PUBLIC Broadcasting when/if the right gets hold
in the coming elections. Considering all the book banning about slavery, etc., that’s going forward, they’ll probably shut it down and jail Henry Louis Gates. CBK
LikeLike
‘Reconstruction’ may have been an ‘attempt’, however it guaranteed long lasting antagonism. I live in the ‘highlands’ of Tennessee. Most folks here had no dog in the fight. No ‘Plantations”, no slaves. Yet, ‘Reconstruction’ made most of these former neutrals into enemies. The ‘carpetbagger mentality’ made people understand that they were considered inferior by ‘certain segments of society’. As a result, antagonism was forced upon them by the ‘Eastern Establishment’.
Thus, you reap what you sow.
‘Reconstruction’ was nothing other than a brutal occupation and an assumption that the ‘victor’ was all-knowing. That same idea infects our country today.
As a science guy, I always felt that Nature learns from experience and, thus, adjusts. If not, the species pays the price. Sadly, it appears that our species hasn’t learned from our history.
LikeLike
Daedalus,
Please watch the Henry Louis Gates PBS program “Reconstruction.”
You will learn a history that was not taught in school.
Please. Then let’s talk.
LikeLike
Well, I know that the ‘memorial’ on my town square lists as many people (not that many) fighting for the Union as for the Confederacy. Could be a lie, of course, however (as I said) none of these ‘mountain folk’ really had a reason to care.
Today, the ‘locals’ generally hate influence from the ‘Yankees’. Times have changed. Any idea why?
Personally, I think Sherman’s ‘March to the Sea’ and ‘Reconstruction’ played a big part. When an outside entity imposes itself upon you, and lets you know that they are superior, they create resentment even if it wasn’t there before. Why is that concept so strange?
Now, transfer that thought to Palestine.
LikeLike
Are you suggesting that Lincoln should have left slavery alone? Reconstruction was necessary to protect newly freed black peoples. When it ended, the Confederacy took control. The KKK had freedom of movement. Thousands of black peoples were lynched. As I said before, I wish Reconstruction had remained in place for 50 years to guarantee the freedom and safety of black people. Obviously you don’t agree.
LikeLike
Yes, perhaps we could have prevented some of the Jim Crow backlash. Daedalus does have a point about northern carpetbaggers, though, who we could probably compare to some modern day hedge funds, who are only interested in lining their own pockets. We need some of the historians to speak up here.
LikeLike
Growing up in Texas, our schools taught us about the supposed horrors of Reconstruction. We know more now. We know that blacks were elected to Congress and state legislatures in Confederate states, which outraged racists. The Reconstruction legislatures passed the most progressive legislation ever seen in the South, including a guarantee of free public education in every state. After Reconstruction ended, the only legislation that survived was the requirement for public schools. Watch the PBS 4-part series on Recinstruction. Read Derek Black’s “Schoolhouse Burning.” The end of Reconstruction was the triumph of racism and the regeneration of the Confederacy, as well as Jim Crow and the KKK. The fear-factor of “carpetbaggers” and “scalawags” was rationale for the restoration of White Power.
LikeLike
I know all that, which is why I supported your wish that reconstruction had lasted, but I am also interested in whether northerners took advantage of the situation. Did they go in and buy up “distressed” property? Perhaps part of the carpetbagger narrative was backlash on the part of poor whites watching the former slaves getting land and I’m sure the former landowners were less than thrilled. I just wonder if and/or how northerners benefited from the dismantling of the south. Obviously enough white people from the north and the south were less than thrilled with the growing influence of the black population, or reconstruction would have lasted longer.
LikeLike
Of course some northerners bought land in the postbellum south. We call that capitalism. And certainly some southerners welcomed the investments that came from the north. Eric Foner writes about the Reconstruction era; I recommend his books.I grew up in South Carolina during the Civil Rights Movement, so I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about southerners and their wounded feelings after 1865. (One would think the assassination of Lincoln would have made them feel better, but no.) Six hundred thousand people dead in a war fought over the right to enslave human beings. Shameful.
LikeLike
Thank you, Cindy Watter. Well said. Slavery is this nation’s original sin.
LikeLike
I am a Northener trying very hard to understand the lingering animosity. I was hinting at predatory capitalism and perhaps the hypocrisy of Northeners hellbent on “reconstructing” the south. “You got an estate your family can no longer support since all your money is gone and most of it has been ransacked or burned? Sure, I’ll give you a few bucks for it.” In addition, given the short lived nature of reconstruction, I have a suspicion that there were more than enough Northeners who had no desire to see blacks get so “uppity.” I have no quarrel with reconstruction. If it had continued, maybe we would have seen the spread of its ideas throughout the country. Maybe there would have been no need for a civil rights movement in the 60’s.
LikeLike
Lincoln wasn’t around to manage ‘reconstruction’.
