They decided a republic was worth more than their own comfort

I did not go out to see fireworks this evening, partly because my city isn’t putting on a display and I don’t want to search the schedules of neighboring cities. I am hearing a lot of fireworks shot off by neighbors. I did listen all day to the weekend classical station that featured American music – I think I heard The Stars and Stripes Forever about four times. And some of the commentary between pieces and on NPR got me to stop and ponder the day. And this evening I spent time as a patriot writing about what is wrong with the country and how it could be better. Andrew Mangan of Daily Kos discussed the Independence Day festivities.

In his second term, Donald Trump scored one of the biggest gimmes in presidential history: His term included America’s 250th birthday. How easy it should have been to unite the nation—at least a little, at least briefly—under a common star-spangled banner. Instead, he has failed to find popular support for the key events in his semiquincentennial project.

An aside: The best Latin can do in naming the anniversary is “Half-Five Hundred”? I’ll admit I don’t know the Latin rules for how to name numbers. Why bother with the Latin? But onward.

Excitement isn’t matching the occasion, and Trump is the most to blame. He doesn’t know how to throw a party.

There’s the fight on the South Lawn of the White House. Only 8% of Americans follow mixed martial arts, compared to 40% for football (that’s American football). The concert was a bust when so many unknown artists pulled out. The Great American State Fair is a bust. So many states refusing to participate and the rest favoring the nasty guy and conservatism was part of that. The nasty guy is doing quite well at degrading America’s view of itself. Those who are proud to be American is at 53%, down from over 90% in 2004. One part might be because he doesn’t know how to throw a party. Another part, likely much bigger, is that people recognize his party isn’t about America, it’s about him. Thom Hartmann of the Kos community discussed several signers of the Declaration of Independence who lost quite a bit to the Redcoats in the War of Independence. Are the Redcoats (or the Redhats) ruling America again? How did that happen? Hartmann points to the Reagan Revolution fueled by the Powell Memorandum. This was led by a group of rich people and industrialists fed up with the gains made by Labor and the Middle Class since Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. They wanted to reassert their dominance.

For the morbidly rich and big corporations back in the 1970s, this average American’s trust in a government that was then maintaining high tax rates and — through the newly-created EPA, Clean Air Act, and Clean Water Act — holding corporations accountable for their pollution and poisonous products, was, they believed, an existential threat to their wealth and power.

Powell described it as a hatred of corporate power, an assault “on our government, our system of justice, and the free enterprise system.” This is an example of portraying their opponents not as someone who disagrees, but as an enemy. I’m sure many middle class people liked corporations because they funded their middle class lives. The response of the rich was to create think tanks to alter public opinion, pack the courts, create conservative media empires, repeal bans on corporate donations to candidates, replace trust in the government with cynicism, and to fill schools and colleges with conservative educators while pushing out the liberals. Yeah, all that began back then. The goals included reducing the tax rate. If I understand it right (it’s not mentioned in this article) a high tax rate meant the bosses didn’t ask for big salaries because they would be taxed anyway, which left more money for the workers. That bit about trust in government was to get Americans to reject government programs in favor of corporate sponsorships of research centers, health centers, and civic centers. Medicare was partially privatized through the “Advantage” scam. There is an ongoing attempt to privatize education through vouchers and charter schools. Public parks, stadiums, museums, and more are encouraged to turn to billionaire charity (and naming rights) instead of tax dollars. All that to say government bad, rich people good. The effort of those think tanks shows up in college textbooks and thousands of opinion pieces in media outlets and social media every day. Conservative talk radio provides a steady stream of stories that “government can’t do anything right” as the hosts get millions in subsidies. That’s a gusher of political poison. All that to say don’t trust the government your ancestors fought to establish. Reagan and his VP Bush I negotiated trade deals that moved 15-20 million good-paying union jobs from America into low-wage countries. There goes the middle class. And their campaign has been and continues to be effective. The number of billionaires and the size of their wealth has jumped considerably. Fox News is quite influential and half of Republican voters are ready to reject democracy. Voter suppression gets lots of effort. The head of the Heritage Foundation said the Republican Party is willing to slaughter Americans who oppose Project 2025. The party no longer believes in democracy, “equality before the law,” and a government whose power comes from the “consent of the governed.” They’ve sworn their fealty to the rich. Many people believe we’re headed to another Civil War because many conservatives say that’s what they want. They believe democracy was a dangerous mistake and the rich (the modern version of the white male landowner) should run everything, suppressing all dissent. Some individual thoughts:

A political network run by a group of right-wing billionaires has a larger budget and more employees than the entire Republican Party. The single largest source of threats of violence and murders by terrorists in America today are committed by white-supremacists aligned with the GOP who hate and fear the idea of a pluralistic, democratic society. Tragically, for the third time in our nation’s history, patriots who believe in the ideals of July 4, 1776 must defend America against those who don’t. We had our third chance in 2024, and we let it slip. Trump won, and he came back not chastened but emboldened, surrounded by the same billionaires who bankrolled his rise and are now getting their return on investment in spades. Everything the Loyalists and the Confederates and the Redcoats ever wanted — rule by the rich, contempt for the ballot, a leader who answers to no one — is being assembled in front of us in real time.

All that means is getting rid of the nasty guy and voting out Republicans isn’t enough. We must also rein in the rich. The people who signed the Declaration were not the big guys.

They were outgunned, outspent, and written off. But they won anyway, because enough of them decided a republic was worth more than their own comfort.

We must do the same. Will Democrats? Will they reject “big, dark, and foreign money”? Will they agree a republic is worth more than their party, their reelection, and their own comfort? When they win at least one chamber of Congress will they work to throw off the control of the rich, or join it? That’s a big reason why Democratic Socialists are making big gains. From Thomas Paine in The American Crisis, “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered.” In last Tuesday’s Pundit Roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quoted Colby Smith and Tony Romm of The New York Times discussing the Supreme Court ruling that prevents the nasty guy from firing Federal Reserve board member Lisa Cook just because he wants to.

But the Supreme Court left much unresolved. The justices did not clearly articulate the full legal criteria that would allow Mr. Trump to fire Ms. Cook, who denies any wrongdoing and has never been charged with a crime. Nor did they wager an opinion on the exact allegations against her. And the court majority did not even prescribe the exact venue in which Ms. Cook should be allowed to respond to the allegations. […] The president did not hesitate to seize on that legal ambiguity. In a social media post, he described the decision as merely a “procedural” matter and vowed to “take appropriate action immediately to make sure that someone who has committed wrongdoing will not be making vital decisions concerning the Welfare of the United States of America!”

Joshua A. Douglas of Washington Monthly wrote about an aspect of another Supreme Court ruling that allows states to count ballots that were postmarked by election day but received a few days later. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority opinion, affirmed 5-4.

Instead of affirming the security of our election system, however, Justice Barrett seemed to accept the premise that absentee ballots might lead to the appearance of fraud. She wrote, correctly, that “even under plaintiffs’ interpretation, last-minute flips are possible, because the election-day statutes set no deadline for counting ballots or certifying election results.” Yet there is no such thing as a last-minute “flip,” and speaking in terms of “flipping” the results during the election night count is improper. Leads may change as ballots are counted, but no results are “flipped” because they are not final until the state has counted all ballots and election officials have certified them. It’s the same as saying the result in a World Cup match is “flipped” by a last-minute goal; although one team might have had the lead, there is no winner until the final whistle blows. So, while the Mississippi decision was good for voters, it was concerning for the underlying message about voter fraud and the leeway the Court may give to states to combat it.

The word “flip” also implies individual votes were switched. That also fuels the appearance of fraud. In Friday’s roundup Greg Dworkin included a tweet by Bill McGuire discussing the El Nino weather system developing in the Pacific Ocean.

This is absolutely terrifying. The Nino 3.4 forecast temperature anomaly mean is now at 4C, when even the biggest historical super ninos have seen less than 3C. I really have no idea what this is going to bring over the next 12 months, but it will be very, very, grim.

Might we have massive crop failures this year or next? In the comments exlrrp posted a meme: “The saddest part of Trump’s historically corrupt 2nd term is witnessing the impotence of our entire political system to do literally anything about it. Another meme posted by exlrrp:

The Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool had aging pipes and filtration issues. Trump’s administration spent $14 million. Not on fixing the infrastructure. On painting the pool dark blue. Now it is covered in algae. It’s the perfect metaphor for modern Republican governance. Paint the surface. Ignore the problem. Blame somebody else.

I watched another video from Broadway Backwards, the annual show that raises money to combat AIDS. This one was from 2023 and is a reinterpretation of “One Day More” from Les Misérables as a group of LGBTQ activists preparing for a march in Washington. This one wasn’t just the song, there was a scene to introduce the characters – a newly out man afraid to be seen protesting, a mother who lost a son to suicide. The whole thing was nine minutes and it’s well worth watching.

