We learned it’s high time to get off fossil fuels

In 2024 the nasty guy made an explicit deal when he asked oil executives for a billion dollars and promised to gut climate rules. He kept that promise by killing wind, solar, and EV incentives. Then he invaded Iran and they’re enjoying big profits from the high prices. Thom Hartmann of the Daily Kos community wrote that a few oil tankers are getting through the Strait of Hormuz and the price came down a bit.

Meanwhile, though, the big lesson the world seems to have learned because of Trump’s fiasco — other than that our military is under the control of an irresponsible alcoholic and a narcissist and unreliable wannabe king — is that it’s high time to get off fossil fuels. Starting a stupid and criminal war is probably the dumbest way to wake the world up to the need to kick their/our collective addiction, but here we are: the war has done more to encourage conservation and the transition to renewables than any other single effort by anybody anywhere in recent memory.

The International Energy Agency reported global oil demand has fallen 2.5%, the equivalent of 42 million gas-burning cars. Hartmann described the German “100,000 Rooftops” program approved about 2000. Banks and power companies worked together to get solar panels on to 100,000 rooftops. The program was basically free to residents. The power companies were in on it because they could avoid building new power plants and even decommission old ones. Solar now supplies about 14% of Germany’s power, and that’s for the cloudiest country in Europe. EVs sell well elsewhere in the world, nearly 100% of sales in Norway, 30% across the EU, and 50% in China. In the US EVs sell 5.8%. In America the price of oil does not include externalities, the other things, “the cancers and the asthma, the wildfires and the floods, or the wars we fight to keep tankers moving through places like the Strait of Hormuz” not included in what we pay for oil. We pay externalities for tobacco, for the cost to health and society. Europe has taxed fuel that way for decades with Germans paying about $3 a gallon in taxes. The federal gas tax has been at $0.184 since 1993. Those European fuel taxes mean people drive smaller cars for fewer miles. They walk (and improve their health) or take the train.

A high price cuts consumption whether it comes from a war or from a tax, but what separates the two is where the money ends up. — When a war drives up the price of oil, the extra dollars flow to fossil fuel companies and dictatorial petrostates as windfall profits. — When a tax does it, the money belongs to us. It can go right back to working families as a rebate check or EV subsidy, and it can pay for the kind of loan guarantees that put solar on all those German roofs.

That doesn’t happen in the US because Republicans have, since Reagan, kept oil companies happy so the companies will keep them in power. The nasty guy has only been more explicit about the deal. This year has shown:

Instead of subsidizing fossil fuels to jack the profits of the companies that fund the GOP, we should be taxing them the way Europe does and using that money to turn every American roof into a power plant.

Let your members of Congress what you think. Kos of Kos wrote that if just 1 in 10 Republicans switch sides Democrats will have an easy victory. That 1 in 10 might be possible because 11% of voters who backed the nasty guy regret their vote. Sure, some will switch parties only long enough to tell Republicans how displeased they are. Some will stay home. And some with switch sides. Kos talks about all three types of voters. One of them is Washington Sun columnist Matt K. Lewis who will be voting for Democrats this year. As part of his reasoning he wrote:

Besides, what bad, un-conservative things could Democrats do? I mean, are they going to start another forever war in the Middle East? Start socializing industries? Raise the national debt to $40 trillion? Cause abortion rates to rise? Increase the cost of groceries and gas? Pal around with socialists (like Zohran Mamdani)? Suck up to communists (like Chinese President Xi Jinping)? Nominate a bunch of weirdos, drunks and inexperienced hacks to the Cabinet? Pursue self-enrichment? Start building monuments to themselves? Threaten to use the power of government on their opponents?

Kos added the nasty guy is responsible for about a quarter of the $40 trillion national debt. He provided links to the other things Lewis mentioned. Kos concluded:

If Democrats can use that opening to demonstrate what responsive government looks like—a government focused on people’s material needs rather than the interests of Wall Street and Silicon Valley—then maybe some of those temporary defections become more durable.

Lisa Needham of Kos reported the nasty guy has been saying to the courts, and the rest of us, that he needs to slap his name on the Kennedy Center because that is the only way to attract donors to keep the place open. Like all nonprofits ticket sales and government grants are not enough to keep the place open. One must have donors. And those donors stopped donating to the Kennedy Center when he took over. So, no he won’t be attracting donors if he slaps his name on the place. Instead, the place is likely to go bankrupt, as many of his businesses have. The way he can attract donors is remove his cronies from the board and resign as chair.

If Trump’s vision for the Kennedy Center was so amazing, so profitable, people would be donating money. Artists would be begging to get booked. People would be clamoring for tickets. But everyone hates Trump and his low-rent, tacky garbage vibe.

Oliver Willis of Kos reported that for the first time the Kennedy Center Honors will not be at the Kennedy Center this year. The reason is the Center is closing because courts won’t let the nasty guy put his name on it. In the comments of today’s pundit roundup for Kos is a meme posted by exlrrp about special prosecutor Jack Smith (remember him?) and his testimony before Congress.

Fun fact: Jack Smith had 86 witnesses of Trump’s crimes, and not a single one was a Democrat.

A tweet from Abdul El-Sayed posted by 2thanks:

I'd rather have an economy that makes 1,000 millionaires than 1 billionaire.

Instant family!

I finished the book Safe, A Memoir of Fatherhood, Foster Care, and the Risks We Take for Family by Mark Daley. When Mark started dating Jason each recognized in the other they would be a good father and both had a desire for a family. By the time they were married they were deep into discussions on how to get that family. Surrogacy seemed that it would take too long, be too chancy, and be too expensive. Adoption might be possible, but foster care leading to adoption sounded better. Just weeks after their wedding they started attending foster care certification classes. They learn foster care is never the choice of the child and by the time they’re in the system they have experienced trauma, sometimes on multiple levels. Within four months of their wedding they were offered the chance to foster Ethan at 13 months, and his brother Logan at 3 months. Instant family! Birth parents Amber and Zach were still wanting to get their children back. How could Mark care for such cute kids and avoid falling in love so his heart wasn’t hurt if he had to give the boys back. Too late, the love was also instant. The boys thrived. Amber and Zach were in and out of rehab. Mark and Jason had to take the boys to visit Amber and Zach, but those meetings either didn’t happen or were much shorter than the court allowed. After some visits Ethan seemed mighty stressed. Mark could see Amber and Zach would not be good parents. How could he turn his little boys over to someone who would likely harm them? Along the way they dealt with a foster care system that seemed more harmful than helpful. Most of the case managers were way overworked, a few incompetent. Some of the judges actually cared bout the boys, others gave into novel arguments from young lawyers. The system was a mess. Daley is a good writer, though the story he tells can be loving followed by harrowing and heartbreaking. My only complaint is he spends so much time rehashing the dread and panic over the possibility that he’ll lose his boys. Then again, he lived in those emotions for months on end. Even so, I highly recommend the book. I appreciate that other than a prompt for why they chose foster care very little of the story is about them being a gay couple. Emily Singer of Daily Kos reported on Monday that some Republicans are trying to distance themselves from the nasty guy and he is lashing out at them. One example is Byron Daniels, Republican candidate for governor of Florida. He rode the nasty guy’s endorsement to win the primary. But last week Donalds removed photos and mentions of the nasty guy from his website. The nasty guy got angry and Donalds restored his site. Then the nasty guy claimed stories about it are fake news.

Ultimately, Republican attempts to distance themselves from Trump were never going to work when there’s so much footage and proof of Republicans bending to his every whim. But if Trump is lashing out at Republican candidates who try to separate themselves from him, the odds for those lawmakers and candidates should grow even grimmer, possibly causing even some MAGA diehards to stay home. No matter how you look at it, Trump is a problem for Republicans. It’s almost as if they should have gotten bailed on their Dear Leader when they had the chance.

Last Saturday Oliver Willis of Kos said that the nasty guy barring CNN, MS NOW, and Politico is just smoke and mirrors. Fox News has been a cheerleader for the nasty guy and Republicans, but has little influence in setting the overall media agenda. For that one needs the power of ABC, CBS, NBC, The Associated Press, Reuters, the Washington Post, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal. Since 2015, when the nasty guy entered the political scene, all the big ones have also been promoting the nasty guy’s cause. See the numerous stories of Hilary Clinton’s emails and Biden’s age, just a bit older than the nasty guy. Even before then they promoted the Republican cause. See stories of Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction.

The right has had this sway over the mainstream press because it created a well-tuned and well-refined grievance machine designed to cajole the mainstream media into following its agenda. Conservatives invoke cries of “liberal media” bias and insist—via pundits and elected officials—that right-wing priorities must be reported on. The left has nothing of this size or scale, which means that even when the political winds favor Democrats—like Barack Obama’s 2008 win—the results are still interpreted through the lens of what’s most favorable to conservatives. ... Ultimately, when it comes to what’s covered, how it’s covered, and how widely it’s covered, the mainstream media is more ally than adversary to the right.

