GOP3bak

 gullible conservatives

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">one year into trump era, he has officially taken over the party</font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">post impeach, authoritarian</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">see mcconn 3</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">capt 420</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/kentuckys-gravy-train-is-now-in-danger-thanks-to-mitch-mcconnells-heartless-greed/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/kentuckys-gravy-train-is-now-in-danger-thanks-to-mitch-mcconnells-heartless-greed/</font></a></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Kentucky’s gravy train is now in danger — thanks to Mitch McConnell’s heartless greed</b></font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Daily Kos Staff April 26, 2020</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As of 48 hours ago, few people knew that Kentucky was the nation’s leading recipient of federal largess, and certainly had no clue just how much the state received compared to the rest of the country. Then, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Republican from Kentucky, started whining about “Blue state bailouts,” and the shit has hit the fan.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Andrew Cuomo</font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">@NYGovCuomo</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">NY has given $116 billion more to the federal government than we received since 2015.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Kentucky took $148 billion more from the federal government than it gave.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Just give NY our money back, Senator McConnell.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Embedded video</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Looks like it’s time to reexamine Kentucky’s privileged status.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Blue states have been happy to carry the burden of funding red states for … kinda forever. California, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, in particular, have pumped untold hundreds of billions over the last several decades into mostly rural red states.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">That dynamic carries forth in states themselves, with large urban centers paying for rural regions, like the upstate-downstate divisions in Illinois and New York, or Philly-central Pennsylvania.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And that would be fine! Liberals are okay with helping out those that are less well off. Liberals have no problem with the federal government subsidizing telephone and mail service to rural areas—services that would not be justified by capitalistic math. We’re okay subsidizing rural health care. We’re okay subsidizing rural education, or opioid treatments, or transportation networks (e.g. roads).</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The problem here isn’t our willingness as liberals to help our disproportionately rural Conservative brothers and sisters. The problem is twofold: 1) the bullshit pretense that these same people are “anti-government” and that urban liberals are somehow feeding off the government trough, and 2) the refusal of these same assholes&nbsp; to help when blue states get hit with catastrophe. Instead, Mitch McConnells and his asshole buddies suddenly discover the evils of the budget deficit—a deficit that wouldn’t be so large if Kentucky wasn’t bleeding the country dry.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Still, once upon a time, liberals and Blue states were like “whatever, we’ve got it good, we’re the United States of America. We’ll help.” But McConnell’s toxic brew of greed and cruelty has shattered that pretense.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Conservatives have pretended for far too long that it is they, the “heartland,” the “real America,” that supposedly makes this country great, and it is the cities, the Brown and Black people, the feminists, the liberals, who are dragging it down. Yet it is us paying for their infrastructure, for their health care, for their Medicare and Medicaid and food stamps and aircraft carriers and all the things that make their society functional.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>They wouldn’t last a week without our assistance. Yet not only is there zero appreciation, but they act like they’re the ones being screwed over.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If Republicans want to finally acknowledge that we are all in this thing together, that we are a United States of America, then great, we can continue being generous.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But that’s not what’s happened. Quite the opposite. Their divisive up democratic talk, in fact, has sown the seeds for a national breakup.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And so now, Kentucky’s largess is firmly in the sights of Democratic lawmakers. No more flying under the radar. No more free ride. I’m going to embed this tweet one more time for effect:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">No more red-state bailouts.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So every time Mitch McConnell mentions the deficit? Kentucky first.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Mitch McConnell doesn’t want state bailouts? Kentucky first. Return the $148 billion in extra money it received the last five years.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Mitch McConnell wants to rail against the evil federal government? Then by all means, Kentucky, return that evil tainted federal cash.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Mitch McConnell wants to rail against New York or California? Return the money paid by New York and California taxpayers.