The failure of democracies to rein in corporations

To commemorate the death of Jesse Jackson Bishtoons highlighted a phrase of Jackson. Love the saying, not so much the caricature. Jackson said:

Never look down on anybody unless you’re helping them up.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York went to the Munich Security Conference and told the crowd:

I think one of the connections and relationships that is underdiscussed, particularly in the security space, is the fact that I believe we're seeing an economy … around the world—including in the United States—that extreme levels of income inequality lead to social instability and drives in a sense in authoritarianism, right-wing populism, and very dangerous domestic internal politics. And that is a direct outcome of not just income inequality, but the failure of democracies over decades to deliver. The failure to deliver higher wages, the failure to rein in corporations. There is a level of market concentration and corporate consolidation where a massive company can get so big that its consolidated power can rival that of nation states. Massive corporations that then begin to consume the public sector gobble up the spending. They start to call the shots, and we're starting to see this with some of the billionaire class throwing their weight around in domestic politics and in global politics as well.

Alix Breeden of Daily Kos reported that federal judge James Boasberg, who has been tussling with the nasty guy’s administration for many months ordered them to return some Venezuelan men who were wrongfully sent to prison in El Salvador without due process. However three of the men told Kos that they refuse to step foot in the US while the nasty guy is in office. They say they have no guarantees of being free while their cases are being heard. The risk of returning isn’t worth it. Two of the three said they would consider returning to the US when there is a change in president. The third said he would still be too afraid to come back. Robert Reich, former Labor Secretary, wrote in his Substack that according to the New York Times the Department of Homeland Security sent subpoenas to big tech companies demanding the names on accounts the criticize ICE to identify those who oppose what ICE and DHS are doing. Reich responded:

Hello? Kristi Noem? Robert Reich here. I hear you’re trying to find the names of people who are making negative comments on social media about ICE enforcement. Look no further. I’ve done it frequently. I’m still doing it. This note to you, which I’m posting on Substack, is another example.

Reich then listed several things ICE is doing – arrests without due process, inadequate care in detention camps, and much more – that are unconstitutional. Noem is defying court orders, also unconstitutional, as are those subpoenas. Noem seems to have forgotten that she is given power and being paid by the people of the United States and she swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. As was true for Reich. He did his duty. What the hell is she doing? In Monday’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted Jacqueline Alemany of MS Now

For now, Democrats are in the minority — limited to issuing strongly worded letters and exercising a mostly toothless investigative authority to rein in a president who has applied a maximalist approach to executive authority. But with increasingly rosy prospects for the party to win back the House in 2026, Democratic lawmakers are laying the groundwork for a sweeping expansion of oversight targeting the companies and CEOs who have done business with the Trump family, or sought favorable regulatory treatment, merger approval, or policy changes from the administration — from Paramount to Palantir. It is a strategy that Democrats believe could reshape corporate America’s relationship with Trump: By threatening future investigations into companies that curry favor with the administration, they hope to make CEOs think twice before opening their wallets or bending to presidential pressure.

In Tuesday’s roundup Chitown Kev quoted Heather Cox Richardson from her Letters from an American Substack discussing the latest potential nasty guy grift.

On February 13 and 14, President Donald J. Trump’s representatives filed three applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to trademark his name for future use on an airport. As trademark lawyer Josh Gerben of Gerben IP noted, the application also covers merchandise branded “President Donald J. Trump International Airport,” “Donald J. Trump International Airport,” and “DJT,” including “clothing, handbags, luggage, jewelry, watches, and tie clips.” Because of the trademark filing, Gerben notes, any airport adopting the Trump name would have to get a license to use the name, potentially paying a licensing fee. Gerben emphasizes that while it is common for public officials to have landmarks named after them, “never in the history of the United States” has “a sitting president’s private company…sought trademark rights” before such a naming.

In the comments paulpro posted a cartoon by Pedro Molina showing a man facing down ICE agents referring to what AG Pam Bondi said before Congress:

Papers? Oh, Bro! Haven’t you heard? We should all be focused on the Dow!

Parker Molloy tweeted a link to Sports Illustrated and wrote:

Sign of the times that there are multiple members of the Chicago Cubs who haven't been able to enter the U.S. because Trump's immigration crackdown has made getting visas impossible.

Herbilly posted a meme:

Let’s have illegal immigrants hunt down sex offenders for a chance at citizenship. We’ll call it “Aliens VS Predators.”

Bill in Portland, Maine, in his Cheers and Jeers column for Kos quoted Shawn Ryan, a podcaster on the right, after Bondi sat in front of a House Committee and made that comment about the Dow. Bill has a very good reason for quoting someone on the right. Ryan said:

What you should be talking about is how you are going to investigate and prosecute any pedophiles that are running around on Epstein Island that you’re affiliated with. But we didn’t talk about that, did we? Oh, and what’s the excuse? What was the excuse? “If we prosecute everybody the whole system would go down.” Well, you know what that sounds like? That sounds like how Trump ran his campaign: “Let’s drain the swamp.” Doesn’t that sound a lot like draining the swamp? It actually is drain the swamps served up to you on a f---ing silver platter but you’re not gonna take it, are you? You’re gonna protect pedophiles! You’re going to protect pedophiles rather than go after them and hope that everybody’s happy that the Dow hit 50,000. Are you f---ing out of your mind?!”

The whole system would go down? The system of men who think they’re so far above the rules that they can abuse girls? Sounds like a goal worth working toward. In an LGBTQ Update for Kos Clio2 wrote of many topics. Here are a few of them:

If I have this right, the proposed federal "SAVE Act" (Republicans have a way with Newspeak!) currently before Congress would require proof of citizenship and ID matching one's birth certificate to register to vote, disqualifying not only trans people who have changed their documents, but a great many others--such as adoptees, and married women who took their husband's name. Voter fraud is, of course, minuscule, and this would amount to theft of people's votes. Reportedly Sen. Collins, however, has gotten over her usual fit of the vapors, making this a squeaker. :-/

Then Clio2 got into discussing bans on transgender care, both in the US and in Britain. And in Britain the efforts include closing a clinic treating trans children, and requiring schools ban social transition, including “using a different name, pronoun or haircut” and outing trans youth. There is also a book urging parents not to support their trans kids. And a tweet from Sara Hummingbird:

Policies based on lies is killing kids. "Good Law Project can confirm that in 2021-2022 suicides of trans children in England surged to 22, a marked increase from 5 and 4 the previous two years" It takes years for this data to be available there will be more. All these kids had the right to life.

A series of tweets by Toby Buckle (I’m not sure of the order):

one of the things i got from diving into the weeds of this debate for my reporting on it was just how small the core 'gender critical' team is almost all (anti-trans) reporting cites/ quotes the same half-dozen people the idea that this was a popular backlash to a socially dominant 'woke' worldview, pushing pronouns down all of our thoughts is absurd a decade ago most brits did not hold well defined views on this, there was a bi-partisan consensus for tolerance basically, we've utterly erased the rights & healthcare access of a vulnerable minority because a very small group (of apparently very well-connected) of people became fanatical about it & the (also very small) group who decide press coverage decided they needed relentless coverage a stat i always cite is the number of anti-trans articles in the press went from 60 in a year, to 7,500

DixTheory added, based on data from Parliament Committees.

Chart showing the frequency of trans-related articles by month in the UK press from 2012 to 2022. The count remains below 50 per 30 days until 2015, rising to 400 per 30 days by 2021, then peaking over 1,000 in 2022.

Clio2 tweeted a link to an article in The Pink News with the title and subtitle:

Publicly funded gender-affirming care is great for the economy A new study in Australia has found that increasing public funding gender-affirming care could save the government millions.

On a different topic Kat Tenbarge tweeted:

When a sitting representative refers to the Super Bowl halftime show as “pornography,” people should use that to reflect on how they and other representatives are simultaneously working to ban, censor, and restrict “pornography” and what that actually means And we don’t have to guess what they mean, because we can read Project 2025 ourselves and see that “pornography” is shorthand for LGBTQ people existing publicly. That’s what they’re working to ban, censor, and restrict online under the guise of “protecting” kids from porn And we also already know that these efforts have been in motion for years, and that sex workers, LGBTQ people, feminists, educators, and anyone who talks about bodies, women, and gender/sexuality is already being censored online and offline

TC added:

Yes, they've signalled using "pornography" the way Putin's Russia uses the term "hooligan"