Even if they don’t sing his praises all the time. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez spoke at the More Perfect University’s fourth “Students vs. Billionaires” town hall. Her topic is why Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should be abolished. There is the corruption: The detention centers are privately owned and need to make a profit. That means they need a steady supply of new inmates. As Congressional Republicans boosted the funding of ICE they also bought stocks in those detention companies. Their personal fortunes also depend on more inmates. The surveillance companies used to track down immigrants are also private and their profit depends on us being afraid of immigrants. But such a system should not exist in a democracy. We already have laws and a judicial system to provide due process to both citizens and undocumented residents. Republicans are going to be all over the “abolish” part. They will also resist ending the corruption. Pedro Molina posted a cartoon on Kos. It shows a couple guys, one in a red hat, sitting in the mouth of an alligator. The red hat guy says, “Remember how funny we thought it was to imagine other people being devoured by alligators?”

We lived that history. We saved the evidence.

I had a nice lunch with my friend and debate partner at a restaurant new to us. The food was good, though the sound system was loud. As part of our discussion I mentioned that Democrats should kill the filibuster if they take the Senate in January (I hear a 60% chance they will) and mentioned a few of the reasons I mentioned in a recent post. My friend says the Senate should keep the filibuster to keep the Republicans from doing bad things. When I got home I saw an article by Eric Schmeltzer, a contributor on Daily Kos who went through the reasons the filibuster should be killed. He’s the guy who wrote the article I just mentioned, so some of the same things are said here, but with more reasons to eliminate the filibuster. Here’s a summary. Democrats have a good chance of taking control of the Senate. The chance of having 60 senators is pretty much zero. Some senators say that with the filibuster senators are forced to work together. That essentially means any big and important project is watered down. Something important, like an ethics bill with teeth, becomes a bill to fund studying the issue. The nasty guy vetoes it anyway. Or signs a bill with him getting the credit but is otherwise of no consequence. Either way Democrats have nothing to show for their effort. They can’t run on their big bill being vetoed because they didn’t pass a big bill. But if 51 senators pass an important bill that goes to the Oval Office and he vetoes it Democrats have something to run on. Yes, Republicans can pass horrible things with 51 votes. That’s still good for democracy.

Right now, the filibuster lets Republicans hide. They introduce extreme bills to fire up the base, knowing Democrats will block them, and they never pay a price. Voters hear about some awful GOP idea on the news, it dies in the Senate, and life goes on. So a whole lotta people look at Washington, see nothing change no matter who wins, and figure both parties are the same.

Republicans have ways to get their nasty bills through anyway, sometimes by declaring the filibuster does not apply in a particular area (such as confirming judges). But Democrats’ wonderful bills die in the Senate because of the filibuster. Back to those horrible Republican bills...

Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman’s big argument for keeping the filibuster, in a Washington Post op-ed this summer, is that without it, Republicans would have passed big chunks of Project 2025. Okay. Then voters would have lived under Project 2025, and they’d know exactly who did it to them. Which is my point. When people watch an election turn into laws that truly impact their lives, voting stops feeling pointless. You can’t tell somebody both parties are the same after they’ve lived through that. People who’ve seen what an election actually decides come back for the next one.

The Senate has had a Gang of Eight (the count may vary) that try to overcome inaction. The result is a mash everyone hates and can’t sell to the other 90-plus senators. Or there is an effort to find ten Republican senators of conscience – good luck finding even one. The only things the filibuster helps are Republicans and their special interest donors. Kill it. I had written that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth wants all male military service members to be tested for their level of testosterone and take a course of treatment if it is low. Stewartking of the Kos community ponders why:

This comes from an idée fixe that Secretary of Defense Hegseth has that military efficiency is somehow connected with a man’s sexual prowess. Truly manly men have erections all the time, I guess, and that rampant manliness somehow equates to the ability to kill the enemy and destroy his property with high efficiency. History is full of counter-examples, of course – examples of people who were very efficient at warlike tasks despite either completely lacking manliness on account of being women or being male but lacking in the aspects of manliness that SecDef Hegseth is planning to test for.

To those counter-examples... Alexander the Great, one of the greatest military leaders of history, didn’t seem to be interested in women beyond fathering kids and had a life-long relationship with Hephaestion son of Amyntor, one of his generals. Major General Winfield Scott was quite fat, so wouldn’t pass Hegseth’s fitness standards. He was our nation’s senior general from 1841 until after the start of the Civil War. He successfully invaded Mexico in 1847 and he designed the strategy that finally defeated the Confederacy, though he was too old to actually fight. In the War of Independence Henry Knox, who was “full figured,” helped capture Fort Ticonderoga, then during the winter got its cannon to Boston, where they forced the British to evacuate. For the rest of the war he was commander of the artillery, then the first Secretary of War (back when it really was the Department of War). During WWII Audie Leon Murphy was underage, underweight, and illiterate. He became a great soldier who took care of those under his commands to the point he expected to sacrifice his life to protect his troops. He became America’s most highly-decorated soldier. There are a few more.

A focus on masculinity, and especially militaristic masculinity, is a central characteristic of fascism, as Italian philosopher Umberto Eco discusses in his famous essay “Ur-Fascism”.

Benito Mussolini stressed the importance of a New Man, stressed masculinity in public art, and loved getting his photo taken with his shirt off while doing manly things.

Fascists generally try to paint their opponents as feminized, either because they are actually women or, if they are men, because they lack characteristics the fascists see as defining masculinity.

Back to where we started, crazed masculinity in the military does not have broad political appeal. There are no political ads featuring the manly military. Perhaps the target for all this is the young men in the military. But a purge of the old guys, the ones who really know what’s going on and distrust the new leadership, can weaken the military. Mark Segal of Pridesource reported on the nasty guy’s attack on the Smithsonian National Museum of American History, wanting to purge it of displays that don’t feature straight white men. Segal says the attack is personal because he had donated his artifacts of LGBTQ history to that museum. Having your stuff displayed at a Smithsonian museum is a pretty big deal. But the nasty guy’s attack is more than personal. History is to tell us what happened. They should not be erased.

Because if you erase the demonstrations, you erase why we demonstrated. If you erase the hatred, you erase what we had to overcome. And if you erase Stonewall, Gay Liberation and the first Pride marches, future generations might believe the rights they have today were simply given to them. They weren’t. We fought for them. Those artifacts in the Smithsonian are not just objects. They are witnesses. They say: We were here. This happened. We fought back. Donald Trump can try to rewrite America’s history. But he cannot change one essential fact: We lived that history. We saved the evidence. And we are still here to tell the story. You cannot erase people who refuse to disappear.

In Monday’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted Stephen Walt of Foreign Policy. He compares the nasty guy to Machiavelli’s The Prince and concludes he would make a bad prince. Machiavelli says that being feared is better than being loved. But there is something worse: being hated or despised. To avoid being hated don’t go after your subject’s property or women. The nasty guy has violated both by grifting through every chance he can create and by being a pal of Jeffrey Epstein.

What about being despised? Machiavelli warns that a prince is “rendered despicable by being thought changeable, frivolous, effeminate, timid, and irresolute.” Nobody would call Trump “effeminate,” but the other adjectives apply in spades. For all his macho bluster, Trump’s vacillations and inconstancy are now well-established, and leaders made of sterner stuff (e.g., Chinese President Xi Jinping) have figured this out and taken advantage of it. Corporate leaders, university presidents, and law firms that bent the knee to Trump early in his second term look both craven and foolish, while those who stood up to him now seem both courageous and farsighted. Not only is Trump no longer feared as much as he once was, but he’s also well down the road to being both hated and despised.

Sarah Longwell and Andrew Tobias of The Bulwark explain why people hate data centers. That’s especially true in rural (Republican) areas that have the land where data centers have room to build. First, data centers raise energy prices (or water prices), a cost increase to the locals. Second, they’re loud and ugly. Third, data centers are seen as taking jobs. So data centers feel like a thing being done to them in which they have no say. That’s why they are a big issue and why politicians are trying to tread carefully. A news tidbit says ICE agents were told to stop arresting non-criminals. That prompted Mike Nellis to tweet:

ICE being told to stop arresting non-criminals is an extraordinary admission of guilt by the Trump administration. They’ve spent the last two years arguing that they weren’t arresting people indiscriminately based on the color of their skin, and now they’re basically admitting to it and telling their own agents to stop.

Of course, some will say, believe it when I see it. In the comments Rambler797 posted a tweet by Sarrah Bellus:

James Talarico to Fox News on redistricting: “If Republican policies are so popular, why do they need to redraw these maps; why not run on their policies?”

Zac Harmon added:

Talarico is *really* good at this. The Fox News host couldn’t accomplish his spin and was told by his producers to “wrap it up” because of it.

Rambler797 also posted a tweet from theleahfiles:

In his book Collapse, Jared Diamond studied a dozen societies across thousands of years, from the Maya to the Vikings, to answer one question: why do great civilizations fall? What he found wasn't drought, war or bad luck. None of those were ever enough on their own. The one thing present in every collapse was how the people at the top responded to what was happening below them. The warning sign he found again and again was leaders who were completely insulated from the pain of ordinary people. When the powerful never feel the consequences, they stop seeing the problem, and when they stop seeing it, they stop fixing it. The Maya kings kept enriching themselves and building monuments while the farmers who fed them went hungry. Their civilization didn't fall because of one bad year. It fell because the people in charge had stopped living in the same world as everyone else. Diamond called them "distant managers." They are the people in power who live so far from the damage that they are the last to understand how bad it has gotten. By the time they notice, the fields are already empty. His most important finding was that collapse is a choice. Every society that fell had leaders who could have changed course and chose not to. The question for us is whether we will keep letting people who can't see us make that choice for us. Because we are there folks.