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The red-state anti-government scam is fully exposed. No more.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/03/a-pandemic-is-laying-bare-the-gops-blatant-corruption-and-recklessness/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/03/a-pandemic-is-laying-bare-the-gops-blatant-corruption-and-recklessness/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>A pandemic is laying bare the GOP’s blatant corruption and recklessness</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">President Donald J. Trump applauds during the federal judicial confirmation milestone event Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2019, in the East Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Julianna Luz)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Heather Digby Parton / Salon March 20, 2020</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As we watch states around the country start to shut down, one by one, as if the lights were all going out across the country, there is plenty of discussion about President Trump’s bungled response and his compulsion to deliver happy talk and disinformation to the American people. Now that he is unable to hold his beloved rallies and has taken over the daily coronavirus briefing, the opportunities for the latter are unfortunately multiplying. His performances before the cameras every day are getting more and more surreal.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On Thursday, Trump came before the country touting a supposed wonder drug that he promised looked like a major breakthrough. (In fact, it’s a standard antimalarial medication.) As usual, the experts had to walk that back later, saying that it’s just one of many drugs being considered as a possible treatment but they won’t know for months. Reports coming from within the administration confirm that the bungling continues unabated. Between Jared’ Kushner’s “shadow task force” and turf wars among the various players, it seems nobody really knows who’s running the show. It certainly isn’t Trump, who is clearly spending most of his time watching Fox News and the stock market ticker.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There was a time when we might have expected Republicans in Congress to wake up from their stupor and exert some leadership in the face of a president’s overwhelming incompetence in such a crisis. Sure, maybe they felt it was no big deal that he engaged in a criminal cover-up from the moment he took his oath, or that he extorted a foreign leader to smear his political opponent.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Maybe it doesn’t mean anything to them that he’s pretty much dismantled the executive branch as a functional part of government and completely destroyed America’s reputation abroad. Assaulting the press, nepotism, rampant corruption and intentionally dividing the country into warring camps obviously aren’t things that keep them up at night.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But you would have thought GOP lawmakers might be just a little bit concerned about their own voters getting sick and dying in droves. Not to mention the collapse of the world economy.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Unfortunately, leading Republicans don’t seem all that worked up about it, or at least not in public. Recall that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell adjourned the Senate for three days last week. He didn’t feel it was necessary to stay in session so they could put together an emergency economic package to help the millions of workers and owners who have lost their jobs and businesses overnight.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He had priorities and they didn’t include trying to mitigate the effects of what appears to be an impending economic meltdown:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sherrod Brown</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>@SenSherrodBrown</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>This is why Mitch McConnell sent the Senate home for the weekend. To join Brett Kavanaugh at an oath ceremony for one of his judicial nominees.&nbsp;</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Unbelievable.https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mcconnell-absent-from-negotiations-on-coronavirus-economic-relief-package/2020/03/13/7f5f495e-6541-11ea-b3fc-7841686c5c57_story.html …</font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">McConnell finally reconvened the Senate this week and Republicans came up with their own plan on Thursday evening — over which, unfortunately, the GOP caucus is still squabbling. Politico’s Jake Sherman reports that Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.. and new White House chief of staff Mark Meadows are lobbying Trump to reject the idea of immediate cash payments. Apparently they don’t think it’s important to get money into the hands of the millions of people whose incomes have abruptly dried up, and prefer an increase in unemployment benefits. (Why this should be either/or is beyond me. Clearly, we need both.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They aren’t the only Republican senators who don’t like the bill McConnell came up with, with some favoring loans to small businesses and others arguing against bailouts. As they continue to bicker amongst themselves. many are displaying their ignorance, shallowness and irresponsibility during this emergency.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Here’s Alaska’s long-serving solo congressman, Rep. Don Young, sounding like one of those drunken kids on spring break in Fort Lauderdale, characterizing the response to the epidemic as “hysteria” and exhorting a group of senior citizens not to follow the instructions of public health experts:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This beer virus I call it — they call it a coronavirus, I call it a beer virus — how do you like that? It attacks our senior citizens. Now, I’m one of you. I still say we have to as a nation, as a state, to go forth with our everyday activities.