The neurotic need for endless conflict, incompatible with joy

I’ve been thinking about the power of the social hierarchy for several years now and frequently apply my thoughts to current events. One of the questions that came to mind was whether those towards the top of the hierarchy were happy. They seemed to obsess over their position in the hierarchy. So what did it bring them? The American Declaration of Independence famously says we people have the right to the “pursuit of happiness.” It doesn’t list any other emotion. So are they happy? What online research I could find (and could understand) didn’t say much about this question. The Gaslit Nation bonus episode for last week posed the question, “Do fascists feel joy?” Yes, I was intrigued. It’s close enough to my original question and now I have the time to explore it. Because it is a bonus episode it is available only to members (which I am). So my link may not work for you. Also, bonus episodes do not get a transcript. I listened to the audio, pausing frequently to write down ideas. A lot of what follows is a summary of what was said. Only once did I check to make sure the quote was accurate. Beyond a prelude the speaker was Andrea Chalupa, host of Gaslit Nation. From that prelude: How did Communists maintain their power? It wasn’t because people believed their lies, but because too many people were willing to let the lies persist. They wanted to go along to get along, to not threaten the system so it would not threaten them. The example was shopkeepers posting signs that agreed with the lies of the regime. But one one person can break the fantasy. A shopkeeper could stop putting up the sign. On to the main discussion. Do fascists feel joy? That they don’t seems obvious. They don’t have empathy. They are cruel and they push out those not extreme enough, not cruel enough. Trump’s rallies shows people who are laughing and appearing to have a good time. But is it joy? George Orwell wrote a review of Hitler’s Mein Kampf in 1940. He noted that socialism and capitalism offer people a good time. Fascism offers struggle, danger, and death. “The fascist psychological profile is driven by a neurotic need for endless conflict, which is incompatible with the contentment or life affirming nature that we all know as joy.” Note the “endless conflict” – the nasty guy invaded Venezuela, then seemed to drop that to push an invasion of Greenland. That is like ICE using tear gas in Minneapolis after Renee Good was murdered, to maintain the level of conflict. This episode was recorded before Alex Pretti was murdered. So fascism offers a “better” time than what capitalism offers. That better time is being hyper vigilant of enemies within and without, which is endless conflict. Yeah, that doesn’t seem like a better offer. Stick with me a moment. Why do people want endless conflict? That’s how they were raised. They had a domineering father. Hitler then praised those types of fathers. A proto-Nazi movement declared that dominance is the only way to deal with a chaotic world. In this case “chaos” included feminism and LGBTQ rights. In the 1920s and 1930s Germany was the leading center of research into psychology and philosophy. So when Hitler came along these researchers began to study him and his movement. Fascism is a way for the masses to express themselves without giving them any power. The elements of their rallies are designed to create a state of mass intoxication. A researcher saw that the self-alienation was so complete people could feel their own destruction as a form of pleasure. The cruelty is a dopamine hit derived from inflicting pain on someone else. It is glee that comes from the violence of domination. What they were feeling wasn’t and isn’t joy. It was the thrill of dominance, the high of the mob. Fascism is a death cult, and requires an enemy. In contrast, joy is life affirming. That cruelty is funded by corporations that want the destruction of the labor movement, of liberals, and of feminists all wanting to challenge the patriarchy corporations want to maintain. Why discuss their lack of joy? Because it exposes their weakness. The fascist high is not sustainable. It is fast and hot. It needs continuing escalation. It needs new enemies to destroy to maintain the level of stimulation. It is exhausting. But it is also never enough. So the Democrat’s plan to wait it out won’t work. Such a movement is already dead inside. Their laughter is empty. They are brittle. Their movement will eventually collapse. True joy, the kind that sustains resistance, is a renewable energy. That comes from love and community. We must keep going and do so in joy until the fascists collapse. So find and keep joy in your life. It is the best revenge. All that was the first 19 minutes of the recording. The remaining 15 minutes was a discussion of self care with Vatican reporter Colleen Dulle. She wrote the book, “Struck Down, Not Destroyed: Keeping the Faith as a Vatican Reporter.” One thing Dulle reported on was MAGA attempting a siege of the Vatican. It seems the Vatican can’t reform fast enough to withstand the effort. And one needed reform is to let women be priests to fill the desperate need for priests. The self care discussion was about how Dulle cares for herself. I’ve seen Chalupa’s standard list of questions for these things and quickly saw one person’s self care may not apply to another. So I didn’t finish the recording. A thought from me. People who followed Hitler wanted more of what they knew from growing up. The same seems true for many of the people who adore the nasty guy. That means how we raise our children needs an overhaul with a greater emphasis on love and community while limiting dominance. And in the meantime a lot of people need a great deal of therapy and our country isn’t set up to give it. Our culture considers children raised to be highly patriarchal to be raised properly.

The rules of capitalism don’t force their different choices

This morning I ate breakfast to the news that the US Military, under orders from the nasty guy, swooped into Venezuela and kidnapped President Nicolás Maduro, taking him into US custody to stand trial for drug related crimes. I haven’t paid much attention to the new since and switched radio stations to avoid his speech and the analysis of it. I’m sure you can find plenty of details at your favorite news source (at least one with a strong acquaintance with truth). So I won’t go into details. I’ll only say the nasty guy has pulled America to the low level of Russia by invading another country without military provocation. In the comments of today’s pundit roundup for Daily Kos are lots of tweets with images and videos of the US operation. Among those is a meme posted by Mel Ankoly:

If we elect Trump, we will be at war within 6 months. -- Kamala Harris

Gosh, off by only five months! This roundup is by Greg Dworkin who quoted a New York Times opinion piece about the January 6 Capitol attack. That day the rioters and nasty guy lost and it was seen as a turning point.

That day was indeed a turning point, but not the one it first seemed to be. It was a turning point toward a version of Mr. Trump who is even more lawless than the one who governed the country in his first term. It heralded a culture of political unaccountability, in which people who violently attacked Congress and beat police officers escaped without lasting consequence. The politicians and pundits who had egged on the attack with their lies escaped, as well. The aftermath of Jan. 6 made the Republican Party even more feckless, beholden to one man and willing to pervert reality to serve his interests. Once Mr. Trump won election again in 2024, despite his role in encouraging the riot and his many distortions about it, it emboldened him to govern in defiance of the Constitution, without regard for the truth and with malice toward those who stand up to his abuses

. Democrats could have gone a long way to bolster democracy by prosecuting the nasty guy for his various crimes (many more than just instigating that riot). And they didn’t. Pamela Herd and Don Moynihan of their Substack quoted a bit of Zohran Mamdani’s inauguration speech as he starts his term as governor of New York City.

What we achieve together will reach across the five boroughs and it will resonate far beyond. There are many who will be watching. They want to know if the left can govern. They want to know if the struggles that afflict them can be solved. They want to know if it is right to hope again.

Back in the comments are a couple cartoons by Toonerman, both having to do with the alleged theft by Somali child care companies that prompted the nasty guy to cut funding for all child care providers. The first one:

Right-wing YouTube influencer Nick Shirly took a guy named Dave and a video camera on a snowy, cold day to Minneapolis and attempted to walk into Somali run daycare centers without any challenge. Two grown men with a camera wanting to take video of other people’s children. Sounds like perverts to me.

And the second

Minnesotan Aimee Bick – founder of Feeding the Future and ring leader of a massive fraud and theft operation was found guilty of stealing $250 million of federal COVID relief funds and pocketing millions herself. She is NOT SOMALIAN. You can tell because of her accent. But you won’t hear Trump or his fascist friend mention Aimee... because she’s white!”

In Friday’s pundit roundup Dworkin Paul Waldman of Public Notice discussing the nasty guy building monuments to himself.

It goes beyond an exercise in branding. Trump is seeking a physical legacy, a collection of signs and structures that will pay eternal tribute to his greatness. Which is why it is so important — and why it will be so rewarding — for the next Democratic president to tear it all down and smash it to bits. This isn’t just about petty revenge, even if there is undoubtedly some of that going on here. Emerging from this dark period in our history will require a sweeping, comprehensive strategy of repudiation and repair, one that encompasses the substantive, the procedural, and the symbolic. Fortunately, removing the physical remnants of Trumpism will be much simpler than reconstituting the federal workforce or rebuilding our security alliances.

In the comments there is a tweet by End Wokeness:

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani: “We’ll replace rugged individualism with collectivism.”

Rotimi Adeoye responded:

For people who have a problem with this statement, maybe before you start pearl-clutching ask why rugged individualism clearly isn’t resonating anymore—so much so that someone like Zohran, who openly criticizes it, could get elected in the first place.

A cartoon posted by LEastsound and created by Benjamin Slyngstad. It shows the nasty guy falling asleep while on either side...

Marco Rubio Suck-up of State: No one has ever slept through a meeting like you, sir. Pete Hegseth, Secretary of Beer: You are truly leading the war on wokeness, Mr. Presideint.

Karmadog tweeted, showing the net worth of several people:

Donald Trump $5.4B Elon Musk, co-chair of DOGE, $300+B Warren Stephens, Ambassador to UK, $3.3B Charles Kushner, Ambassador to France (and father of Jared), $2.9B Linda McMahon, Education Secretary, $2.6B Howard Lutnick, Commerce Secretary, $2B If #oligarchy is too strange a word, how about we call them: Yacht Nazis!

Rep. Andy Ogles tweeted an image of a soldier ready for the Crusades with the caption, “We must stand and reaffirm that this is a Christian Nation. This is a battle of good vs evil.” Greg Nunziata responded:

It’s not necessarily a good thing, but it is an interesting thing, that protestant MAGA types love to appropriate Catholic history and iconography.

Christopher Hale tweeted:

Pope Leo XIV ended 2025 with a fierce warning: “Stop using religion to conquer markets and justify violence.” He followed that warning with a challenge: stop fearing strangers — and start welcoming them as neighbors.

Aaron Rupar tweeted the Nick Shirly video (well, I think it is, I didn’t watch it), adding:

uhhh yeah I can see why these childcare properties weren't eager to let in some rando dudes asking "where are the kids?"