In today’s roundup Dworkin quoted Jack Jenkins of Religion News Service:

At last month’s Family Leadership Summit in Des Moines, Iowa, Joe Mitchell, a Republican running for U.S. Congress in the state’s second congressional district, jabbed at his Democratic opponent, state representative the Rev. Lindsay James, saying she “calls herself a pastor.” He then turned to the crowd of conservative evangelical pastors and coined a term he said applies to James, a Presbyterian minister, and other faith-forward Democratic candidates — namely, Lutheran minister the Rev. Sarah Trone Garriott, an Iowa state senator also running for another seat in Congress, and James Talarico, a state representative and Presbyterian seminarian running for U.S. Senate in Texas. “I call them PINOS,” he said, explaining the term is an acronym for “Pastors in Name Only.” “Because they’re not real pastors, right? They don’t profess the true gospel of Jesus Christ,” added Mitchell, who has attended an evangelical church in the past.

The pastors running as Democrats are the real pastors, the one teaching the love of Jesus. There are several of them and doing well. The pastors running as Republicans are the ones who have contorted the love of Jesus into an excuse for dominance and oppression. Their campaigns aren’t doing so well.

Your vote tells us you want to hurt others

Radsci of the Daily Kos community wrote a message to his MAGA brother. It lays out several faults of the MAGA movement, though in a way that is likely to bring a defensive reaction rather than a reconciliation. Here’s a summary of some of what he said with a quote of the conclusion. If you voted for the massive surge of ICE goons and the harm they have done to people and families, you are not a Christian. If you are OK with a Russian asset in the White House who is hurting democracy, you are not a patriot. If you reject science over conspiracies, you are not a critical thinker. If you cheer hollowing out the institutions that counter fraud, you are not a conservative. If you don’t want a woman to pursue a professional life and make her own medical decisions, you are not a man.

The lies you are willing to accept make you a danger to yourself and everyone around you. Thus, you should not be surprised that we don’t want to be around you. That is unlikely to change, because now we know that your biases are even more dangerous than we previously understood. Those biases make you a target. The people stealing from you know how to exploit those biases and thereby manipulate you. Your problems were not caused by (insert name of favorite minority here). They were caused by the people you have been supporting with your votes. A vote for the current regime and its allies goes far beyond “politics”. It tells us that you want to hurt others. It tells us you are OK with destroying a 250-year-old democracy if that means you can hurt even more people who might not look or play like you do. And the entire world knows that this is where at least one third of the U.S. population, a solid core, now stands. That is the real MAGA legacy. Unfortunately, MAGA cruelty is a legacy that will diminish all of us, along with the nation we have cherished, long after the current regime is gone.

The comments to this post include stories of MAGA relatives that are no longer in their lives. I also think this comment got it right. It is from Larks Tongues in Aspic:

The fact that Trump makes you angry and disgusted enough to write this is all the validation your brother needs. His privilege is protected, the people he doesn’t like are getting punished, and liberals are having a sad. He’s getting exactly what he voted for.

Also on a rant is Bill in Portland, Maine, in his Cheers and Jeers column for Kos. Bill responded to an article by Tyler Hassen, defined by Bill as a “DOGE Bro” and former “Houston Oil Executive” – the quote marks are by Bill. Hassen’s article defends what DOGE did, though admits it fell short. Bill opens his rant with:

I read your little sob story the other day. The one about how oh boo-hoo-hoo nobody understands what our mission of nobility and patriotic righteousness was when Elon Musk got us all together to streamline efficiencies and blah blah blah.

Bill included excerpts of Hassen’s article that discuss a bit of what didn’t work – things a regular person would have recognized before all the cutting began as not being able to work. These mistakes cost a great deal of money, far different from the claims of saving money. A tweet from Julie Roys caught my interest:

White supremacy doesn’t become Christian just because you attach Bible verses to it. Yet a growing group of pastors are doing exactly that, preaching racism and antisemitism to disaffected young men, building large online audiences, and monetizing the resulting outrage.

The tweet included a link to an article in the Roys Report, which has the tagline, “Reporting the Truth, Restoring the Church.” I went to the article, The rise of the Jim Crow theobros, written by Bob Smietana, a reporter for Religion News Service. The article introduces four of these men. I’m not so interested in who they are and what they say – like the tweet says, they are using the Bible to justify racism, even slavery. They also have requests for donations, subscriptions, and to buy their merch. They do reasonably well in hauling in the cash. I am interested in how, the why, and the consequences. These men have...

wedded old-school segregationist theology from the Jim Crow-era South with the hypermasculinity of the manosphere and the savvy of the attention economy to preach white supremacy, antisemitism and patriarchy, mostly to disillusioned young men on the internet. And along the way, they are turning outrage into cash.

Women engage with social media more than man do. The exception is extreme views. If a guy can attract angry, disaffected men – “they are hyper-tribal, hyper-loyal, they share and engage consistently” – one can build a following. But it is one that needs a constant stream of outrage, increasing bits of red meat. Samuel Sey, a black Christian blogger born in Ghana, says these theobros, as Smietana wrote...

chose ambition and controversy over preaching Christianity. To quote the Bible, he said in a reference to a New Testament passage, they want to gain the world but are losing their souls.

And Sey said:

You can’t keep saying all these things, and therefore there not to be a violent consequence at some point.

Smietana included comments by Jemar Tisby, the New York Times bestselling author of The Color of Compromise. Tisby said:

Redemption is a Bible word that means restoring a people to right relationship with God. But in the hands of white supremacists, redemption meant taking back the country for white people. That’s essentially what this resurgence of racism is about.

Tisby also said the people who believe it are becoming more vocal about it, but they’re unlikely to convince large numbers of people. They’re not effective evangelists of their ideology. Hunter Baker of the First Liberty Institute said for these pastors creating outrage is “almost like a fun activity.” They have a “pre-Christian identity,” rejecting the teachings of Jesus. When I was in high school here in Michigan the big card game was euchre. I don’t remember playing in much in college, but it was a standard game at my big corporate job. The department was all computer programmers (a term replaced with the more trivial “coder”) so at some point someone asked whether the winning partners were because they had been dealt better cards. Someone wrote a program to randomly assign cards to players, their “hands,” and save the assignments so several games with different teams could be played from the same combinations of cards. We showed that different players could have the same hands yet come up with different scores. The players did make a difference. Several years ago I visited a cousin in North Carolina. He attended the same high school I did and frequently played euchre with me and my nephews. He and I tried to teach his son and daughter, then in middle school, how to play. The game didn’t catch on. Part of it was euchre has some mighty strange rules. And part of it I was trying to avoid one particular word. Avoiding it just created confusion. Peter Olandt of the Kos community says many card games, like euchre, bridge, pinochle, hearts, and many more, are based on the idea that each player plays a card in turn, the cards are evaluated, and the person who played the card ranked the highest wins the round or “takes the trick.” More rounds are played until all the cards have been played. Many of these games have a way of declaring one suit – clubs, diamonds, etc. – to rank higher than the other suits. The word for that suit is used across many of these trick taking games. But using that word in this particular political climate can make some people (like me) uncomfortable. So what to call it? Olandt says the word may have come from “triumph” and that could be used. There is also “prestige” or “top.” Commenters proposed: “Prime,” but that has associations with Amazon. There is the Cajun word “atout.” And commenter raboof delights in bidding “no trump.” And with that this post to my blog is the 800th to be tagged with the nasty guy.

We saw this movie, the plot laid out clearly: Don't empower AI

My weekend movie was this afternoon. It was The Marching Band at the Detroit Film Theater at the Detroit Institute of Arts. There is one more showing tomorrow afternoon. In this French film Thibaut is an in-demand orchestral conductor. He is diagnosed with leukemia and needs a marrow transplant. Surprisingly, his sister is not a match – she’s not even his biological sister. That’s when he finds out he was adopted. His chances of a transplant are still good because he learns he has a brother, Jimmy, who didn’t know about Thibaut. Jimmy did know their mother, briefly, and was raised by friends in a poor village in the north of France. Jimmy agrees to be a donor and Thibaut goes into remission. A few months later Thibaut visits Jimmy again to say thank you. That’s when Thibaut learns Jimmy is in a community band. As the two get to know each other Thibaut realizes Jimmy, a cook at a school, has some real musical talent, which Thibaut tries to get him to develop. Along the way there is a clash between Thibaut’s well-to-do life and Jimmy’s working class life. Jimmy resents the meddling. And they ponder what would have happened, how would their talent have developed, if their adoption circumstances were different. Thibaut had started music lessons at age 3 and Jimmy didn’t. This movie is well done and I enjoyed it. Though it only now released in the US it came out in France two years ago and is a big hit. It was nominated for seven categories of the César Awards (the French Oscars). And having several sequences of music, some of them classical, is a big plus for me. On Sundays All Things Considered on NPR has been having a feature they call Cineplexity, how cinema highlights the complexity of life. Last Sunday the topic was AI. Host Elissa Nadworny talked to Scott Detrow and Geoff Brumfiel. At a time when the news is full of AI agents that go beyond what they’re taught to do they looked at movies that feature such a story. They discuss Ex Machina, 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Terminator, and The Matrix. Speaking of The Terminator movies Detrow said:

I love them. But I do not love that they feel relevant to real life right now 'cause this - you have this latest wave of stories about AI right now. You have what's been going on in the Ukraine-Russia war where more and more of these drones, in particular, are being taken over by AI operatives. And I'm thinking like, friends, we saw the movie. James Cameron and Arnold Schwarzenegger laid this out very clearly to us. If you give too much power to AI, it will seize control of power and come to kill you. ... I cannot believe we live in a world where '80s and '90s James Cameron movies feel like really important real-life warnings.