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin expressed his skepticism as well:</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I’m not denying what a nasty disease COVID-19 can be, and how it’s obviously devastating to somewhere between 1 and 3.4 percent of the population. But that means 97 to 99 percent will get through this and develop immunities and will be able to move beyond this. But we don’t shut down our economy because tens of thousands of people die on the highways. It’s a risk we accept so we can move about. We don’t shut down our economies because tens of thousands of people die from the common flu.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Johnson is a multimillionaire businessman, but he seems to be a bit confused about numbers. Traffic accidents account for about 34,000 deaths per year in the U.S. If the coronavirus kills 1 to 3.4 percent of the population, that would add up to somewhere between 3 and 11 million people. I suspect that could be pretty bad for business, but what do I know?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., wasted everyone’s time with an irrelevant amendment and gave a speech in which he referred to immigrants as “non-people.” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said he couldn’t understand why Chinese people would be upset that Trump is calling this disease the “Chinese virus”&nbsp;</b>because “Spain never got upset when we referred to the Spanish flu in 1918 and 1919.” (They did get upset. That pandemic originated in Kansas, but Spain was the only country not under wartime censorship so that’s where it was first reported. That’s not a good precedent.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Republicans have lost the ability to legislate, even in an emergency. All they know how to do is confirm unqualified judges and protect Donald Trump from accountability.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Well, actually — they also know how to look out for No. 1. NPR reported on Thursday that Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., had given a private briefing to some influential big donors on Feb. 27. As chairman of the Intelligence Committee as well as co-author of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act, Burr was in a good position to know what was coming down. He warned this select audience that the coronavirus was akin to the 1918 flu pandemic and that we might have to close schools, curtail travel and call out the military.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Here’s what the president was telling the American people at that time:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Aaron Rupar</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@atrupar</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We’re going to be pretty soon at only 5 people, and we could be at just 1 or 2 people over the next short period of time” — Trump on US coronavirus cases on February 26 (there are now more than 10,000 cases in the country)&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Embedded video</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">JM Rieger</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@RiegerReport</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump earlier today on coronavirus:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“It’s going to disappear one day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear. And from our shores, you know, it could get worse before it gets better, could maybe go away, we’ll see what happens. Nobody really knows.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Embedded video</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ProPublica reported later on Thursday that Burr had sold millions of dollars worth of stock days before he gave his big-donor buddies this helpful heads-up. As it happens, Sen. Kelly Loeffler, R-Ga., whose husband just happens to be the chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, also dumped millions of dollars worth of stock immediately after a full Senate briefing on the virus by the subcommittee on health.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">How likely is it that they are the only ones?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Everyone thinks the Republican establishment is afraid of Donald Trump. This entire episode suggests that’s not true. It isn’t that they’re afraid of him. They’re just like him.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: currentcolor none medium; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer; letter-spacing: 0px;">=</span></font></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/03/how-the-coronavirus-crisis-revealed-the-danger-of-the-decades-long-conservative-movement/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/03/how-the-coronavirus-crisis-revealed-the-danger-of-the-decades-long-conservative-movement/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>How the coronavirus crisis revealed the danger of the decades-long conservative movement</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Amanda Marcotte / Salon March 13, 2020</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell smelled an evil liberal conspiracy on Thursday, one designed to steal away his decades of tireless work to kneecap the federal government. The Democratic-majority House had passed a large emergency bill, designed to combat the coronavirus pandemic, and McConnell was absolutely certain Democrats, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, were trying to pull one over on him.