LikeLike
Daedalus writes: “Reconstruction’ was nothing other than a brutal occupation and an assumption that the ‘victor’ was all-knowing. That same idea infects our country today.”
Insofar as slavery needed to GO, as well as the South’s recalcitrant ideas and their residual effects of Jim Crow. and the even longer threads of racism itself, the “victor” was NOT ALL knowing, but they did know THAT.
Also, bad methods, e.g., too broad-brush, as you suggest, does not make for a bad idea.
Finallly,, OMG, I “hear” the existential crumbling sound of white privilege losing its centuries-old underpinnings.
The original point was that the old (1800’s and onward) neglect of holding accountable those responsible is now visiting itself on today by way of setting the context for . . . the need to hold those responsible accountable. CBK
LikeLike
I think Reconstruction was necessary to protect newly freed slaves. I’m sorry it didn’t last for 50 years. There would have been no Jim Crow laws. No massacres of black people. Fewer lynchings. No KKK. Blacks’ right to vote would have been protected.
LikeLike
I can see that. Lots of underlings went down for Watergate. Not Nixon. They certainly have plenty of dirt on Trump enablers perhaps without purposely targeting them, but we have to cut off Medusa’s head, not just whack off the multitude of serpents.
LikeLike
speduktr My response to your comment went to moderation. CBK
LikeLike
It is out of moderation.
LikeLike
When Pence said, “I’m not getting in that car,” it sounded like a line out of a gangster movie! It was if he was worried for his physical safety.
LikeLike
When Pence refused to get in the car, it sounded as if he knew he would be detained in the car and the vote would not happen. He was determined not to be trapped by Trump’s henchmen.
LikeLike
Diane THAT (the henchmen thing) is REALLY RUSSIAN SCARY. CBK
LikeLike
I know, but the car was being driven by Secret Service agents! And he didn’t trust them. Mike Pence was having a really bad day.
LikeLike
Pence knew that Trump was reckless. He was wise not to get in that car. He might have been returned safely many hours later, after the vote was indefinitely postponed.
LikeLike
Cindy Watter Someone in Hollywood is writing a script for this as we speak. CBK
LikeLike
That’s what I thought at first. Then some commentator said that if he left the capitol complex, a Trump toady was supposed to step up and do Trump’s bidding. I’m not sure how that was supposed to make a difference since the VP just receives the states already certified results.
LikeLike
Well, I agree with the ‘Jackson Pollock’ thing. Pence was so bad that he knew he was going to loose in Indiana, so he decided to run with Trump..
However, I think its a bit much to blame Russia for Trump. Far easier to see him as a New York product (like Giuliani). An all too common type. Something in the air?
LikeLike
Daedalus About Putin’s ongoing influence NOW: I merely raise a question that has a background (unlike conspiracy theories) in the early presence of Manaport with the Trump campaign, his money-loan-hotel dealings, etc., all that makes it kind of naive and wispy to actually think NOT as a sure thing, at least as it seems to me. CBK
LikeLike
Well, Trump wanted to be an oligarch, and the Russian oligarchy probably saw a potential ally. However, we have plenty of oligarchs here in the US, and Trump wouldn’t even have been close without their influence. (I might point out that Clinton catered to them, as well).
Perhaps we’ll get some semblance of democracy back, but it’s gotta get worse before enough people get desperate enough to wake up from their ‘screens’ (controlled by oligarchs).
It’s easy to point the finger ‘over there’. Remember ‘Benghazi? Again, I find myself repeating this, before we assign blame to ‘the other’ (the splinter in the eye of someone else’) we would be wise to attend to the log in our own eye. We have serious political problems, and neither Biden, nor Trump, nor Clinton were at all concerned with anyone other than themselves.
LikeLike
Daedalus writes: “However, we have plenty of oligarchs here in the US, and Trump wouldn’t even have been close without their influence. (I might point out that Clinton catered to them, as well).”
We can see with some (probably unintended) clarity how influential Big Money is on Congress with the NRA and gun voting, as distinct from paying attention to those Common People who work for a living and still have time to march and write $10 checks.
I’ll never forgive Bill Clinton for diminishing the power of the Glass-Stiegel Act. Also, even with the point that Hilary got more votes in THAT election, one of the talking points on the right was the Clinton’s connections with Big Money/corporations (absence any reference to Republicans, of course), and a residual sense of abandonment of the older democratic principles. In my view, and whatever we think of Roosevelt (and despite all, he and Eleanor are favorites of mine), the Democrats missed his major political insight-turned-operative about connecting with “the people.” Instead, and though she was right in my view, they were peopled with “deplorables.”