Andrew Lawrence added:

like 75% of dem messaging right now should be “the party led by epsteins best friend is breaking into pre-k childcare centers so they can record your toddlers and put the videos on internet”

Mark Sumner Kos staff emeritus wrote about why Warmart is bad and Costco is good. This is a time where I wish my blogging skills (and maybe blogging tools) allowed me to do a side-to-side comparison. I’ll have to put one below the other. Before I get to that, both are highly successful companies (though it looks like Costco outperformed Walmart in the stock market). Both are pursuing their individual business plans without government coercion. They have just followed very different strategies. Walmart: + Has 10,700 stores including supercenters and Sam’s Clubs, founded in 1962. + Each supercenter has about 300 employees, they earn an hourly wage of $14-$19 an hour. + Stingy with benefits. + It tops the list of largest employers whose workers receive Medicaid and SNAP. + When Walmart moves into a community it depresses wages, which can drain the local talent. + A store manager can be paid $500,000 with assistants earning almost as much. The pay gap between the bottom and top is high. + Turnover can reach as high as 75% when similar companies might see 60% turnover. + Climbing the company ladder is the only way to improve one’s pay. It is difficult and fiercely competitive but with no corporate assistance for improvement. + They are ruthless with suppliers, demanding extremely low prices for shelf space in their stores. + They undercut every local retailer until the nearby town is hollowed out. Then it raises prices. + One supercenter can have 120K to 150K products. Customers see Walmart as their only shopping destination. + Their profits come from squeezing suppliers. + Walmart can so thoroughly hollow out the economics of a region it has to close stores for low performance. Costco: + Has 914 Costco Warehouses. It grew out of Price Club in 1983. + Each store has about 350-500 employees. Starting wage is $21 an hour and the average is $31. + Generous with benefits. + Costco employees don’t need Medicaid and SNAP. + When Costco moves into a community it can raise wages and strengthen local economies. + A Costco store manager earns $150,000 a year. The CEO earns $13 million in salary and stock options. The pay gap between the bottom and top is low. + The pay is high enough employees have to jump to another industry or get a college degree to do better. Annual turnover is below 6%. + There is an extensive employee development program. It does quite well from employees suggesting improvements. It saves on recruiting and basic training of new hires. + They serve as a supplement and supplier to local retail stores. They provide items others can’t and can provide items in bulk that other retailers can buy. A consumer may not buy a bulk package of rice, but a restaurant and school system does. + A Costco Warehouse has about 4,000 items and few of them are there consistently. Costco is only one place where its customers shop. + Their profits come from their memberships which have a renewable rate of 90%. + Costco doesn’t need to close stores, though it has replaced some of its earlier and smaller stores. Again, no one, including government, is forcing either company to follow their business strategy. The rules of capitalism aren’t forcing them either. They made choices they way they did because they want to. I see it as Walmart striving for the top of the social hierarchy – the managers and owners want to be high in the hierarchy and everyone else – employees and local economy – is oppressed to make their position look better. In contrast Costco works in community. We’re all in this together, we’re all equal. We’ll provide a service to help you in providing yours.

Remember that part about how the average Walmart supercenter has about 25% fewer employees than the average Costco Warehouse? Those fewer employees have to deal with 30 times as many items, more frequent restocking, and do it while getting less pay and fewer benefits. They work harder for less. By design. For stores that damage their local economy, and which are much more likely to simply pack up and leave. That's all a choice.

For the record, I shop at neither, though both are within four miles. I avoid Walmart because of their rapacious policies. I avoid Costco because as a family of one their membership fee and their emphasis on bulk items, which I would have a hard time storing or using before they spoil, is a bit much. I also wouldn’t want to wait in the long Costco gas lines.

The evil brother that is corporate law

Trenz Pruca of the Daily Kos community discussed capitalism and democracy in four posts. Sources are included in each post. In the first he described the life cycle of capitalism. Stage 1 is production and competition featuring small firms. There are inventors and hungry upstarts. Stage 2 is consolidation in which firms swallow competitors and acquire political power. Stage 3 is financialization in which speculation replaces production, which becomes optional. Finance is sacred. Factories collapse and no one notices. A bank sneezes and Congress has billions in bailout. Stage 4 is oligarchic management in which wealth concentrates and the state guarantees elite losses and protects elite profits. What Adam Smith praised was stage 1. He would be appalled at stages 3 and 4. It is a historical pattern that Venice, Netherlands, and Britain followed. Corporations are not capitalism. They were invented to encourage risk through limited liability. Ownership is diffuse among passive shareholders leaving decisions to executives, fund managers, and lobbyists. The value shifts from product to stock price. More money can be made trading assets than producing goods. Capitalism isn’t broken, but complete. There are ways out of this, but they will be painful. Capitalism is a brand. It describes itself as stage 1 so as to protect the wealth that accumulates in stage 4. In the second part Pruca describes a way out, which is democratic socialism. First we have to get an accurate view of socialism, beyond what Republicans say it is so they can discredit it. Democratic socialism is practiced in the Scandinavian countries. It keeps markets, private firms, and competition. It adds, universal services, strong worker power, government that regulates capitalism, public or cooperative ownership of essential sectors, and political equity so government can’t be bought. Democracy is the steering wheel to capitalism or can be seen as capitalism with guardrails. This creates broad ownership rather than concentrated. Businesses can fail without wrecking society. There are strong unions and collective bargaining. There is confusion because people often confuse “capitalism” with “big business” and “socialism” with “government doing everything.” Pruca wrote:

The defining difference between late-stage capitalism and democratic socialism is not markets. It is power. Who controls the surplus? Who sets the rules? Who captures the gains? Who bears the risks? Who writes the laws? Who funds the political class? Who can be allowed to fail without destroying society? Late-stage capitalism answers: capital. Democratic socialism answers: citizens. Everything else follows.

Oligarchy is not fate. In the third part Pruca sorts through definitions. Some people describe stage 1 as capitalism, others describe stage 4 and use the same term. The two groups talk past each other and the rich and policymakers exploit the confusion. We need to define capitalism not as a fixed idea, but a historical lifecycle system. That allows us to criticize capitalism without rejecting markets. If capitalism is a fixed idea than taxing capital is attacking capitalism. Regulations, union rights, and anti-corruption laws are then socialism. But if capitalism is a historical system that can degrade into oligarchy then taxing capital, regulation, and all the rest are maintenance, keeping the system for eating itself.

Capitalism does not just create wealth. It creates the conditions by which wealth governs unless democratically constrained. ... If capitalism is seen as historically self-transforming, reform becomes essential to prevent decay.

Democratic socialism does not mean the government owns everything and there is bureaucratic central planning. That’s state socialism, which is different. Democratic socialism prizes the democracy and provides the guardrails to capitalism. We’re used to thinking about state socialism because of WWII and Cold War language. We’re used to socialism being a synonym for authoritarianism. We’re taught capitalism is freedom, regulation as socialism, and equality as tyranny. In summary: Capitalism is a historical system and will evolve into oligarchy unless democracy intervenes. Policy depends on accurate definitions and descriptions and America’s political paralysis is a result of linguistic confusion (which is made worse by those in power). We can’t get a better system until we accurately describe this one. In the fourth part Pruca clarifies the problem isn’t corporations, it is the evil brother that is corporate law. Corporations derive their power not from capitalism but from law. Georgetown historian Carroll Quigley argued:

Without public control over corporate personhood, corporate lifespan, and corporate liability, no society can remain fair, democratic, or functional.

Early American corporations were not all powerful. They were:

granted charters sparingly, limited to specific purposes, barred from owning other corporations, subject to periodic re-approval, restricted in asset accumulation, constrained in stock issuance, and limited in voting rights so no shareholder could dominate.

These rules were pro-democracy. The idea of corporate personhood does not appear in a law or court opinion. It does appear as a headnote by a court reporter in 1886. States had a race to the bottom and Delaware won that race. I had read elsewhere that corporations went to various state legislatures, no doubt with money and promise of jobs, asking them to loosen state corporate laws. That’s why most corporations are registered in Delaware and the state as a separate corporate judicial system. This is another example of the actions of the social hierarchy. Get a bit wealthier than others and one has money to meddle in politics to make wealth accumulation a bit easier. A bit more wealth, a bit more meddling. The cycle can continue. Back to Pruca. That meddling meant corporations became immortal. No limit on purpose or consolidation, no obligation to the public. They switched from being economic tools to sovereign entities. But capitalism can work just fine with all the smaller corporations. With the immortal corporations...

attempts to raise wages are blunted by corporate pressure, attempts to regulate are captured by corporate lobbyists, attempts to tax are negotiated like hostage situations, and attempts to provide public goods are undermined by private interests.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren has introduced the Accountable Capitalism Act. Its components. Corporations with more than $1 billion in revenue need a federal charter. It must consider the interests of not just stakeholders, but workers, customers and communities. At least 40% of board seats are elected by employees. There are limits on political spending (I would prefer none). Executives can be held accountable. Other ideas out there: Corporate personhood leads to corruption. Anti-trust is a tool to preserve democracy. Democracy can’t exist with private empires. Liability rules should scale to corporate impact. One corporation can’t own another. Transparency in risk, taxes, and supply chains. Quigley said:

The danger isn’t “the market” — it’s the corporation that has stepped outside both market discipline and democratic authority.