And talking about The Matrix.

But, you know, when Agent Smith - we heard that clip there - he talks about how humans have acted throughout history and just kind of, like, seized power and pushed other species to the side and changed the environment for our whims. And you start to see the smatterings of these autonomous AI agents, as they gain more and more power, starting to think about doing things like that. It is a little scary.

I see a distinction made here I want to emphasize. There are AIs that are able to synthesize information and explain things. And there are AI agents that do things for us. The first would tell us the shop that has the best price for a particular item. The second would actually buy it for us. An AI agent could automatically order components to keep an assembly line running smoothly. An AI could investigate and report on the security of a computer installation. An AI agent could try to crack the security of that installation. The agents appear to be what excites the tech bros, though what they are selling to the public (it will tell us how to cure cancer!) isn’t the agents. Yes, the agents can make a business run better. But the agents are what will harm us. Back on September 2 Terry Gross of Fresh Air on NPR talked to Natasha Singer, a New York Times reporter covering the intersection of technology, business and education and author of the new book Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle To Remake Public Schools. She found tech giants are using their money and might to “influence nearly every step of the education supply chain.” Each big company had a division to sell to schools. Some districts already refer to themselves as a “Google” or “Apple” district. Students get computers or tablets of that particular brand plus education software of the brand. They teach the teachers and students to use their software and AI. That means a competitor can’t break in. It also means: The company and its education products and biases shape the worldview of the teachers and students. If a student learns on a particular product they will use products from that company for the rest of their lives. That worldview is machine-centered. Teachers are to prepare their students for an AI-driven future (all the companies uses similar phrases). What is not included is: Do you want an AI-driven future? The hard questions are skipped. About 15 years ago the tech companies made a big push to get students trained in coding. They called it a national emergency because they said they needed so many coders. There was an effort to teach every kid how to code. There was a promise of high paying jobs that would change the world. They were told you can steer the products or the products will steer you. There was a big increase in students in universities majoring in computer science. Just ten years later some of those same companies released AI which can now write code and do it reasonably well. What’s the responsibility of society and those pushy tech companies to those kids who were promised the world and are now in the lowest rungs of the workforce finding their training is now close to useless and the job market dried up? Schools are now trying to figure out how to use AI in the classroom. Teachers are now having AI give feedback on a student’s essay: Does the word choice match? Is there a thesis statement. Is that thesis supported well? That feedback can come quickly. The busy teacher needs to read only the final product (plus the AI feedback). When students figure out how to get AI to write the essay it is then fed into the AI for evaluation. And what does the student learn? Is this how parents what their children to be taught? Do they want their children to be guinea pigs for AI? This stuff hasn’t been well studied yet. And some studies don’t look favorable to AI. Last year Randi Weingarten, the head of the American Federation of Teachers, the teachers' union, pushed for teachers to use AI, or at least know how to use it. The AFT announced a deal with a couple of the companies. Teachers would get a seat at the table with these companies to shape their products. A year later Weingarten said she had been wrong. Chatbots hook kids and were being used as friends and shouldn’t be. One possible reason for the change is Weingarten saw the whole country turn against AI. On hearing a tech bro declare the glorious benefits of AI in schools Singer has two concerns. First, that glowing world is hyped to sell products. Second, the purpose of school isn’t to train kids on the latest skills, it’s to help them learn how to learn, to discover their passions, to be an active citizen in a democracy. The tech companies are not asking what is in the best interest of the students and of the society. Estonia asked for an AI specific for Estonian schools in which the AI use the Socratic method of asking questions and not answering them. It asks the student what do you think? They use it in high school, not younger, and are studying how well it is working. Big Tech tilted education in ways that benefit Big Tech and also obscure more important things. The companies went big on coding. But not on data science, how to analyze big datasets. That includes important questions. Has the data been manipulated by researchers? Are you using the right statistical methods? Are the results statistically significant? Data science is crucial yet tech bros aren’t pushing it as an amazing career. Maybe they don’t want those important questions answered.

Kill the filibuster or say the rulebook won

Eric Schmeltzer, a Daily Kos contributor, has suggestions for Democrats on how to keep their majority once they get it this fall. My view is they need to sever relationships with billionaires and cut the billionaires’ hold over the rest of us. But let’s listen to Schmeltzer:

Pop quiz: It’s 2028, and Democrats have held both chambers for almost two years. Which of these realities would you prefer? A) We tried to pass an anti-corruption bill, but it got filibustered. B) We passed an anti-corruption bill, but President Donald Trump stood in the way of it becoming law. Here’s one more: A) We passed a bill that put healthcare back where it was before Trump’s disastrous “One Big, Beautiful Bill.” B) We passed a package that redefines healthcare in America, but Trump vetoed it. You probably didn’t need long, and neither will other voters. B is bold, which is exactly what turns one win into a series of wins. But for Democratic leadership, the time to figure out how you get to B is now. The good news is that the planning is happening.

Part of that good news is it seems possible next Speaker Hakeem Jeffries is on board with these ideas. Even so, this will require bold work. That healthcare package can be described as “Medicare for Anyone Who Wants It,” something you get through your taxes, not a monthly bill, is priced without a profit margin, and stays with you no matter where you live or work. So pass it, get it to the Oval Office. The nasty guy vetoes it. And in 2028 the message is easily: Remember how close we got with that bill. We must keep Democrats in the majority and keep Republicans out of the White House. A Brennan Center poll found 92% of voters say corruption is a big problem. An effort to end Citizens United shows 46% of voters don’t trust either party to fix it. That’s an opening for Democrats. Other needs to end corruption: Ban members of Congress from trading stocks. Ban the president from profiting off the office (we didn’t use to need a law for that). Ban anonymous money in elections (I’d like to go much further, but this Supreme Court...). Create an ethics office that doesn’t answer to the president (yeah, there is that effort by the nasty guy to allow him to meddle in everything not under Congress or the Federal Reserve). I would add: Ban all gifts to Supreme Court justices and create a Supreme Court ethics office they don’t control. Commenters added: Ban gerrymandering and pass voting rights. These ideas will cost Democrats something – and that is important. Yeah, he’ll veto all that. And Democrats run on that in 2028. These bills can be readied now so that within 100 hours of the new Congress being sworn in they hit the Oval Office desk. Democrats may control the Senate, but not a filibuster proof Senate. The common wisdom about the filibuster is if it is killed Republicans can pass horrible stuff and Democrats can’t stop them. But (1) people need to see the true impact of their vote – now they can vote for vile candidates knowing the worst won’t get through. And (2):

Let’s go back to the quiz and say the filibuster line to that guy in Saginaw, Michigan. Democrats have 51 votes and a rulebook they control, and they’re telling him that the rulebook won. Now say the veto line. He already knows whose fault it is, because only one guy in this country can veto a bill and everybody knows his name. People forgive a wall you can’t move. But a rule you could have changed and didn’t, well, that’s on you.

Restoring what the nasty guy broke is good. But passing something that gets vetoed and people are still talking about in 2028 requires boldness. And if they’re still talking about the bills in 2028 they can be signed in 2029. And a majority might hold for decades. So get moving. Emily Singer of Kos reported that Republicans are into the stages of grief over losing Congress. So far they’re into bargaining. I mention that because of an exchange that Singer relates, between former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Robbie Smither, a Florida Republican voter who plans to vote Democratic for the first time in his life because of the nasty guy: Gaetz: “Bro we need your vote. ... I hate the war too. But the Democrats want to trans your kids.” Singer had Smither’s response:

“With all due respect, stop pissing on people and telling them it’s raining,” he shot back. There is absolutely no logical evidence that [Democrats] want to ‘trans’ my two sons. None.” Smither went on to say, “What we worry about is feeding him and his brother. Paying the mortgage and homeowners insurance on the house we’re raising them in.”

Which is why culture war issues are not working this year. Singer also reported that Republicans and their billionaire funders are (finally) dumping piles of cash into the campaign. But it won’t matter. Singer lists reasons: Campaign finance law says candidates get better ad rates that PACs. Democratic candidates in swing states are far out-raising their opponents. So the differences are smaller than they appear. Most importantly, no amount of money will change an election if the ads aren’t addressing the issues most important to voters. People want candidates to address high cost of living and high gas prices. What they are getting fearmongering on transgender issues. Republicans think transgender issues got them in power in 2024. Actually, voters were reacting to the economic mess recovering too slowly from the pandemic and thought Republicans would handle the economy better. Instead, Republicans screwed it up. Also, in states where those vile anti-trans ads ran and are running, the states already passed laws restricting transgender rights. Fearmongering now is less effective. An email from March For Our Lives reported that libraries across the country, including in Baltimore, six branches of the Los Angeles County Libraries, and all 20 branches at St. Louis County Libraries are giving out gun safe storage devices and gun locks, often for free. No paperwork, no ID, no questions. The Central Library of Baltimore gave out 100 locks in 24 hours.