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Unfortunately, it appears at this hour that the speaker and House Democrats instead chose to produce an ideological wish list that was not tailored closely to the circumstances,” McConnell said. He accused Democrats of exploiting this situation, saying the bill addresses “various areas of policy that are barely related, if at all, to the issue before us.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>There’s a lot at stake here, but apparently the big sticking point for McConnell was a provision requiring employers to offer paid sick leave to employees, which McConnell claims would “put thousands of small businesses at risk.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In reality, of course, this is just common sense. As the New York Times editorial board noted, companies that don’t offer paid sick leave “are endangering their workers and customers.” A lot of workers with public-facing jobs — such as food service workers and retail employees — come into close contact with dozens or hundreds of people a day. But they are the people least likely to be allowed to stay home without losing their jobs, or at least losing a paycheck.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>McConnell is so poisoned by his right-wing ideology that he can’t see this, or chooses not to. Instead, he’s standing firm on the long-standing Republican tendency to view employers as feudal lords who should be allowed to treat employees however they wish — even, apparently, if that means allowing a deadly disease to rip through the population, potentially killing hundreds of thousands of people if it is not checked.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So far, most of the panic over the coronavirus outbreak has been driven by the undeniable incompetence of Donald Trump. At every turn, Trump has made this situation worse — even going so far as to try to discourage testing to bamboozle the public and, I suspect, tanking the markets by screwing up an Oval Office address because he’s too vain to wear glasses so he can see well enough to read a teleprompter.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">That’s</span><b style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> all true. But it’s also important to understand that the larger Republican Party, even without Trump, is also to blame for what looks to be a serious public health crisis. Right-wing ideology, often</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);"> marketed as “rugged individualism” but perhaps better understood as an aversion to the very concept of a common good,</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> is one major reason why the U.S. government, hamstrung for decades by Republican power, isn’t better equipped to handle a crisis.</span></b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This isn’t just a Trump problem. This is a widespread Republican problem. For decades, GOP strategy has been consistent: Whenever they get power, they slash regulations and gut spending, with the goal of making government less effective. This is a deliberate strategy to make the public broadly distrustful of government, and therefore increasingly open to shifting more and more power to the wealthy individuals who control the private sector.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This ideological commitment to an every-man-for-himself ideology, which is terrible in any circumstances, is exposed as particularly dreadful in the face of a pandemic. Disease is a reminder that humans are a herd species, wholly dependent on each other for survival, and that government must be a way to formally organize that joint survival pattern. It’s not some villain in a racism-inflected right-wing morality fable about the importance of “personal responsibility.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Simply put, we need our government to be able to protect us from disease. Republicans have spent years tearing it down, and even in a crisis are incapable of accepting that “small government” is not always a good thing.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As Max Moran at Talking Points Memo argued, the fact that Vice President Mike Pence — deemed a “normal” Republican — is in charge of the coronavirus comforts some people, because they believe he is more adult and responsible than Trump. Pence’s track record suggests otherwise. As governor of Indiana, he oversaw an HIV outbreak that led to 10% of the population people in a single county becoming infected because Pence thought preaching the value of personal responsibility was better than following the recommendations of public health experts.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>“[A] Pence-led response is dangerous, not in spite of, but precisely because he is a typical Republican,” Moran writes, because normal Republicans “apply their competence and considerable resources” to the task of “protection for the powerful, callousness for the afflicted, and a special disdain for the ‘other.'”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The right-wing idiocy that is going to get people killed is all over the Republican response to this situation. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy joined McConnell in denouncing the Democratic bill, even though everything in it — including expanding food-stamp spending — will either help slow the spread of the disease or stimulate the American economy to offset the inevitable slowdown caused by this epidemic.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Instead, McCarthy is resorting to racism instead of sensible public health measures, calling the coronavirus the “Chinese coronavirus” for no apparent purpose except to feed the assumptions of the Fox News base than their whiteness and their racist attitudes will somehow protect them</b>. (This assumption, by the way, is leading many older Americans to take serious and completely unnecessary risks with their health.