Pruca says that corporations must be subject to national review because corporations operate nationally and internationally, states don’t have the capacity to regulate them, and a corporate failure can crash the economy. The question isn’t whether capitalism is good or bad. It is: Who rules whom? Pruca’s answer:

Any institution that enjoys the privileges of personhood, immortality, limited liability, and political power must be subject to the nation’s democratic authority, No exceptions. ... Wealth, power, and economic activity must operate within democratic boundaries, not outside them.

As I wrote all that I got to be thinking of the Robber Barons of the late 1800s. They sound like late-stage capitalism. I don’t remember, if I learned at all, how they were defeated.

Policy: drive liberals to anger, then mock them

My Sunday movie was Episode 1 of American Revolution by Ken Burns. I haven’t watched episodes 2-4 and probably won’t get to 5 and 6 unless I can find a way to stream them over the next several weeks. I’ll have to check whether PBS allows non-members to stream their shows. This episode covers 1754 to 1775. The story starts with the Seven Year War (French and Indian War) in 1754. It was actually a global war. These were George Washington’s first battles. He was part of the British military and those battles convinced him the British could be defeated. This was at a time the people still thought of themselves as British. The mainland (rather than the Caribbean) colonies were quite diverse. People came from various European countries in addition to England. There were also African slaves and indigenous people. How could such diversity be united into one country? The greater the percent of slaves in a colony, the more prosperous it was. Caribbean colonies were quite prosperous. New England colonies were not. England paid more attention to the Caribbean. Those who came to the American colonies were people who wanted their own plot of land. They did not want to work for the local aristocracy. There was a continuing demand for more land but the only available land was controlled by the natives. That meant violence. To reduce that violence Britain said no spreading beyond the Appalachian Mountains. Colonists said nope. Britain sent troops to enforce their edict. But the British government, having fought four wars (or maybe that was wars on four continents?), was deeply in debt. They decided the colonies should pay for the troops – the troops that prevented them from spreading west. Thus the Stamp Act. And that created the idea of no taxation without representation. Most of the episode is about the government in London enacting more ways to bring its colonies under control and the colonists rejecting them and becoming more united in their rejection. Then came Lexington and Concord, the first deaths, and the British retreat. Before then each colony had its own relationship with London, some rejecting the meddling and calling for defiance and others enjoying profitable relations they wanted to continue. But Lexington and Concord prompted a more unified view that the political links to England needed to be severed. I am impressed with the large range of artwork the series used to illustrate the scenes. Of course most of it I hadn’t seen before. I was amused at the painting of the young George Washington. I appreciate the show talked about the contradiction between colonists described themselves as slaves to England while having African slaves in their homes. I’ll have more to say about that when I finish the book I’m reading and about a third of the way through. When the nasty guy reclaimed the Oval Office Niece told me she wanted to get out of the country, though she doesn’t feel she is ready to support herself through such a drastic changes. Alix Breeden of Daily Kos reported:

A recent Gallup poll found that 40% of U.S. women aged 15 to 44 said that they would move to another country permanently if given the opportunity—a jump of 10% since 2014. This increase seems to be exclusive to the United States, with other countries reporting fairly consistent numbers between 20% and 30%.

The nasty guy in the Oval Office is not the only reason, though a big one. There is a general sense the US is becoming increasingly unfriendly to women, and has been since about 2016. In the last year both in Britain and Canada there has been an increase in the Americans applying for citizenship. Americans living outside considering renouncing citizenship has jumped from 30% to 49%. Reasons for the desire to leave are restrictions on abortion and reproductive rights, the cost of giving birth is going up (as health insurance is getting much more expensive), and masculinity is getting more toxic. Dan Gearino, in an article for Inside Climate News posted on Kos, reported there are some things people on the left and right agree on. One is a “skepticism of entrenched power and a desire to dismantle systems that they think have ceased to serve everyday people.” And that includes increasing distrust for data centers.

Much of the discussion is about data centers, which are often large developments used to support cloud computing or artificial intelligence. But the underlying issues are broader, touching on the power of tech companies. For people who live near proposed data centers, there is an additional sense of powerlessness, which Inside Climate News has documented across the country, including the backlash to a plan for a huge data center in Bessemer, Alabama. “It’s about big tech,” Olson said. “To steal Bernie’s words, [it’s about] these big tech oligarchs that are calling all the shots at every single level of government right now.”

Gearino included poll results showing that for most things more people (and in some areas many more people) believe AI makes things worse and not better. The problem could be lessened if those wanting to build data centers talk about local benefits. The locals already hear about the high use of water and the likelihood of electrical bills going up. Companies are not working to alleviate those concerns. As for the benefits, some experts ask are there any? As part of the series on Explaining the Right Oliver Willis of Kos discusses how Republicans became shameless hypocrites. An example of them being hypocrites goes back to the 1990s when Speaker Newt Gingrich was portraying Republicans as the party of “family values” during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal while Gingrich was cheating on his wife as she fought cancer and eventually married his mistress. Of course, there are a lot of more recent examples.

For years, conservatives have made the concept of “owning the libs” central to their political ideology. The idea is to engage in behavior and use rhetoric that supposedly makes liberals angry, driving them to exhibit this anger, which conservatives then mock. Even if their behavior doesn’t provoke a tantrum, conservatives have elevated this brand of mockery above nearly everything else, including policy and ideology. This has resulted in the right, including right-wing media like Fox News, becoming fixated on “culture war” issues.

Since Gingrich was “owning the libs” his own infidelity got a pass.

This creates a permission structure on the right where Republicans are allowed to be contradictory, as long as a liberal somewhere is purportedly mad about it. But this kind of posture has a limit.

The limit is that it works great with other Republicans or MAGAs. It doesn’t work for anyone else and voters who aren’t Republicans are quite willing to throw them out of office. Emily Singer of Kos lists reasons why Democrats won the shutdown. I’ll let you read her explanations. Democrats brought health care to the forefront. Polls showed voters blamed Republicans more than Democrats. The nasty guy’s approval fell dramatically, going from -12 to -16. The shutdown gave Democrats a ton of campaign material for next year’s midterms, such as the nasty guy’s Great Gatsby party, which widely polled as inappropriate spending. On Sunday’s All Things Considered on NPR host Sacha Pfeiffer and St. Louis Public Radio reporter Hiba Ahmad discussed the tornado that hit St. Louis last May and toured some of the damage that is still quite evident six months later. Then they turned it into a discussion of the nasty guy’s desire to turn FEMA over to the states. They talked to Mayor Cara Spencer, who summarized the reason to keep FEMA national:

My argument would be that, as a nation, we would be better off, more efficient and certainly more effective if we centralize and share the resources and expertise across the nation for very unusual events, rather than saddling every single municipal government to being able to respond to what may or may not happen in the lifetime of each of those cities.

The article mentions Enright Ave of St. Louis as one that was hit hard by the tornado. There were other places hit harder, but the article doesn’t explain their location. I went looking at Enright Ave. through Google Street View and found something fascinating. Start on the avenue just east of Union Blvd. Google Maps say they rolled down the street in May 2025. The houses look to be in great shape. Then take a step east and the images are of July 2025. A lot of homes are damaged – windows gone or boarded up, walls and roofs missing and some covered in blue tarps, stacks of salvaged bricks, and piles of trash. This allows a person to compare a few houses before and after and to see the destruction on down the street. I then wondered, did the Google Street View people do this intentionally? If so, thank you. Yeah, this is the view of the street in July, six to eight weeks after the tornado. The NPR article says the street isn’t much different six months later. And that’s because the nasty guy and his desire to oppress those not in his billionaire class.

No recordings, no paperwork, no oversight

Eli Hager, in an article for ProPublica posted on Daily Kos, reported the full story of what happened when the Department of Government Efficiency (remember DOGE?) came to the Social Security Administration. Much of that story comes from Leland Dudek, who was the SSA administrator for about four months last winter and spring. The story opens with Dudek posting a scroll 4 feet by 20 feet on the wall. In tiny print and diagrams it describes what SSA does. But that’s not yet entirely reflected in the agency’s computer systems. The SSA is 90 years old. It’s software dates back to the 1980s and has more than 60 million lines of code. Many things are still done on paper. It has been talking of upgrades for two decades without it happening. So when DOGE called for efficiency and the elimination of waste and promised IT whiz kids to make it happen Dudek thought great, bring it on. Except the other part DOGE called for was the elimination of fraud. And that was much louder than all other goals. Every little discrepancy these green kids found was taken as fraud and blown into a scandal – see the stories of 120 year old people turned into dead people still collecting SS.

They could have worked to modernize Social Security’s legacy software, the current and former staffers say. They could have tried to streamline the stupefying volume of documentation that many Social Security beneficiaries have to provide. They could have built search tools to help staff navigate the agency’s 60,000 pages of policies. (New hires often need at least three years to master the nuances of even one type of case.) They could have done something about wait times for disability claims and appeals, which often take over a year. They did none of these things.