Also, I think “our” oligarchs here are more ignorant and greedy than power driven in the way that Putin is, or Hitler and Stalin before him. The histories of both countries and cultures attest to great differences in what “oligarch” means in either one. CBK
LikeLike
Remember, CBK, that one of ‘our’ oligarchs is Murdoch. We invited him in from Australia. (Let me amend that, ‘Our oligarchs were happy to let a foreigner join their cabal).
LikeLike
“Remember, CBK, that one of ‘our’ oligarchs is Murdoch. We invited him in from Australia. (Let me amend that, ‘Our oligarchs were happy to let a foreigner join their cabal).”
He applied for and was granted citizenship so that he could buy and run US media outlets (NY Post and Fox). Wonder why he did that? Patriotic zeal, possibly…?
LikeLike
/s , no doubt. Thanks
LikeLike
Paul Manafort changed the 2016 GOP platform to remove GOP support for Ukraine. Very few noticed at the time. Still working for his handlers.
LikeLike
Still waiting to see why I should care more about Ukraine than my own country.
You know, Thomas Paine had a vision of a North American country totally divorced from Europe, a country based upon location rather than race or ‘ethnicity’. I think I like that vision, and that description of a country.
Sadly, Thomas ran into trouble when he went to France (barely escaped with his head) and the ‘religious’ found him worthy of being killed when he returned to the protection of Thomas Jefferson.
Without Thomas Paine we would not be a country. The lessons he taught were extraordinary (in every sense of the word). Washington understood that, and used Paine (Winter Soldier speech), however it was Jefferson that protected Paine.
Now, Paine’s vision of a ‘country’ is mine. A regional area where people give up their desire to impose their religion or ethic traditions on others but, instead, work for a larger common good.
Clearly, Ukraine doesn’t fit my definition of a ‘nation’. And, our own country is falling apart.
LikeLike
“Now, Paine’s vision of a ‘country’ is mine. A regional area where people give up their desire to impose their religion or ethic traditions on others but, instead, work for a larger common good.
Clearly, Ukraine doesn’t fit my definition of a ‘nation’. And, our own country is falling apart.”
I admire Thomas Paine. He was an important figure in our society at a key point in time and many of his ideas are still more than just “relevant”, today. Brilliant man. I don’t, however, think that all of his concepts can apply accurately to today’s world.
Since the time of his writings, we’ve seen rail travel followed by the automobile and the airplane. Then on to radio and television…and now the internet. It’s a smaller, more interconnected world, now. And the proliferation of international corporations that display little tendency towards nationalism (taxes…?) has effected all countries in terms of independent operation. I don’t like that last point…but there’s no denying the reality.
WWII showed us how interconnected we all are when a determined leader with a powerful military decides to make a move. Ukraine wants to be a democratically run country and is being invaded by a dictator. They’re asking for our help…as we did of France, Spain, and the Netherlands in our war for independence.
LikeLike
Ukraine was a democratic country until the Maiden Revolt, which drove out the democratically elected leader. In a ‘democracy’, you can’t let one ethnic group target another.
Of course, here in the US, we never really achieved Paine’s vision, did we? Perhaps he was just a bit too ‘visionary’ for the human animal to stomach. Still, I’ll stick to Paine, rather than Hiroshima.
LikeLike
Am I wrong that that “democratic election” is widely recognized as rigged?
LikeLike
‘Widely’ leads to ‘Which widely?’. The US currently claims that Juan Guaido is the ‘democratically elected’ leader of Venezuela’. Yeah, right.
In a ‘democracy’, the way to get rid of an abhorrent leader is to vote them out the next time, not to overthrow them in a violent coup. Which brings us to Trump.
LikeLike
If the elections are rigged so that only one result is possible, just how is it that you use the vote? I think the current war speaks to just how freely and fairly Russia’s puppet was elected. The Ukrainian population has obviously welcomed Putin’s invasion with open arms.
LikeLike
Well, you raise an interesting question.
I suppose it’s a habit. I find myself often voting for the better of two rather unattractive options. Why am I presented with the choice of the unpalatable and the putrid? Is this ‘democracy’?
And, wouldn’t one also be concerned about how ‘fairly’ American puppets are ‘elected’? It is the country’s expressed ambition to rule the world, and impose their puppets upon everyone else. How does that ‘endear’ us to the rest of humanity?
But, we are arrogant, following in the footsteps of our English parents.
LikeLike
Daedalus, you’ve got it backwards, I’m afraid. Here’s my comment from above:
It’s worth remembering that Paul Manafort was paid more than $60 million over a decade for his work to install oligarch favorite Viktor Yanukovych, the fabulously corrupt president of Ukraine in 2010. Yanukovych’s cancellation in 2013 of an agreement to bring Ukraine closer to the EU led to the Revolution of Dignity in 2014. Yanukovych fled to Russia; providing Putin with a pretext to invade and take Crimea.
We should think it’s just a coincidence the Manafort offered to work as Trump’s campaign manager for free? Yeah, no.