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>The right-wing ideology poisoning is so bad that the coronavirus bill was held up in part because Republicans wanted to inject some anti-abortion language into it.</b> There is absolutely no reason to believe that helping people protect themselves against a viral epidemic will lead to more abortions, but that’s the modern GOP for you: They’re always worried that somehow or other the Democrats have a sneaky agenda to “let” women have sex. (Which women will undoubtedly do, whether the Democrats authorize it or not.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Even the so-called Republican “moderates” are to blame for this situation. For instance, Politico reporter Michael Grunwald uncovered this little tidbit about Sen. Susan Collins of Maine from his book about the Obama era.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Michael Grunwald</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@MikeGrunwald</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I had forgotten my own reporting that @SenatorCollins stripped $870M for pandemic preparations out of the 2009 stimulus.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Zooming out, it’s easy to see how decades of damage to our government are likely to make this epidemic worse. Republicans have been stingy about health care spending and have blocked Democratic efforts to increase access, especially when it comes to the Medicaid expansion under the Obama administration. The result is that we have fewer doctors and hospitals ready to handle what we know is coming, and we will probably have a lot of infected people who won’t get tested, either because they can’t afford it or don’t even know where to go for testing and treatment.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By all means, blame Trump for the current crisis. His incompetence is especially central to the panicked reaction of the financial markets. Even a slightly steadier president, whatever his or her party or ideology, would bolster investor confidence a whole lot more.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But this isn’t just about Trump. Republicans have a profound hostility to good government, and whatever slapdash response they may grudgingly accept in an effort to save their skins at the ballot box this November will be hamstrung by the fact that they refused, for decades, to invest in the infrastructure necessary to weather the big shock that is hitting us right now. Viruses are the ultimate reminder that humans are interconnected and need each other, and that the ideal of “rugged individualism” is childish and often racist nonsense.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/how-conservatism-could-kill-us-all/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/how-conservatism-could-kill-us-all/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>How ‘conservatism’ could kill us all</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Written by Joe Conason</b>&nbsp;February 28, 2020</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Nothing confirms the human need for strong, honest and competent government like a looming pandemic. The possibility that thousands, or even millions, could die from a randomly transmitted virus reminds us of our species’ vulnerability — and why society cannot exist without institutions that can protect us from such staggering existential threats.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Only government can impose quarantines and precautions when necessary. Only government can trace contacts, control transportation and monitor communities. Only government can ensure that drugs, medical devices and care will be adequately distributed — and that sufficient resources will be directed toward production of a vaccine as soon as possible, without regard to profit.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">At a moment like this, it suddenly becomes clear that every problem — indeed, the most pressing problems — cannot and will not be solved by “the private sector.” If that seems blazingly obvious, please inform the Republicans who constantly tell us they want to&nbsp;<b>“shrink government down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.”</b>&nbsp;Facing a potential catastrophe, those old jeers from the right sound utterly mindless.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But that is precisely the outlook that has undermined our social defenses against a global pandemic,&nbsp;<b>despite many warnings over the years from experts and academics that it was coming. President Donald Trump personifies the impulse to ignore the peril while insisting on prejudice, rather than science. It is exactly the same posture that he and his enablers take toward climate change. When he put on a stunning display of ignorance at a press conference meant to reassure us about the coronavirus, it was because he is capable of nothing more.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Trump alone isn’t responsible for the attitudes that undermine our response to the pandemic danger, of course. What passes for conservatism now is more akin to nihilism, promoting attacks on government and spending no matter what essential purpose they may serve.&nbsp;</span>(<b>Only the military, that mammoth of unconscionable waste, is exempt from right-wing dogma.) In the service of tax cuts for the ultra-rich, no vital program can be assured of adequate funding.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>So the Trump budget actually aims to reduce funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — an idiotic proposal released just before the arrival of the coronavirus. The timing was perfect. And in fact, Trump and his minions have repeatedly vandalized the nation’s bulwarks against pandemic disease.