Every time Dudek tried to work around his bosses, which were people at the White House, he would get a call reminding him what he was really supposed to be doing, which was not to make the SSA better. He realized the problem wasn’t the DOGE kids, it was the senior leaders. One example was the SSA Office of Transformation, which had been starting the work of modernizing the SSA systems. He was told the office was wasteful and to cut it. So he started acting the part that the White House wanted, while trying to push what would actually help the SSA. About all that did was make him unemployable after he was forced out. And the turmoil frightened many of the people who depend on their SS checks. It also made their experience working SSA agents on the phone and in person worse. The only good thing is that SS benefits are still being paid. So far. Maria Godoy of NPR discussed the release of Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy. It has 100 recommendations for improving children’s health. Some of the points are good, things like promoting exercise and fitness and teaching good nutrition. But there are also not good things, such as studying the root causes of autism (which aren’t the things he wants to prove) and producing a new vaccine framework (when there is nothing wrong with the old one). There are also loopholes, such as calling on the reduction of unsafe food additives while letting food companies determine the safety and while specifying no penalties for using additives known to be harmful. And there are contradictions, such as calling for fresh local produce in schools after the administration canceled the program that did just that. Leila Fadel of NPR continued the conversation with Barry Popkin, professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina. Popkin said yes, children’s health is bad. An example is the type of diabetes usually only seen in older adults is now seen in children and teens. But this list does nothing to fix that bad health. “It’s all promises but no teeth.” It’s all about “research, exploration, consideration, but nothing about any regulation or law to mandate change.” Nothing will happen, or at least nothing after Kennedy leaves office.

And you can see that, really, that the food and agriculture sectors that really profit highly from the ultra-processed food they're selling to our children and killing them at the same time, really have gotten to the government so that they had nothing in this document that will lead to any meaningful regulation, law or guideline that will improve America's health.

One thing that would help the health of children is money ffor school food programs that pay for eliminating ultra-processed foods and regulation to require it. But that won’t happen. Alix Breeden of Kos adds a bit more:

According to Marion Nestle, New York University professor emerita of nutrition, food studies, and public health, the report doesn’t have much substance. “The report seems to twist itself into knots to make it clear that it will not be infringing upon food companies,” Nestle said in an email to NBC News. “MAHA has so much bipartisan support. This was the time to regulate food marketing to kids — not ‘explore.’” She went on to say that the report is “short of specifics and weak on regulatory actions,” echoing a similar sentiment from professionals when the preliminary report leaked.

At the bottom of the article is a quote from Kennedy:

We had lots of guns when we were kids. Kids brought guns to school and were encouraged to do so. And nobody was walking into schools and shooting people. There are many things that could explain this. One is the dependence on psychiatric drugs.

I’m pretty sure my student handbook for high school said that a student caught with a gun at school would be expelled. I never saw a gun at school (or anywhere else, though I didn’t go into the town gun shop because my family didn’t hunt). I never heard of a bring your gun to school day. So I rate his first two sentences as false. That bit about nobody shooting people in schools is true. We didn’t practice lockdowns and didn’t need to. But at the time the rate of gun ownership was quite low. At the ending of this quote is Kennedy trying to link psychiatric drugs given to students with school gun deaths? The kids aren’t doing the killing. Fadel spoke to reporter Adrian Florido about the recent Supreme Court order that lifted the temporary order that banned ICE from doing aggressive immigration sweeps in Los Angeles. The order was brief, unsigned, and included no reasoning, meaning it was from the shadow docket. The order means ICE can resume targeting people based solely on skin color, accent, and occupation; what the ACLU called blatant racial profiling. Florido said:

In a concurrence, Justice Brett Kavanaugh cited an estimate that 10% of LA's population is undocumented and said race can be relevant when agents are determining whether they suspect someone is in the country illegally. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissent. And she wrote, quote, “we should not have to live in a country where the government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish and appears to work a low-wage job.”

A reminder that Sotomayor is Latina. There is an underlying court case. The lower court said these sweeps cannot happen while the case proceeds. The Supremes said the sweeps can. And the order will probably affect what ICE does in Chicago and other cities. Fadel and Steve Inskeep then spoke to Sarah Isgur, editor of SCOTUSblog, who recently interviewed Justice Amy Coney Barrett about the shadow docket. A Supreme Court case takes time to read through the briefings, hold oral arguments, and write the opinions. That takes several months to a year or two. The purpose of the emergency (shadow) docket is what should the law be between now and when the case is officially decided. Even so this can have permanent effects that can not reversed even if the eventual decision goes the other way. An example is a person deported now. Other examples are everything the nasty guy does through executive order, such as whether he can fire the head of the Federal Trade Commission. A problem is the orders are not explained and they usually (almost always?) favor the nasty guy. These orders leave lower courts caught between previous Supreme precedents and what these order say. This post includes a bit of that Barrett interview. She admits the emergency docket does not allow the justices to think about the issue, there is less information, and no time for reasoned opinions. Isgur says these nine people don’t really know how to handle the emergency docket and with the start of their term next month they’re going to be hit with a lot of cases coming from all those executive orders, cases like can the president invoke tariffs or fire a Federal Reserve governor. Another issue is what should be the status quo. The emergency docket is supposed to protect the status quo while the case is being decided. Is the status quo what was in effect before the president took office? Or, as the nasty guy’s team claims (and has Biden’s team claimed before them), since he is voted in by the people and is there only four years should his orders be status quo? Lisa Needham of Kos added her take on the Supreme Court orders.

The now familiar 6-3 lineup at the United States Supreme Court just threw out decades of settled law so that President Donald Trump’s roving bands of masked federal agents in Los Angeles can engage in a little light racial profiling, as a treat, and can continue scooping up people based on nothing more than looking Latino, speaking Spanish, and working at a low-wage job like a car wash. You know the drill. A lower-court judge wrote a detailed, thoughtful, lengthy opinion about how this practice was 100% racial profiling and ordered the government to stop doing it. The Trump administration ran to the Supreme Court to say that the world would crumble if they couldn’t racially profile brown people in Los Angeles right away, and the Supreme Court obliged by staying the lower court’s order. That stay prevents the lower court’s order from going into effect, so federal agents can continue this straight-up racist, unconstitutional behavior. ... Does arresting or detaining people for no reason at all violate the Fourth Amendment’s requirement that probable cause is required to search or seize someone? It sure does! If a police officer wants to stop someone on the street and search them, they have to have a level of reasonable suspicion about that particular person, such as believing they are armed and about to commit a crime. Law enforcement officers have to be able to justify stopping specific people based on specific concerns rather than being able to stop whole groups of people based on shared characteristics. ... Justice Sonia Sotomayor pulled no punches, even refusing to engage in the faux-civility of the tradition of saying “I respectfully dissent.” Nope, here it is just “I dissent.” While that may seem like a nerdy, legalistic, tiny thing to focus on, in the context of how the justices communicate with one another through their opinions, it’s Sotomayor saying the actions and reasoning—or lack thereof—of her colleagues are not worthy of respect.

Needham also reported some of the ICE ways of doing business have changed for the worse. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem says ICE agents are facing assaults (what the rest of us would consider freedom of speech). Filming of ICE agents isn’t allowed. No Supreme Court ruling has said one way or the other, though numerous state courts have rules that is a protected right. ICE agents used to be required to document the specific person they want to arrest, giving lots of details, and getting supervisor approval. Now they just arrest who they please. DHS is blocking members of Congress from doing their ICE facility oversight duties without prior approval, while the law says approval can’t be required. And DHS has shut down the oversight office, freezing 500 civil rights cases.

No recordings, no paperwork, no oversight. DHS is systematically eliminating every way we have to keep tabs on law enforcement to ensure that Trump’s immigration crackdown, no matter how illegal or violent, can’t be stopped.

In Tuesday’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted Politico:

The justices, who apparently divided 6-3 along ideological lines, put on hold a federal district judge’s order that reined in what critics called “roving” raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That judge had found the tactics were likely unconstitutional because agents were detaining people without probable cause at car washes, bus stops and Home Depot parking lots based on stereotypes. The high court’s majority offered no explanation for its decision to grant the Trump administration’s emergency appeal to block the district judge’s order. However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote separately in support of the decision, saying it was reasonable to briefly question people who meet multiple “common sense” criteria for possible illegal presence — including employment in day labor or construction, and limited English proficiency.

That little bit about “common sense” is partly why Sotomayor lost respect for the decision. In the comments Matt Davies posted a cartoon titled “Supreme Court guide to use of race in admission:” Over the entrance to a university is “Not OK.” Over the doors of an ICE detention van is “OK.” David Wolfe tweeted, “Children are born perfect without the need for toxic injections. Once vaccinated, the brain and body are harmed forever.” Dr. Neil Stone, infectious diseases doctor, responded, “Before vaccines, 1 in 5 kids never made it to their first birthday.” I add: What’s the evidence that the brain and body of an infant are harmed? Every vaccine must document they aren’t harmful to the vast number of people who take them. Acyn tweeted a quote from the vice nasty, “The bad news is...one of the pollsters once told me, anger usually wins midterm elections and because we done so much of what we said we are going to do, people are angry.” Gavin Newsom responded: “JD Vance admits he policies are wildly unpopular on national television.” In the comments of Wednesday’s roundup is a meme by Dan Pfeiffer,

There are only two possibilities – John Roberts is so afraid of a constitutional crisis that he will give Trump everything he wants, or Roberts is 100% in on the MAGA project to destroy our democracy.