Have you seen the photos of Yanukovych’s palace? The Ukrainians turned it into a museum.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/yanukovych-palace-photos_n_6180640
LikeLike
It’s bizarre to say that Ukraine was a democracy under Putin’s thumb.
LikeLike
Well, Manafort couldn’t ‘install’ a Ukrainian leader unless (of course) it we under the control of the US. Which means that it was NEVER a democracy.
LikeLike
Manafort was working for Putin and his oligarchs.
LikeLike
It’s worth remembering that Paul Manafort was paid more than $60 million over a decade for his work to install oligarch favorite Viktor Yanukovych, the fabulously corrupt president of Ukraine in 2010. Yanukovych’s cancellation in 2013 of an agreement to bring Ukraine closer to the EU led to the Revolution of Dignity in 2014. Yanukovych fled to Russia; providing Putin with a pretext to invade and take Crimea.
We should think it’s just a coincidence the Manafort offered to work as Trump’s campaign manager for free? Yeah, no.
LikeLike
Thanks for the reminder.
LikeLike
A couple of drive time radio talk show hosts made a simple and powerful statement yesterday.
For a moment (stick with this) – take the Ex President totally out of the mix. Imagine he did not make a speech that day. Did not show up. Just did nothing.
For a moment, imagine if the single event of the day was the attack – the destruction of the U.S. Capitol, highest officials in the land and civil servants hiding under desks and in undisclosed rooms. Death and injury of police officers.
Wouldn’t / shouldn’t there be outrage on the part of every person in that building and across the country regardless of party? Wouldn’t one Republican state, we disagree with everything the Democrats and Biden stand for but an attack on our Capitol crosses the line.
But put the exPresident in the mix and they all get stupid and silent.
LikeLike
That’s a superb observation!
About “silent and stupid”, I think we can add scared. Trump acts like a mobster and some seem to believe he’ll unleash his goons on them if they cross the boss. It’s true on social media, or course, but it only takes a few who cross into real life from the virtual realm – the planned kidnapping of Michigan’s governor, for example, or of Mike Pence.
LikeLike
“That’s a superb observation!”
Ditto.
LikeLike
Trump IS a mobster. (If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, …)
LikeLike
“Trump IS a mobster. (If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, …)”
We’ve seen enough of the Donald, here in NYC, to draw a pretty educated guess on that front.
LikeLike
After reading some quotes, I decided to check out some of Carlson and Hannity’s comments on their respective shows. I’m always a little leery of quotes taken out of context…right, left and center.
But sure enough; there they were. Lying. Deliberately downplaying the events of 1/6 and the commission’s work, in general.
I seriously question their motives along with those of their enabler, Rupert Murdoch. It’s not just about ratings. Not just money. I smell a rat. There’s something very very wrong at play, here. They are deliberately fanning the flames of polarization and hatred. “Don’t believe your eyes. Close them and listen to us because we’re the only source you can trust”.
Something is not right, here…
LikeLike
Plenty isn’t right here. A “friend” told me recently that if I hadn’t voted for Biden, Trump would still be President and Putin would not have invaded Ukraine. How’s that for a hypothetical?
LikeLike
Ukraine as property of dictator, Putin, would have been a given under Trump’s presidency.
LikeLike
I think Vlad the Invader would have gone into Ukraine sooner.
LikeLike
Vlad’s mistake in Ukraine was that he didn’t invade when his friend Trump was in office. Trump would have done nothing to defend Ukraine. Without US leadership, NATO would have been hesitant and divided. Putin recently compared himself to Peter the Great. Just taking back what belongs to Russia, I.e., the USSR.
LikeLike
“I think Vlad the Invader would have gone into Ukraine sooner”.
No doubt in my mind. And with Trump and Tucker’s patriotic blessings.
“Vlad’s mistake in Ukraine was that he didn’t invade when his friend Trump was in office. Trump would have done nothing to defend Ukraine. Without US leadership, NATO would have been hesitant and divided. Putin recently compared himself to Peter the Great. Just taking back what belongs to Russia, I.e., the USSR”
Restoring the USSR has been his goal from the beginning and I completely agree: he miscalculated on his timing.
Putin comparing himself to Peter the Great is like Trump comparing himself (favorably; gag me) to Lincoln.
LikeLike
gitapik Vlad may have believed his own made-up aura and so was banking on Trump winning the second election. CBK
LikeLike
Good point, Catherine. Not satisfied with the blackjack table. Looking to hit the jackpot.
LikeLike
Speculation on my part- the view of Charles Koch’s network or Thiel influenced Putin. There were a number of right wingers like J.D. Vance who were making a case that Ukraine wasn’t important enough to generate U.S. government action.
LikeLike
I Can Already Hear the Miranda Rap —
🤪 🤪 🤪
“The Rubber Room Where It Happened”
LikeLike