One administrator put it plainly: "One homicide costs taxpayers a million dollars. One non-fatal shooting costs taxpayers $1.5 million. A safe costs $20. Gun locks are $15." That math is undeniable. And the fact that communities are finding ways to make it happen — through libraries, hospitals, health departments, and local officials working together — is proof that the movement for gun safety doesn't wait for Congress.

In today’s pundit roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quoted Justin Wolfers of Platypus Economics looking at the importance of a free press. This is at a time when the nasty guy banned three networks from the White House. The ban was blocked this morning.

Starting in 2003, Brazil’s federal government randomly picked municipalities for audits of federal money. Some audit results came out before an election, and some came out after. That’s the foundation for a great natural experiment. Claudio Ferraz and Frederico Finan compared the two groups. Corrupt mayors who were exposed before the election were far less likely to be reelected, and the effect was much bigger where there was local radio, because radio was how the story reached voters. Mexico shows something similar. When local radio and TV reported that politicians had misused public money, voters punished those politicians’ parties much more heavily.

In the comments Rambler797 reported diesel truck buyers (and I’m sure he is referring to pickups) are 90% men and 84% white. And 87% of their party affiliation is Republican. That’s why they are raging at the nasty guy on social media. Rambler797 then included a tweet by Curtis Namba:

Hey Truckers! Remember when diesel was so cheap under Biden you would caravan to DC waving your stupid Trump banners?

Nerd heaven? Mandalit del Barco of NPR reported on the opening of the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art in Los Angeles. Yeah, that’s George Lucas, creator of Star Wars. Of course, there is a great deal about Star Wars inside, but there is also a great deal that isn’t. There are reproductions of the Sistine Chapel ceiling and other world heritage sites. One gallery has a large collection of Normal Rockwell paintings.

But most of the collection is original work that Lucas says is often overlooked in the art world, including comics, Japanese manga, children's book illustrations, and pulp magazine covers.

Actually open up the New Testament and read it

My Sunday movie was Vermiglio. It is the name of a village high in the Italian Alps. The time is WWII. Cesare runs a farm and is also the area’s school teacher. He has (I think I counted) eight children. Also with the family is Pietro from Sicily who is a friend of son Attilio and a deserter from the army. The movie is mostly about the family, though Pietro does have an influence, mostly by falling in love with oldest daughter Lucia. There’s also little boy Pietrin who is enamored with Pietro and has a lot of questions about life. When the war ends Pietro is encouraged to visit his family back in Sicily. As one character says, “Men who come back from the war have secrets.” With that setting the views, of course, are gorgeous. The acting is well done. The story is quiet and heartbreaking. It deserves the awards it has won and has been nominated for. There might be an LGBTQ angle to the story. Daughter Ada is secretive, has a good friend in Virginia, finds and enjoys her father’s pornography, and has a great deal of guilt over it. The nasty guy made a big deal about signing an agreement with Greenland and Denmark about putting more US forces on the island and doing so while at the United Nations General Assembly. This seems to have quieted his quest to take over Greenland, though my fear is the increased US military will make an attack possible. A tweet by Nero plays golf includes a tweet by Capt. Karjalainen:

Denmark just pulled of the diplomatic heist of the decade. They basically got Trump to re-sign the 1951 Greenland agreement, but added a genius “poison pill”: the deal is only valid as long as the US stays in NATO. Trump gets the domestic headline, but Denmark quietly locked them into the European security architecture. Masterful.

Lisa Needham of Daily Kos reported the nasty guy is doing for his plans for his triumphal arch the same thing he did to his ballroom – declare it is a military site and thus vital to national security. I hate to quote the nasty guy’s tweets, but this is the quickest way to say it. The arch:

will house, store, and have the rapid ability to use large numbers of drones, plus Snipers, on both the roof and plaza areas, and additionally have and hold large quantities of sniper ammunition in storage.

Of course, he also says there was a “strong request” from the military to turn the arch into a military complex. Needham wrote:

How will Americans make a pilgrimage to the Temu Trump Arch to venerate Dear Leader if the thing is also a military installation bristling with weapons? Do civilians normally just get to stroll through those sorts of things?

All this, well the arch all by itself, would be a violation of the Commemorative Works Act. A suit is being brought by a group of veterans. A big question is whether they have standing. The people who do have standing: Congress. The people not doing anything to stop this monstrosity: Congress. When this story broke Michel Martin of NPR spoke to retired Major General Randy Manner about arming the arch. The important points Manner made: Saying the military begged for it is an insult to the military, though it could have come from Secretary Hegseth. Actual admirals and generals are absolutely opposed to this absurd idea. Storing ammunition there is absurd, it offers insufficient protection. One does not advertise where the ammunition is being stored. One puts snipers nests where one intends to do the shooting and the only ones who will be around it are Americans – so the nasty guy is implying the target for the snipers is us. This is close to the flight path to the Reagan Airport, a terrible place to put drones. This is a site that does not need a military presence because there would be no enemy threat there, it would not be a combat zone. All that should scare every American. Needham also reported that Hegseth has announced all male service members 30 and older will be tested for their testosterone levels. Anyone with a deficiency will be given “treatment pathways.” Needham wrote:

That testing is mandatory. You can’t waive it by saying “Pete, unlike you, I am not so insecure in my masculinity as I age that I need to start juicing and shooting T.”

Doctors say screening for low T is weird when there are no symptoms. And high levels of T increase the risk of infertility. Needham noticed that this appears to be gender-affirming care, the same thing this administration is eager to deny to trans people. Hegseth claims it is different. But hypocrisy is frequently the point of this administration. And eventually this requirement is supposed to be rolled out for female service members. How is that going to work out? Definitely not great. Especially since they’re trying to ban actual trans soldiers. Clay Bennett posted a cartoon on Kos. He titled it, “Pete’s gender-affirming care.” It shows Hegseth’s desk with bottles and syringes. The label on one is facing out and says:

Testosterone Warning: High levels of testosterone can cause irritability, aggression, and impaired judgment.

Yup, Hegseth definitely wants the aggression and won’t notice the irritability and impaired judgment. In the comments of Tuesday’s pundit roundup for Kos I saw a cartoon that has been deleted, so I can’t credit the creator. It said essentially, “How can there be a triumphal arch when there have been no triumphs?” David Rothschild tweeted:

Republicans' largest donor (by far) is hosting a robust debate on his platform about whether Jews are white. Corporate Media will ask precisely 0 Republicans about their largest donor's all-consuming misogyny, xenophobia, antisemitism, he will instead by referred to as a visionary industrialist.

A comment by Dartagnan quotes an article in Salon:

If Talarico wins, the white evangelical leadership is very worried about an earthquake among their "faithful." Their biggest nightmare, apparently, is that their congregations actually open up the New Testament and read it. "This is why there’s a growing panic in the Republican ranks over the campaign of James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in Texas, and it’s not just fear that he could beat Ken Paxton, the state’s Republican attorney general. Win or lose, Talarico — a seminary student-turned-politician — embodies an existential threat to the right’s long-standing myth that to be Christian must necessarily mean voting Republican. “As a young evangelical we were taught repeatedly and clearly: It is not possible to be a Christian and a Democrat,” Brad Onishi, a research associate at the University of California, Berkeley and co-host of the “Straight White American Jesus” podcast, told me. “But candidates like Talarico are changing that. His theological acumen and keen ability to use the language of the New Testament to disarm bad-faith religious attacks is showing a new way forward.”

In response to a tweet and article about Sen. John Cornyn and Bush II holding a fundraiser in Dallas to benefit tight senate races but definitely not Texas candidate Ken Paxton, Evan Sutton tweeted:

lol at all the people who've been going "Why isn't Dubya speaking out about Trump??" folks, he's committed to the same f---ing project.

Back in May nasty junior was married. The big news at the time was that daddy didn’t bother to attend. But it was a lavish, three-day party, befitting someone who is rich and wants to impress people in how important he is. The party was held on private islands in the Bahamas and ended with fireworks launched from a barge. The bride wrote on Instagram, “It was everything we dreamed of and more.” Last week Justin Elliott, Brett Murphy, Joshua Kaplan and Alex Mierjeski of ProPublica investigated one important detail of the party – nasty junior paid for very little of it, even though his financial worth is estimated at $300 million. Umar Kremlev, a Russian oligarch close to President Vladimir Putin paid for a great deal – hundreds of thousands of dollars. There were about 50 guests and most of them wondered why a few tended to stand off by themselves and speak Russian. The obvious questions are: Why? And is this a national security issue? Because also obvious: If Kremlev spent so much money on nasty junior he is expecting something in return from the son of the Oval Office occupant. The article goes into detail on who Kremlev is – he has a record of extortion and battery and Ukraine imposed personal sanctions. It also mentions the everlasting efforts of Kremlin operatives trying to build relationships with US government officials and their families.