Or both? Way down in the comments is a cartoon by the Naked Pastor. Under a banner saying these are the “Lost sayings of Jesus” Jesus is talking to a group of women. “Beware when men write something and claim it is inspired by God, for then you can’t dispute it.”

The Constitution was written to frustrate ambition

Jasciu of the Daily Kos community started a post with:

For nearly two and a half centuries, the American experiment has endured by virtue of its capacity to restrain power. The Constitution was less a blueprint for efficiency than for frustration: ambition checking ambition, institutions restraining one another, power fractured and parceled out to preserve liberty. Yet over the last century, one of the most profound threats to this equilibrium has crept in largely unchallenged. Two entities—the political party and the modern corporation—have come to wield a quiet dominance over the electoral system, the judiciary, and the regulatory state, placing organized selfish power at the very heart of our republic.

They propose an amendment to the US Constitution to remedy the problem. I won’t quote the whole text, but here are the main points. No political party shall administer elections. Elections shall be conducted by nonpartisan bodies. No political party shall control or influence the nomination of judges. [Michigan Supreme Court justices are nominated by the parties, then run as “nonpartisan.”] Corporations are not persons with political rights. They shall not finance elections. Corporations shall not have control over regulatory agencies. The author does recognize the difficulty, close to impossibility, of getting this amendment approved in the current political climate. Commenters added other needed amendments or sections of broader amendments. From iyouwemeus: A corporation shall not be equated with a natural person or citizen. Money shall not be considered speech. Money to influence any part of government shall be transparent and controlled by law. A corporation owning more than one type of media outlet shall provide balanced and truthful news and free political advertising. Bots generated by AI shall not be equated to a natural person and shall be identified. From btfjd: Abolish the filibuster. Increase the size of the Supreme Court. From dfhamel: The filibuster must be active – a senator actually talking on the Senate floor. Rules for the House that don’t change when the party in power changes. Supreme Court Justices, Department of Justice leadership, and FBI leadership must be independent from the president. Instead of appointed by the president they should voted on by the people after a vigorous vetting system. I would add more: Congressional and state legislature districts shall be drawn by citizen redistricting commissions representing the political parties and citizen diversity. The right to vote shall not be denied. Ryan Krugman, in an article for Inside Climate News posted on Kos, wrote that there is a Make Billionaires Pay march planned for September 20 in New York City, which is during the United Nations General Assembly when many world leaders will be in town. They will be protesting more than inequality; they also have demands for climate and social justice. Billionaires are targeted because they are pushing and profiting off the climate crisis. They even profit off the people displaced by the climate crisis by those people being caught in low-wage work. They also profit by being in the detention business. The climate movement is getting good at building solidarity with other social movements. That includes being involved in the Black Lives Matter protests. In Tuesday’s pundit roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quoted Mike Lofgren of Salon. Here’s a bit of the quote:

If you pay attention to the details, America is rapidly transforming from a service state — one that provides education, health care, infrastructure and parks to its citizens — into a carceral state that punishes and imprisons them.

Kev added:

I’ll say it again: Trump imagined designing a wall to keep people output wall can function to keep people in as well. It’s the reason why the metaphor always seemed ominous to me.

Here’s also a portion of the quote by Lorenzo Tondo of The Guardian:

Out of the International Association of Genocide Scholars’s (IAGS) 500 members, 28% took part in the vote. Of those who voted, 86% supported the resolution. The resolution states that “Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide in article II of the United Nations convention for the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (1948).” ... The resolution said the IAGS recognised that “since the horrific Hamas-led attack of 7 October 2023, which itself constitutes international crimes”, the government of Israel had engaged in systematic and widespread crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, including indiscriminate and deliberate attacks against the civilians and civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, homes and commercial buildings, of Gaza.

From Paul Sonne of the New York Times:

Now, Mr. Putin’s fortunes have changed — and so has the world. Nowhere was that more apparent in recent days than in Tianjin, China, where leaders from member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian security grouping, met on Monday alongside heads of state from other countries. Mr. Putin used his stage to publicly blame the West for the war in Ukraine. He gleefully held hands with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India and erupted in laughs as the pair joined in a huddle with the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping. Leaders from Iran, Nepal, Tajikistan, Turkey and Vietnam glad-handed Mr. Putin in private meetings that ran past midnight.[...] The elephant in the room was President Trump, who has helped end Mr. Putin’s isolation, both by welcoming him to U.S. soil for the first time in a decade and by clashing with leaders from Brazil, India and South Africa, pushing them closer to Mr. Putin. Mr. Trump’s relationship with Mr. Modi has unraveled as New Delhi has resisted pressure from Washington to credit the U.S. leader with ending the military conflict between India and Pakistan. Mr. Trump has piled tariffs on India in response, singling out New Delhi for buying Russian oil.

In the comments is a cartoon by Bill Bramhall. It shows RFK Jr. pushing a woman off the roof of a building renamed “Department of Health and Human Sacrifices.” Chacal suggests perhaps that could be shortened to “Department of Health and Harm.” A meme posted by exlrrp and from funny snarky joke shows a perky woman holding a teacup saying in response to the nasty guy’s lack of public appearances and speculation of his health:

I can’t believe it’s already is-he-dead-yet season. I still have my holy-s***-he’s gonna-start-WWIII decorations up.

In today’s roundup Greg Dworkin quoted Jeff Tiedrich’s personal blog.

Let me state right up top that I didn’t believe any of this past weekend’s rumors that Dear Leader had shuffled off this mortal coil. But clearly, something is very wrong with Donny, and it’s being covered up — and because it’s this White House, staffed by the most incompetent clownf***ers ever to have f***ed clowns, it’s being covered up in the most inept manner possible.

On the same topic, in the comments exlrrp posted a meme with the words, “Have we been seeing Trump lately, or is it his doppleganger?” Beside a photo of the nasty guy is a woman with a very similar face and hair style.

Messing with the numbers doesn't shield you from reality

My Sunday movie was Universal Language. It is one of the most eccentric movies I’ve seen. Matthew Rankin was one of the writers. He also directed and plays a major character named Matthew Rankin. I have no idea how much is autobiographical. A tagline says it happens somewhere between Tehran and Winnipeg. Most of the story takes place in Winnipeg, though the major language isn’t English, but Persian. All the signs are in Persian and nearly all the characters – Matthew is one of the few exceptions – look to be of Persian descent and speak Persian or French. How this came to be is not explained. The story takes place during a Winnipeg winter. Matthew leaves his government job in Montreal (or maybe Quebec) and takes the bus to Winnipeg, where he grew up. He is trying to find his mother. Two young girls find paper money frozen in ice and try to get a way to get it out before an adult can do so. Massoud leads walking tours of Winnipeg for tourists. Many major sites on his tour now have highways next to them. Another site features a briefcase on a bench someone left behind fifty years ago. The tourists complain of the cold. There is a turkey shop owner promoting his frozen turkeys and he paid for a prized turkey to be a passenger on Matthew’s bus. A scene takes place in a Kleenex repository. Canada submitted this for “Best International Feature Film” for the 2025 Academy Awards. It wasn’t chosen as a finalist. It did win an award at the Cannes Film Festival and won and was nominated in many other film festivals. I heard about it when it was shown at the Detroit Film Theater perhaps a year ago, but didn’t see it then. This is definitely an unusual movie, something to watch when one is tired of movies seeming all the same. And I enjoyed it. Sharon Lerner, in an article for ProPublica posted on Daily Kos, discussed Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert Kennedy Jr and his effort to find the cause of autism. He said he would have an answer by September. Erin McCanlies, an epidemiologist at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a part of HHS, was stunned by Kennedy’s announcement. She was about to release her fourth paper on exactly that. I think she was able to finish it before she was fired, though many offices around hers were already empty. So why was her job and funding cut when Kennedy said he was looking for an answer that she and the rest of his department were well on the way to finding? Kennedy said the answer was vaccines and environmental toxins. Based on what McCanlies found he was half right. To put this in proper scientific terms, McCanlies and others found autism risk factors. The more factors the higher the chances of a child being on the autism spectrum. That doesn’t mean a particular child will be autistic. Some of the factors are genetic, others are things like parental age and whether the mother had a fever during pregnancy. Still others are whether the mother had been exposed to chemicals such as the solvents varnish, xylene, methylene chloride, and others. More culprits are certain pesticides, certain metals, and air pollution. Folic acid, one of the B vitamins, can decrease the chances of autism. One can see reasons why Kennedy doesn’t like the results McCanlies and others are publishing. His favorite culprit of vaccines has been proven not to be a cause of autism. The Environmental Protection Agency, under Administrator Lee Zeldin is blocking air pollution rules and reversing bans on several chemicals that have been shown to be a risk. Kennedy likes to say we don’t know the causes of autism and because the condition can be so devastating we need to find those causes quickly. I’ve heard media say over the last several years that the higher rates of autism are because of more frequent testing, implying there isn’t a cause. But we do know the causes. Alas, the corporations that back the nasty guy would rather protect their profits through the use of harmful chemicals and releasing pollutants into the air. So the nasty guy hires people willing to put corporate profits over the health of mothers and children. Mary Childs of NPR discussed the consequences of a government not publishing honest and trustworthy financial statistics. The story was aired because the nasty guy recently fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because he didn’t like the reported jobs numbers. Childs talked to George Papaconstantinou, who became the finance minister of Greece in 2009, just after the financial mess that caused the Great Recession. At the start of his term a person went to him and said the financial situation is quite bad, much worse than what is officially said. His team needed more than a year to figure out the real numbers. According to European Union rules, member countries were to keep their deficits under 3%. The real deficit number, once determined, was 15%. That created a huge loss of trust. To recover Greece had to borrow a lot of money at much higher interest rates and cut its spending to austerity levels. “Messing with the numbers doesn't shield you from reality.” Recovery took nearly ten years. I usually use dashes or asterisks to soften expletives. I grew up at a time and in a family where such words were not used. There have been times where I thought including such words were critical to the tone or forcefulness of a quote, but years have passed since I’ve let one through. But I can’t hide the expletives in this next quote because they’re the point. So if such words offend you just skip the first quote. In a pundit roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quotes Glenn Kessler, formerly of the Washington Post and now writing his own Substack.

