A blue tsunami of giving

A few tidbits of news of yesterday’s Senate hearing of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. This is from yesterday because I haven’t read today’s news yet. Kerry Eleveld of Daily Kos reported that Sen. Cory Booker asked Barrett “Do you believe that every president should make a commitment unequivocally and resolutely to the peaceful transfer of power?” The only answer should be a resounding yes. After a non answer Booker tried again. She talked about disappointed voters having to accept new leaders. My translation: The president doesn’t need to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, but the people do. Laura Clawson of Kos reported Senator Patrick Leahy asked her whether a president could pardon himself. Barrett muffed that one too. Walter Einenkel of Kos reported that many GOP senators have been praising Barrett on being the mother of seven children. Einenkel wonders is that all they have to go on? Then Senator Amy Klobuchar had a turn. She knew Barrett was going to dodge and weave, so she didn’t ask questions. Instead she listed Barrett’s positions from earlier writings and interviews on such things as the Affordable Care Act, the “barbaric legacy” of Roe v. Wade, gun safety, and marriage equality. Einenkel wrote:

This nomination is going through, barring some kind of medical emergencies across the board. The Republican Party is clear in its determination to create a fascistic, paternalistic, white supremacist oligarchy even if the majority of Americans do not want it.

Sigh, it’s wrong to cheer on the virus, though a pandemic is probably the only thing that can stop her confirmation vote. Though several GOP senators seem to be working hard to make that happen. Lyz Lenz tweeted:

Every man praising Amy Coney Barrett's motherhood supports a president who ripped children away from their mothers at the border.

Joan McCarter of Kos discussed the refusal of Moscow Mitch to allow a vote on another virus relief package. A GOP strategist now confirms what many have speculated. The reason is to make it more difficult for President Biden to govern – the economy will be worse off and in desperate need of assistance while the GOP can shift to their well used argument that the deficit and debt are too high and the government can’t afford it. The argument they didn’t use when they gave rich people a tax cut. Here’s a cartoon appropriate for the season. Kos of Kos wrote that back in 2006 he saw ActBlue make a difference in a campaign. ActBlue is a hub to allow small donors to give to Democratic campaigns. It was a Democratic answer to the GOP parade of billionaire donors. This year it is a convenient way for small donors to express their disgust with the nasty guy and fury at Moscow Mitch for rushing Barrett's confirmation while they grieve Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. It has become a blue tsunami of giving. Sheldon and Miriam Adelson gave $50 million to a PAC aligned with the Senate GOP. The top nine Democrats in the Senate received $50 million from ActBlue in August. I used ActBlue to give to several candidates, such as Democrats likely to unseat GOP senators, though a few others. That was a lot easier than trying to find the candidate’s postal address and sending a check. I found that ActBlue forwarded the donation and included my email address. One campaign replied quickly saying it was critical I send a donation, naming the amount I had just sent. Yeah, they were asking for another donation. Most of these campaigns ask for a donation every day, some a couple times a day, and one set a record for five in a day. I tried to unsubscribe from one of them but they kept sending emails anyway. So they all get routed to my junk email folder, which I now clear out at least once a day. One time I saw an endorsement saying there were 47 candidates running for various state legislatures. I narrowed my choice to three because I didn’t want 47 campaigns sending daily emails. Yes, ActBlue is great! I’m glad to see there is a way for the little people to easily donate. But it also has a down side. My spam filter will be glad when the election is over. Greg Dworkin, in his pundit roundup for Kos quoted Ed Yong of The Atlantic about the consequences of the nasty guy bragging about how he’s beaten the coronavirus, which (he claims) shows how strong he is.

Equating disease with warfare, and recovery with strength, means that death and disability are linked to failure and weakness. That “does such a disservice to all of the families who have lost loved ones, or who are facing long-term consequences,” says Megan Ranney, an emergency physician at Brown University. Like so much else about the pandemic, the strength-centered rhetoric confuses more than it clarifies, and reveals more about America’s values than the disease currently plaguing it.