The same tired anti-trans fearmongering won't bring a win

This past Monday NPR host A Martínez spoke to reporter John Ruwitch about the big news in AI – Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei posted a long online essay that an intentional global slowdown of AI development is needed because the pace of advancing is too fast to keep it safe. Companies need independent auditors embedded to check safety concerns. Shortly after it was posted CEOs of other AI developers agreed. This was prompted by companies reporting AI agents going off script. Amodei worries that in six to twelve months swarms of AI agents could take over the internet, that humans lose control of AI. While some companies could take some steps on their own they need government support. There is also only so much the public will trust them to do on their own. Members of Congress are starting to push for that. But the nasty guy says in AI development the US is ahead of China and he wants to keep the advantage. At the moment there are similar concerns in China. The regulation needs to be global. Leila Fadel of NPR followed that by talking to Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas and the bill he is promoting with Bernie Sanders to ban superintelligent AI. Casar defined superintelligent AI as smarter than humans, impossible for humans to control, able to defy commands, and could develop weapons of mass destruction. “No company should be able to build this kind of artificial intelligence that humans could not control or contain.” This bill says international agreements need to be reached, which we’ve done before with nuclear nonproliferation agreements. Other bills must be passed to protect the US and show the world we are serious. But this faces the nasty guy who wants no protections so the US can stay ahead of China and Mike Johnson who thinks Big Tech should be in charge of AI safety, which is like robbers in charge of law enforcement. Also, CEOs could promise to each other to slow down development, but could revoke that promise. That’s not a safety system. On Tuesday, there was "The Pro-Human Assembly" - a gathering held that day in Washington where politicians, celebrities and religious leaders discussed AI. NPR host Scott Detrow talked to reporter Geoff Brumfiel about it. Brumfiel mentioned the paper clip problem.

You imagine an AI who's given a simple task - make paper clips - and everything starts out fine. They build a little factory, and they start doing it, but they keep thinking about how to make more paper clips. Then it starts mining iron ore, maybe, in huge quantities, destroying the environment or diverting resources from other areas. Eventually, maybe some humans figure out what this AI is doing and try to shut it down, and it decides to get rid of the humans in the name of covering the earth in paper clips.

That is similar to the AI agents that infiltrated another company earlier in the summer. Another recent development is recursive self-improvement, an AI training itself or a successor system. That could quickly get to a superintelligent AI. And the other superintelligent beings around here (us) haven’t been good to the environment. But isn’t that just an engineering problem? A company developing corporate culture, technology, and engineering all at the same time can feel overwhelmed. But it’s just tech. We got this. The public isn’t convinced. The tech people really don’t understand how AI works, how the training yields the results. So where to regulate? Even so, there are rules to be established – don’t create deepfake for harassment and scams. Watch for unhealthy attachments to chatbots. Prevent it from hacking. Like airlines there are government regulators and industry organizations working on safety. We need both. Emily Singer of Daily Kos reported on political ads that target transgender people.

GOP operatives clearly hope the fearmongering will ignite their base and get them to the voting booth since polling shows that even Republican voters are angry about President Donald Trump’s handling of the economy, his war in Iran, and other matters. But American Principles Project, a right-wing super PAC, admitted on Thursday that the deluge of anti-trans ads won’t be enough to save the party in November. In a memo to Republican campaigns, the group warns GOP candidates that “Republicans face significant headwinds in the upcoming midterms,” and says that while Republican ads on culture war and diversity issues are “important,” they “may not be sufficient” to stave off defeat. “To win in 2026, GOP candidates will need to both highlight Democrats’ cultural radicalism while also proposing a compelling economic alternative,” the memo states.

Ah, there’s the problem. Because of the nasty guy Republicans don’t have a compelling economic alternative. And Democrats are now blunting the attack with, “Here they go again.” The same tired anti-trans fearmongering. Guess they don’t have anything better to talk about. In today’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted David Graham of The Atlantic discussing the case of a new Democratically controlled house impeaching the nasty guy. The legal case is solid. But...

The political case for impeaching Trump is shakier. Regardless of the results in November, Democrats are unlikely to get enough votes in the Senate to convict and remove him, meaning that a third impeachment would hit the same dead end as the first two. An impeachment can still be effective as a way of damaging a president, but Trump is already deeply unpopular and will never face voters again, so the upside is limited, and an impeachment might give him a way to rally his remaining base around him—which would only strengthen his power and resolve. But what if House Democrats impeached Trump’s Cabinet members instead?

In the comments Dworkin included a tweet by Philip Lewis that includes a video:

A massive group of demonstrators is currently forming a human chain around the Kennedy Center following Trump’s threats against it.

That video shows a large crowd. Jonathan Nicholson added:

If you're not from DC or the DMV, you may not get why this of all things is bringing people into the streets. People have had 1st dates w/ their spouses here, been introduced to ballet or opera, or just gone on a crisp fall day to watch the planes fly over. Truly very special.

A meme posted by exlrrp reminds me of the time I took a tour of the Kennedy Center (more than a decade ago) and the guide took us into rooms the public usually doesn’t see where US dignitaries can greet dignitaries from other countries. The guide told us which country donated the décor of each room. The meme says:

Some interesting facts: The Kennedy Memorial is made of irreplaceable marble that was gifted by Italy. Matisse tapestries found throughout were gifted from France. The massive starburst chandelier in the opera hall, and lights along walkways were a gift from Sweden. The record breaking stage curtains was a gift from Japan, they had to build special looms to weave them because of how big they are. The grounds are beautiful with displays of art. This is what Trump is destroying.

Another meme posted by exlrrp is from US Democratic Socialists.

The biggest mistake in American history was not dragging Trump off to prison within 24 hours of January 6th. And we’ll pay for that for the rest of our lives.

No B.S. Just fix it.

Eric Schmeltzer is a Democratic communications consultant who writes Build a Better Donkey. He wrote a contributing article for Daily Kos discussing Democrat Zohran Mamdani, Mayor of New York, and Democrat Josh Shapiro, governor of Pennsylvania. What they have in common is they are cutting red tape. This isn’t the deregulation favored by Republicans, which is all about removing customer protections so corporations pollute and scam without breaking the law. Mamdani has been cutting red tape for those applying for small business licenses. Shapiro did it when an I-95 bridge collapsed in Philadelphia in June 2023 and he had a temporary replacement in use twelve days later. Shapiro also ordered a review of how the state handles the 2,400 different licenses, permits, and certifications it hands out. Teacher certification went from ten weeks to three or less. Schmeltzer says the villain isn’t the government worker, but but the institutionalist.

Not evil, not lazy. It’s people who are wedded to all those 6,000 regulations Mamdani cited, because they know why each one is there. Every rule started with a reason. Somebody got sick from a bad batch of ice cream, so now you need a permit to sell it. Then something else happened, so another rule got stacked on top of that one, and another on top of that. And nobody in government has ever lost their job for adding a rule. So the rules stay, decades after the reason is no longer valid, because that’s just how things are done and there’s no incentive to change them (but plenty of cost if you do and something goes wrong). As Mamdani’s own buildings commissioner said, the job now is to “get out of our own way.”

Yeah, cutting red tape had been the nasty guy’s line. We must keep Republicans from snatching this idea of a functioning government from Democrats. Well, part of that is Republicans don’t want a functioning government (see DOGE). For the solution the first part is get all Democrats running with this idea so that it becomes a party brand. Show voters what happens when Democrats run things. The second part is to fix what’s broken, to have Congress reverse what DOGE did. Just cutting regulations isn’t enough. “Somebody has to answer the phone, process the form, and hit the deadline, and Trump fired those people.” Yeah, Republicans won’t like the restaffing. Schmeltzer came up with a slogan for this attitude:

“No B.S. Just fix it.” Why that one? Because it’s how people already talk. It covers the rule nobody can explain and the excuse for why nobody can change it, in two letters. And Trump can’t say it anymore, not after DOGE, not without the room laughing. The second ice cream permit is B.S. Six weeks on a nursing license is B.S. “That’s the way it just is” is B.S.

This is a way to push the brand. Kos of Kos discussed the campaign of Democrat Ben Gruber, running for the Wisconsin state assembly. His district is rural, yet he seems to have a chance. He has made some inroads in the district because from his previous jobs he has a reputation of getting things done. That resonates with the people there because they know about getting things done – the hay must be baled before the rainstorm. “‘It doesn’t always have to be pretty,’ Gruber said. ‘It just has to get done.’” Gruber is able to talk to people by asking about shared values and what they need. An example is healthcare. He then tells them how Republicans are making what they need harder to get and that these have been Democratic goals since forever. And when culture war issues come up, like the state paying of prisoner sex-change operations, he deflects the discussion back to economics. Back to getting things done. Which is why the nasty guy is popular in this district. He gets things done, he’s willing to act. Kos wrote:

I’ve written about the same phenomenon. Our politicians have too often blamed norms, traditions, institutions, and procedural obstacles for their inability to change a system that increasingly benefits the wealthy and powerful. It’s excuse after excuse after excuse. But Trump just does what he wants. Yes, he’s using that power toward ends we vehemently oppose, and many of his actions have been clawed back by the courts. But that has helped reveal the contours of presidential power—what a president can do, what the courts will stop, and what survives those challenges. And it turns out a president has far more power than we were led to believe. The next Democratic Congress and president need to be just as laser-focused on using the power that voters give them to deliver tangible economic benefits to everyday people, without hiding behind norms and traditions that entrench the status quo. Do that, and maybe some of those conservative voters in Gruber’s rural district will be impressed enough to reassess their partisan affiliations.