Twenty years ago this month, the late Princeton philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt published his seminal work On Bullshit, which argued that bullshit was worse than lying. His point was that a liar knows the truth and deliberately tries to hide or distort it, while a bullshitter doesn’t care about the truth at all — they care only about the impression they make. When Donald Trump emerged on the political stage in 2015, Frankfurt wrote in Time magazine that Trump was the epitome of the bullshit artist he had identified a decade earlier. [...] But, following Frankfurt’s theory, focusing only on Trump’s lies obscures a deeper danger to American society. As a bullshitter, Trump doesn’t care whether what he says reflects reality. He says whatever serves his momentary purpose, often contradicting himself without hesitation or shame. This indifference to truth makes Trump’s bullshit more insidious than lies.

Kev followed that quote with one from Frankfurt. I’ll let you read it. Kev also quoted Jason Linkins of The New Republic:

But Trump is getting plumped by some in the media as well: The Atlantic’s Michael Powell idly handwaves the fact that D.C. brought the violent crime rate to a 30-year low in 2024 to admonish Democrats for “downplaying crime.” (In this case, “downplaying crime” means “marshaling statistics demonstrating that the crime rate is trending in the right direction.”) Charles Fain Lehman, also in The Atlantic, goes to similar lengths to dismiss the actual facts to assert that “the reality is more complicated” and that some “deliberate intervention”—atop the one that brought the crime rate to a 30-year-low, presumably—is warranted. These authors and others are making a profound error from the jump in assuming that Trump sincerely desires to lower the crime rate in D.C. Trump is actually a “blank, sucking nullity” who wants to see himself on television and has decided that his second term in office will be about self-enrichment and revenge. He is inventing a crisis of crime as a pretext for further consolidating his power; this is authoritarianism 101. Personally, I think downplaying crime in the nation’s capital is not nearly as irresponsible as downplaying Trump’s authoritarianism. But if we must pretend that Trump’s efforts are sincere, then I’d challenge the proponents of his militarized deployments to approach their work with more rigor, and less vibes. Trump has proposed a thesis: Crime in D.C. will go down if masked paramilitaries flood the city and amble about the streets. The task, then, is to see if his theory stands up to the test—to take this seriously.

A liar, ineffective, or compromised

I leave for a short trip tomorrow afternoon. I probably won’t post again until Sunday or Monday. Then next Wednesday I leave again for a week. Abe Streep, in an article for ProPublica posted on Daily Kos, discussed the sale of federal lands in the West. A requirement to sell land, which I had mentioned, was thankfully pulled from the Big Brutal Bill. While land conservation groups, along with hunters and hikers, are cheering they must still be wary. Sen. Mike Lee of Utah has been pushing for a federal land sale since he came to the Senate in 2010. The basic reason is the government has no need to hold on to it (conservation groups, hunters, hikers, and lots of other people who use federal land would disagree). Congress passed the Federal Land Policy and Management Act in 1976 and in 1980 Reagan campaigned on returning federal land to the states. Many Western states have a high percentage of land owned by the government. I think I remember seeing that the feds own 87% of Nevada. Streep provides a history of the efforts to sell or protect federal land. The desire to sell federal land got a boost recently from “coastal elites” who recognized building on former federal land could help ease the housing crisis. Utah is short 61K housing units and Nevada is short 118K units. Why not sell federal land near cities to build affordable housing? That isn’t so easy. Sell the land for what developers are willing to pay for it – perhaps $200K an acre – and costs are already too high for affordable housing. The Bureau of Land Management can sell it for the low price of $100 an acre (and they can sell it for whatever they want to promote the common good). But there are few takers. One problem is the law gets in the way, partly because its terms are not well defined, partly because the processes don’t favor the goals, and partly because developers make a whole lot more money from expensive houses than affordable units. Some deals have been made but are proceeding slowly. In today’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin has a lot of quotes of people discussing the Epstein case. I’ll mention only one of them. Sahil Kapur quoted an article in the New York Times that quoted Natalie Winters, co-host of Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast:

She summed up the movement’s sense of betrayal this way: “I just think it’s frankly very grifty to have spent your entire career promoting, even if it weren’t the Epstein thing directly, but the idea that there is this deep state, the idea that there’s this unelected class of, you know, banker, corporation, countries, intel agencies, blah, blah, blah. And then finally, you have the power to expose it, and either you’re not because there’s nothing there, it which case it makes you a liar – and I don’t believe that – or you’re ineffective, or you’re compromised.” This twisted tale has raised fundamental questions about the limits of Mr. Trump’s abilities to control the conspiratorial forces he has plied in his pursuit of the presidency.

Down in the comments exlrrp posted a meme:

So Ghislaine Maxwell is in prison for a “made-up hoax by Obama, Comey, and Biden”? MAGAs, are you that stupid to believe your cult leader?

Maxwell was Epstein’s assistant and it seems the woman took the fall for much of what Epstein did – then again Epstein was in prison for those crimes and there was a lot of discussion on whether he committed suicide or was murdered so the details of his career would not be revealed in court. TheKingOfPies posted a cartoon showing an elephant and donkey:

Elephant: Trump’s fighting in other countries’ wars!?! Trump’s tariffs really are taxes Americans pay!?! Trump won’t release Epstein’s list of clients!?! Donkey: Are you just realizing Trump’s lies or are you admitting Trump lies?

When the nasty guy moved back into the White House Rosie O’Donnell moved to Ireland. Perhaps to distract from the Epstein scandal he called her a “Threat to Humanity” and said he would try to revoke her citizenship. GoodNewsRoundup of the Kos community posted the full text of O’Donnell’s rebuttal. Here’s a bit of it:

you call me a threat to humanity— but I’m everything you fear: a loud woman a queer woman a mother who tells the truth an american who got out of the country b4 you set it ablaze you build walls— I build a life for my autistic kid in a country where decency still exists you crave loyalty— I teach my children to question power

A week ago Emily Singer of Kos reported Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott called a special session of the state legislature to demand they make the state Congressional House districts even more gerrymandered in hopes of blunting the expected loss of seats to Democrats next year. Some Republicans in that Congressional delegation are concerned that in an attempt to make more Republican majority districts their margin in each district will be smaller, giving Democrats a better chance to win. Democrats say this is a craven political move to distract from the central Texas floods. Also a week ago Lisa Needham of Kos reported the nasty guy and his cabinet redefined a “federal public benefit” to prevent undocumented immigrants from accessing a wide range of resources. Previously, if a program such as Head Start or a food bank was administered at the community level the recipient didn’t get it directly from the federal government. That meant undocumented immigrants could apply. The new definition says that if the program is funded with federal money undocumented immigrants were banned from receiving the benefit. It means all these programs have to ask for documentation. It also means immigrants can’t use federally funded education and food programs mentioned plus are banned from many health and mental health clinics. Why make this change?

The administration has not been shy about using the tools of violence to push immigrants out of public life. But deploying soft power like this, by withholding resources, is just as dangerous—so of course they’re doing it.

They’re doing it because they can, because they want to make life for immigrants as difficult as possible, because they relish in being cruel. Biden and his Federal Trade Commission created the click-to-cancel rule. Canceling a subscription online must be as easy as signing up. A company can’t make signing up easy, done with a single click, yet extremely difficult to cancel. Needham reported of course, companies hate it, so they ran to a favorable court, this time the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. This was a safe court because it has only one judge appointed by a Democrat.

One of the bases for the ruling was that the FTC failed to do a preliminary regulatory analysis, required when a rule’s impact on the economy would exceed $100 million. Of course, the only way companies can complain that making it easier to cancel things would cost at least nine figures is to acknowledge that trapping people into paying for services they can’t cancel is a significant moneymaker.

The 8th Circuit gave its decision five days before the click-to-cancel rule was to go into effect.