In the name of tolerance we claim the right not to tolerate the intolerant

My Christmas concerts went well. Brother came and we had a good visit. And now back to blogging. I downloaded Michigan’s COVID data, updated Tuesday, December 6. I hope last week’s jump in the weekly peak of new cases per day was an anomaly. The peaks in the last few weeks are 1440, 1194, 1784, and 1312. So maybe it is. That high peak happened just after Thanksgiving, when people gathered together. The deaths per day over the last few weeks are in the 14-27 range, a bit higher than it was between May and September. The nasty guy is still there and is making it clear what his intentions are, not that we had any doubt. Mark Sumner of Daily Kos reported that the nasty guy used his social media platform to complain again that the 2020 election was stolen. As part of that he wrote “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the constitution.” Yes, he is calling for ripping up the constitution and installing himself as dictator. Sumner also reported the general reaction is: Who cares what he says? Sumner wrote:

Trump so regularly says something absolutely vile which should be offensive to the sensibilities of anyone who cares about facts, laws, history, or democracy has left all his statements in a kind of odd limbo. On the one hand, a former leader of the nation calling for the overthrow of the current government and installation of himself as the head, while explicitly calling for the Constitution to be pitched, seems like textbook sedition. On the other hand, Trump is just such a repetitive and consistent asshole, that raising the stakes to tossing the Constitution on the bonfire of his vanity, seems like just another Saturday. ... However, there’s a huge danger in dismissing any of this as “oh, that’s just Trump. Ignore him.” Because no one has done more to normalize racism, misogyny, xenophobia, anti-science, anti-journalism, anti-facts language than Trump. Every time he speaks like this and it doesn’t generate a powerful backlash, Trump has succeeded in moving the line for “political speech” a little further toward having “Kill them all, let God sort them out” as the platform of the Republican Party.

Greg Dworkin of Kos tweeted:

People who grew up in Germany are much more attuned to the vibes of Trump's outrageous call for suspending parts of the Constitution.

Dworkin quoted a tweet from Ondine, who is German:

I feel like I’m in an alternate reality trying to shake people awake going THIS IS A BFD WE’VE SEEN THIS BEFORE THE TIME TO CRUSH IT IS NOW LATER IS TOO LATE and people going awww lil girl it won’t happen here because Reasons. Sigh.

Dworkin concluded:

on the one hand I don't think Trump is the political force he used to be on the other, any power he regains will be without restraint

Laura Clawson of Kos reported on the wimpy response by prominent Republicans and by the press. An example is Rep. David Joyce, who said he didn’t think the nasty guy would be able to get there, so it somehow doesn’t matter that if he does get there Joyce will support him. But context! – as if those words could be taken any other way. Mike Luckovich tweeted a cartoon of the nasty guy writing on the Constitution, including crossing out the words “We the People.” An elephant behind him says, “When you’re finished, I’ll hold your sharpie.” Steve Benson, of the Arizona Mirror tweeted a cartoon of the nasty guy with a gun and the Constitution full of bullet holes. Sumner reported that lawyers of the nasty guy searched two more of his properties and declared they found no more classified document. Which should mean FBI agents should immediately go search those properties. By the time it took Sumner to write and post his article his source, the Washington Post, updated their article to say at least two more classified documents were found in a storage unit outside West Palm Springs. There are a lot more places that need to be searched. And by the FBI. Joan McCarter of Kos reported that on Monday the Supreme Court heard another case about LGBTQ bigotry. This one is this court’s version of the Colorado cake shop case of four years ago. It is one brought by a woman who is thinking about starting a website but hasn’t yet because she’d have to accommodate same-sex couples and doesn’t want to do that. It isn’t a case of a company that refused a business request by a same-sex couple. It’s a case brought by a business that doesn’t exist yet. Which means they aren’t a defendant yet, there is no evidence yet, no one has been harmed yet, and the Supremes should not have taken the case. But they did. This case, like the cake shop case, is brought by the Alliance Defending Freedom. To be clear, they’re all about the freedom to discriminate and not freedom from discrimination. McCarter reviewed some of the oral arguments. I’ll let you read it on your own. Though I will note, as reported by Rebekah Sager of Kos, that Justice Alito contributed a racist joke. Clawson reported that as one group of bigots were before the Supremes asking to be allowed to unleash their bigotry, another group of bigots were loudly complaining their bigotry was met with firm resistance. The Family Foundation of Virginia made a reservation for an event at Metzger’s Bar and Butchery in Richmond. The waitstaff at the restaurant figured out who these people are and told their management they refused to serve the bigots. So management canceled the reservation. Sheesh! Like they tell us about wedding cakes, wouldn’t they rather go to a restaurant that wants their business? Clawson wrote a summary of FFV’s position:

We should be able to demand service from waiters and bartenders whose basic humanity and rights we reject, even as Team Christian is off at the Supreme Court arguing for the constitutional right to discriminate against people based on who they are.

Clawson acquainted me with Popper’s Paradox: a tolerant society is maintained by refusing to privilege intolerance. The Wikipedia entry for the Paradox of Tolerance says in part:

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. ... We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

SemDem of the Kos community wrote about the various ways the states are undermining what this illegitimate Supreme Court is doing. The Supremes overturned Maine’s prohibition against giving tuition vouchers to religious schools. The Maine legislature responded by prohibiting vouchers to schools that discriminate. The Supremes approved the Texas law that allows anyone to sue a person involved in an abortion and, if successful, get $10,000. California responded with a law that says anyone can sue a gun dealer who sells to anyone under 21 years old and get $10,000. The law will, of course, be challenged. Gov. Gavin Newsom wants to hear how the Supremes will justify one and not the other. The Supremes overturned a New York law requiring extensive background checks and training before being issued a concealed carry gun permit. The ruling, written by Clarence Thomas, essentially says states cannot protect citizens from gun violence. There is an exception that guns can be banned in “historically sensitive places.” So New York greatly expanded its list of historically sensitive places. Florida passed a law to restore voting rights to felons who completed their sentences. Gov. DeathSantis and the Republican legislature created an opaque system that demanded payment of costs before restoring voting rights. A lower court said that’s an unconstitutional pay-to-vote system. The Supremes sided with DeathSantis. So four counties created “rocket dockets” to waive fines and fees en masse. The Supremes said abortion rights are up to the states. Several states responded by affirming that right and a few of them are working out methods of meeting abortion care needs of pregnant people in red states. The Supremes have heard a case pushing the idea that legislatures can make rules for federal elections without regard to their own state’s citizens, laws, courts, or constitution. A decision is expected by the end of June. If, as many fear, the Court buys into this far right idea, SemDem proposes a way to fight back. States in Republican control are already gerrymandered to the max. But the number of states firmly under Dem control has increased. These states try to play fair. But they could put the House firmly in Dem control by just as vigorously gerrymandering for a blue advantage. Speaking of DeathSantis, Sager reported he suspended a Democratic state attorney for being a “woke idealogue.” That attorney sued to get his job back. Ryan Newman, general counsel for DeathSantis, was asked to define “woke.” After some prodding he said, “it would be the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.” So DeathSantis is suspending people for acknowledging and wanting to address the systemic injustices in Florida. DeathSantis is also doing as much political work as he can to increase and perpetuate the systemic injustices in Florida. An example of that work was reported by Walter Einenkel of Kos. The Florida State Board of Education rescinded its protections for trans students. That political mood allowed a couple of newly elected MAGA types, plus an existing member, to take over the Brevard County School Board. They fired the current superintendent and pushed through anti-trans rules. Then, wrote Einenkel,

Just a few days later, the new School Board Chairman, Matt Susin, stood alongside Sheriff Wayne Ivey, State Attorney Phil Archer, and a union rep for school staff, Dolores Varney, in front of the Brevard County Jail in Sharpes to tell everyone, on camera, that they would be imposing the “most prolific school discipline policy this district has ever had.” In front of a jail. The statements made were vague and threatening and really offered up zero concrete ideas on how anything they were going to do would be beneficial to education in Florida’s Brevard County. Sheriff Ivey, probably the most excited person on Earth about this announcement, couldn’t control himself, saying that the big problem in schools today is that kids aren’t as terrified for their well-being like Sheriff Ivey would like them to be.

Of course, no media was invited to that display. So no one was there to ask the important question why a statement about education was being made by law enforcement in front of a jail.