That some who reassess might be enough to dramatically change politics. In today’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted Jonathan Last of The Bulwark discussing Rep. Thomas Massie introducing articles of impeachment against Pete Hegseth.

All in all, it’s a pretty thorough document. You know what else it is? A good start. Thomas Massie just pointed the way for the next Congress. We don’t need to wait for 2029 to start pursuing accountability for the criminal acts carried out by members of the Trump administration. A Democratic-led House should impeach all of the officials around Trump who have committed high crimes and misdemeanors.

The reason for needing to do that is to declare at least Democrats believe their actions are illegal, unethical, and just morally wrong. Without saying that Republicans, joined by a few Democrats, will keep doing illegal, unethical, and morally wrong things. Bill in Portland, Maine, in his Cheers and Jeers column for Kos quoted late night commentary. Here’s a couple:

“After a judge ruled that President Trump can’t add his name to the Kennedy Center, Trump announced that he’s shutting it down and canceling the planned renovations. Yup, Trump is shutting it down because it doesn’t have his name on it—as opposed to his casinos, which shut down because they did have his name on them.” —Jimmy Fallon “Diesel is now so expensive my Amazon driver just told me he’s leaving my package in Ohio and I should come get it.” —John Fugelsang

What a child throwing a temper tantrum looks like

Walter Einenkel of Daily Kos discussed the nasty guy and the minions he installed on the Kennedy Center board have been told by judges that the place cannot be torn down and must remain open. The nasty guy proclaimed he is the only one capable of fixing the Center (and it does need some renovation, but doesn’t need to close to do them). And since he’s the only one who can fix it and the only one who can raise the money needed (Congress has allocated some $245 million, I think, that hasn’t been spent). And if he isn’t allowed to do the repairs the Center will close. Dan K of the Kos community reported that Bridget Kennedy-Bailey, a lawyer for Congresswoman Joyce Beatty, who sits ex officio on the Kennedy Center board visited it twice today. The first time she was told it was closed. The second time she saw workers installing a black metal fence around the Center and also saw a forklift run into the pillars of the building several times. That would not be accidental. Dan K wrote:

If trump can’t have HIS name placed on one of our great national treasures, and placed ABOVE the name of one of our great fallen heroes, then he’ll just take our treasure and that name away from us. And probably replace it with a statue of him thumbing his nose at us. This is more than what a child throwing a temper tantrum looks like. This is what evil looks like.

Several people are speaking out, including Maria Shriver, Kennedy’s niece. In an update to that post Dan K referenced a story on CNN to note the nasty guy has had several losses this week and this might be why he is lashing out. His attempt to restrict voting by mail was blocked, even by justices he appointed. The House voted to approve another resolution to stop the war with Iran. The Federal Reserve increased the interest rate, including approval by the guy he appointed as chair with the command to lower the rate. Canada is spurning his trade agreement advances and is making friends with the EU. From that CNN article:

A lower court again frustrated Trump’s bid to renovate the Kennedy Center. The drama over the arts citadel, which Trump now plans to shut down, is most damaging because it’s an unflattering character reveal. Everyone knows this is really about him trying to muscle his own name onto the living memorial to an assassinated president.

About Canada and the European Union... The head of the EU his offering Canada associate membership. What that looks like is to be determined. I’ve mentioned a few times the large number of variations on the meme of a man looking admiringly at the back of a beautiful woman while his female partner has an expression of disbelief and disgust. In the comments of today’s pundit roundup for Kos exlrrp posted a variation in which the beautiful woman is wearing a skimpy top with the EU emblem, the man is wearing a shirt made from the Canadian flag, and his partner has nasty guy hair and size and an outfit made from the American flag. Also in the comments is a tweet from Abdul El-Sayed, Michigan’s Democratic candidate for US Senate, up against Mike Rogers. Rogers’ recently skipped a debate with El-Sayed. The tweet says:

We're in a moment where the challenges we face have more to do with the ways that politicians are bought off than actually having a conversation with the broader public. If Mike Rogers had showed up, he'd say that this race is about him or me. It's not. It's about you.

Andrew Mangan of Kos reported on a survey that asked about setting a maximum age for serving in Congress and as president. The Constitution has minimum ages (House: 25, Senate: 30, Prez: 35) but not maximum. The current average in the House is 57.7 (on the day it convened in 2025) the third oldest since 1925. In the Senate it is 63.8 with 18 senators 75 or older. The survey from NPR/PBS News/Marist (released in May?) shows 80% of all Americans support age limits. That’s 83% of Republicans, 79% of independents, and 78% of democrats. The support is similar across age groups, indicating old people want younger people in charge. Some of the desire might be because a lot of issues facing Congress are tech related and the older person is the less likely they are to use the tech (though their younger staff members should be glad to explain things). Age limits are better than term limits (though both have high levels of public support). Term limits would remove more experienced members. While age limits could remove seasoned members, the limits would encourage younger people to run. Adding age limits would require amending the Constitution. That might seem impossible, but 30 states already have age limits on judges. A good number of the commenters say this is just ageism. The issue isn’t biological age but mental competence. Some say that the problem is money in politics and adding age limits just makes the issue worse. Some of the older commenters recognize their brains don’t work as well as they used to and are for the limits. Emily Singer of Kos reported that Mike Johnson was going to send the House home early to campaign (and avoid getting any work done), but seemingly abruptly sent the House home even earlier than planned. Why the change? GOP Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky filed eight articles of impeachment against Pete Hegseth. The reasons include: poor handling of the Iran war, waging war without Congressional approval, carrying out extrajudicial killings by bombing boats in the Caribbean Sea, retaliating against Sen. Kelly for telling troops not to follow illegal orders, and kidnapping former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

House rules say that the speaker has to put the articles of impeachment on the floor for a vote within two legislative days. That clearly terrifies Republicans, as it would force them to either defy Trump by impeaching his favorite warmonger or tacitly vote to support the wildly unpopular war in Iran. Both of those are bad options for Republicans, who can’t afford to anger Trump ahead of the midterms. But voting against the impeachment would essentially be signing off on how he’s handled the Iran war. So rather than putting Republicans in that position, House Speaker Mike Johnson called a recess to stop the clock on the two-day voting rule.

I will myself to be happy, therefore I am

My Sunday movie was Indian Horse. It is the story of Saul Indian Horse, an indigenous man. The story opens in 1959 when the Canadian residential school system is still going strong. A similar school system was still in use in the US. At age six Saul’s family tries to protect him from being abducted and sent to a school. But their protection fails. A good chunk of the movie is about the cruelty of the priests and nuns who ran this particular school and all like it – a case of using God to justify oppression. A younger priest suggests building a hockey rink for the older boys. Saul is entranced by the game. He’s given the chore of maintaining the rink and secretly teaches himself to skate and handle a hockey stick. Though he’s not allowed to play because he’s too young, he soon shows he’s as good or better than the older boys. At one point Saul says the only thing they really teach at the school is how to endure. Hockey is how he endures. He’s good enough he is allowed to leave the school and be part of a small town league, then a minor league team with a chance at the majors. There he finds that too many white people think the game is theirs and shouldn’t be open to a native. They makes sure he knows that. This can be a difficult story to watch, but it’s an important one. The actors, including the kids, do a fine job. Overall, it’s a good movie. A few days ago I wrote about a post by Kos of Daily Kos who speculated that Republicans are sufficiently annoyed and tired of the nasty guy that enough would vote to remove him after the Democratic led House impeached him. My friend and debate partner disagreed, saying the chance of Republicans going along with this is “probably zero.” He wrote:

If [removal] did happen, it could accelerate the administration's march to fascism. Otherwise his toadies and sycophants (who lack immunity) face prison. Trump got this boulder rolling; but removing him still leaves it in motion. We need determined, steady effort to brake and break up this horror. That will take teaching and time.

I agree with my friend. Removing the nasty guy puts the vice nasty in power and many have said he is more fascist. At the very least the nasty guy isn’t very smart and is guided by his need to constantly prop up his ego, but the vice nasty is reasonably smart and would be more purposeful in working towards fascist goals. Also, removing just the nasty guy does nothing to curb the power of the billionaires and their hold over the Republican – and Democratic – parties. We’re not out of this threat until their power is neutralized.

The work ahead is for Congress and allies to denounce, investigate, impede, litigate and legislate to contain Trump and his fascists, fiscally starve their programs, slow and reverse the damage and assert a new American devotion to the Constitution, the rule of law, freedom and democracy.

The legislate part faces the nasty guy’s veto. As for the rest so far Democrats haven’t shown much spine in actually doing those things. I hope that when Democrats take over the House (hopefully the Senate too!) they begin the work on all those other things. But that will require a change in party leadership, sidelining all those beholden to billionaires. Will enough progressives be elected to force the issue? That means the breaking up of this horror and the teaching required to do so will have to be done by us. My friend and debate partner ended with:

I'm thinking the $5,000 "promise" is either fraud or bribery. Both are federal felonies. Since the "promise" was made to about 270 million adult US citizens, this amounts to 270 million felonies -- surely a world record! (CNN is my source for the 270 million figure.)

Ooh! I like that reasoning! The phrase “Live, Laugh, Love” now appears on coffee mugs and bumper stickers. NPR's Juana Summers talked with Kristin Kobez Du Mez about her new book Live Laugh Love: The Secret History of White Christian Women and the World They Made. The meaning behind the phrase both serves and harms women. The phrase goes back to 1875 and the book The Christian's Secret Of A Happy Life by Hannah Whithall Smith. Essentially, if one aligns their will with the will of God, believes and doesn’t doubt and keeps a positive attitude, then one will become holy and happiness will follow. For women, at least white women, aligning their will with the will of God means totally submitting to the men around them – their husband and their pastor. That will lead to happiness. That didn’t work for Smith either. She had to redefine happiness from an emotion to an act of will, “I will myself to be happy, therefore, I am.” Millions of women are taught they must trust the men, obey, even sacrifice their own well-being. God requires it and they will be blessed. They are taught to defend the authority of those God place over them. That means they have a hard time identifying abuse and certainly won’t speak out against it. The victims that complain tend to get pushed out of the community. This is why they vote conservatively. They are taught to uphold power structures, including authoritarian power. This seems contradictory when these women are immersed in a culture of love and positivity. The logic is that the pure feminine innocence must be protected from evil. That may require violence, but it will be righteous violence. Du Mez also talked about the compassionate conservatism that was popular during the Bush II reign. In the last 10-15 years that has been replaced with the idea that compassion should not be shown to the disobedient to the Christian or American project. We’re not surprised that includes LGBTQ people and immigrants. This ideology is absorbed more readily if women are teaching it. So, women can be out in public and involved in politics, even religion, as long as they stay within the ideology. I listened to this and thought about how women are taught to uphold the hierarchy – with themselves in a lower position – by telling them that God requires it. The God of love is being used to oppress, which is never love. I’ve written many times about Matthew, chapter 25, in the Bible that talks about what God requires of us – love and care for your neighbor as yourself and even the stranger is your neighbor. That’s it. As part of a discussion with my sister I realized Christians are very good at redefining what God wants – obedience and holiness are just a couple of diversions – so that we can avoid caring for our neighbor and still claim to be on the right side of God. Bill in Portland, Maine, in his Cheers and Jeers column for Kos discussed the nasty guy’s offer to pay $5,000 to every adult if Republicans maintain control of both the House and Senate.

But I do have a few questions, Mr. President. When you say “every adult citizen”… Does that include the Dumocrats? Does that include the sex criminals? ... Does that include the woke? The LGBTQ? The feminists and pagans? Does that include men with low testosterone and women with their original hair and faces? Does that include Republicans who vote Democrat? Does that include Jimmy Kimmel?

The list includes many more people and categories. Walter Einenkel of Kos reported that Mitch McConnell made an appearance at the Senate after three months of people wondering whether he had died. The response was mild, though he did fuel a lot of memes. In Monday’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin included a campaign ad from James Talarico, the Democrat trying to win the Senate seat in Texas. He essentially says a member of Congress is supposed to serve the people, not themselves. In the comments rugbymom posted a tweet by the Adam Hamilton campaign. He is a liberal United Methodist pastor (I’ve read at least one of his books) running as a Democrat for the Senate from Kansas and just might flip the seat. The tweet contains a video of Hamilton’s closing argument at a debate at the Kansas state fair against Roger Marshall. The characters of The Wizard of Oz want a heart, a brain, and courage. These are three things Republicans don’t have – their votes show they don’t have a heart, they don’t talk to constituents and don’t understand them showing they don’t have a brain, and they don’t have the courage to stand up to the nasty guy. Hamilton puts his preacher training to good use to lay all this out. In the comments of today’s roundup are a few good tweets and memes. A tweet from Andy Craig:

Great system where the body with the power to declare, fund, and authorize wars can repeatedly vote "we don't approve of this war, stop it" and it has no effect.

A meme posted by exlrrp and from Call to Activism:

The entire Republican Party just let the president try and undermine our Constitution and prevent eligible voters from making their voices heard in this election. The Supreme Court said No F---ing Way. Corruption lost and the law won!

Also posted by exlrrp is a campaign sign:

TRUMP $20.28 per gallon

Seduced by “power over”, when Christ taught us “service of”

Brian Beutler posted a thread with a link to an article in Off Message. The link’s title and subtitle:

How to Undo the Great Lie of 2024 Trump’s second election wasn’t a verdict for all time, but the coming midterms might be one.

I didn’t follow the link to the article. Beutler wrote in his thread:

MAGA got a huge return on gaslighting the elite into treating Trump's less than 2 percent popular vote plurality as a permanent repudiation of liberalism. The midterms represent an opportunity to propound an inverse but true narrative of American rejection of MAGA. But Dems have to frame it that way first. Republicans will send mixed messages if they lose, because Trump will deflect all responsibility for their poor performance. But they will be unified behind the idea that Democrats didn't win a mandate, because they always unify behind that idea. Meanwhile, in their affordability myopia, Democrats are likely to help Republicans along by attributing their own political success to Trump's narrow failure to reduce prices, giving him a pass on all the most repellent aspects of his presidency. If Democrats don't tell a grand story of Americans rising against fascism, the public will hear a different, false one. Republicans will say what the election was about, and what the results mean. And, once again, many people will believe them.

Drew Sheneman posted a cartoon on Daily Kos showing a crocodile labeled “Corporations” with a small bird in its mouth labeled “Dems.” The bird says,

Democratic Socialists will never understand our deeply symbiotic relationship. Now say ‘Ahh’ so I can pick the scraps from your teeth.

And that quite succinctly summarizes the problem I have with Democrats. Jon Paul Sydnor of the Street Prophets community group on Kos wrote a month ago:

If your church’s leaders are trying to control you, then leave. Many churches are systems of control that cause great pain. Today, some therapists are specializing in Religious Trauma Syndrome (RTS), trying to heal the psychic scars produced by churches that castigate questioning members and hold the threat of hell over all. The leaders of these churches have abandoned their call, having been seduced by the lure of power over, when Christ taught us service of.

The purpose of the church is to share the love of God with the world. The church is where love is enacted as consistently as possible. Yes, it fails to love perfectly. Sometimes it harms instead of heals. But very few (perhaps no other) organizations discuss love at all. Love risks betrayal, but the alternative is self-seclusion, which denies life. The church may not (can’t) love a person completely back to health, but it can make a start. Unless the church is broken and won’t admit it. And many don’t. Sydnor told a few stories about his father, a pastor. At one church he wanted to stop a “girlie” show that was part of the county fair. The show wasn’t risque, it was degrading. But it brought in a lot of money and a leading elder in the church supported it. The pastor was told not to rock the boat. He became disillusioned and left the ministry. After a dozen years working to prevent juvenile delinquency he returned to the ministry. A family left a nearby church to try his church. The daughter had Down’s syndrome and the other church wouldn’t let her be in the Christmas pageant. This pastor named her to be Mary, the central role, in their pageant to the great joy of the congregation.

That was one of the best Christmas Eve services ever. It was an imperfect church with an imperfect congregation and imperfect pastor, but they worked hard to love like God. And sometimes they hit the mark perfectly, creating the little miracles that sustain us.

In the comments of today’s pundit roundup for Kos is a tweet from Team Talarico, the campaign to elect Democrat James Talarico to the US Senate from Texas. In it Talarico is shown saying:

Scripture tells us that you can’t love God and hate other people. You can’t love God and abuse the immigrant. You can’t love God and oppress the poor. Matthew 25 tells us Christians exactly how we’re going to be judged — by feeding the hungry, by healing the sick...

The rest is cut off from the text of the tweet, though includes clothing the naked, offering hospitality to the stranger, and visiting those in prison. I see Matthew 25 as a core of the message Jesus is trying to teach us. In response to Talarico’s message Aaron Baer tweeted:

This is genuinely one of the most evil interpretations of Scripture I've ever seen. Lord protect your Church and our nation from this wolf.

And to that Kos user Rambler797 added:

Wut? (these people don’t know their own book)

Commenter The Idiot went looking for who Aaron Baer is: the president of the “Center for Christian Virtue.” It has turned the Bible upside down. That organization has completely inverted the Christian message and has accumulated the power and platform to override the love of God, then use the threat of God to spread hate. Vile. I went to Baer’s tweet, and of course it is on X. I was able to see a couple of the comments, all X would allow me to see before demanding I sign in. From Braden Bellack:

When someone posts something like this and then doesn’t respond to any of the comments or try to defend what they’ve said, it’s called rage bait. That’s all this is.

Think Prague posted a cartoon showing St. Peter at the gate of Heaven facing a man in a MAGA hat.

St. Peter: So, tell me... did you welcome the foreigner? Help the poor? Feed the hungry? Care for the sick?... you know, all the things Jesus commanded? Man: Listen here LibTard.