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Exactly two years ago, the money budgeted by former President Barack Obama’s administration to deal with the Ebola outbreak in 2014 began to run out, and the Trump White House allowed that to occur, even though it meant reducing efforts to prevent a pandemic in most of the countries where we should be keeping watch.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The aim of that program was to stop any disease outbreak at the source, rather than allow it to leap oceans into the U.S. homeland. Among the 39 hotspot countries that saw this program eliminated were Congo, Pakistan, Rwanda — and China. Remember that the next time you hear a Republican politician barking about “wasteful” foreign aid. The simple truth is that a minimal investment in global health could have provided substantial insurance against the kind of menace we now confront.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The politicians who hate government also tend to be remarkably incapable of executing the most important government functions.&nbsp;</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Obviously, this is true of Trump and his gang, who have left an extraordinary number of posts vacant simply because they don’t understand why it is necessary to fill them</span>. In other instances, their empty-headed disregard for the purposes of government has led to the&nbsp;<b>abolition of indispensable agencies and offices — notably, the National Security Council global health security division.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">For the past three years, Trump and the Republicans have busied themselves with attacks on our government’s intelligence capabilities, our health systems, even the health coverage that would enable Americans to cope with an epidemic like coronavirus might become</span>. They railed against “the deep state”; they sabotaged fundamental services; they behaved as if society needs no sentinels or guard posts; and now they pretend to be able to protect us.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>If America escapes tragedy this time, it must be taken as a warning: Never entrust the future to these numbskulls again.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">To find out more about Joe Conason and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/senate-republicans-are-implicated-in-trumps-authoritarian-organized-crime-outfit/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/senate-republicans-are-implicated-in-trumps-authoritarian-organized-crime-outfit/</font></a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Senate Republicans are implicated in Trump’s authoritarian organized crime outfit</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump disembark Air Force One Wednesday, Aug. 7, 2019, at El Paso International Airport greeted by Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, and El Paso Mayor Dee Margo. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Joe Conason / Creators Syndicate February 14, 2020</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Authoritarian governments almost always operate in a style that resembles organized crime outfits. Despite their ostentatious populism, such regimes exist to enrich thuggish rulers and enable corruption in high places. The Trump administration is a perfect example.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But in order to maintain an aura of legitimacy, especially in a country with democratic norms and traditions, authoritarian bosses constantly proclaim their devotion to justice, their determination to right wrongs, and their adherence to law and order. So even as President Donald Trump and his attorney general, Bill Barr, pervert the legal system to cover up official crimes and protect presidential cronies, they are creating a narrative of justification for those acts.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">From the very beginning of the Russia-collusion investigation, Trump has aimed to derail investigations of appointees and associates who might implicate him in criminal activity. He urged James Comey, then the FBI director, to bury the investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s unlawful conduct. Then he fired Comey, and later he repeatedly tried to get rid of special counsel Robert Mueller. The Mueller report describes in appalling detail a dozen attempts by Trump to kill the investigation.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At the same time, Trump and his lawyers sent clear messages to all the gang members caught up in the Russia investigation: Don’t talk. We’ll take care of you. They “dangled” pardons to buy silence, with Trump openly considering clemency for the potential witnesses he praised as “brave” and “strong.” His former campaign manager Paul Manafort signed and then violated a cooperation agreement with Mueller. So did Flynn. Longtime adviser and dirty tricks specialist Roger Stone never talked, although he knows everything.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While Trump’s efforts to stop the investigation continued behind the scenes, the public face of his propaganda apparatus declared incessantly that the Russia probe was “a hoax.” Not only was there no reason to investigate Russia; according to Trump, the real culprit in 2016 was Ukraine, which Trump also blamed for framing Manafort. (Discovering, or perhaps inventing, evidence that will “exonerate” Manafort is among the chief preoccupations of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s trips to Ukraine.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Never mind the meticulously documented findings of nearly every U.S. intelligence agency and official including his own FBI director, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee and the Mueller investigation. And never mind the multiple convictions of Flynn, Manafort, Stone and others in Trump’s orbit.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The logic of Trump’s ongoing campaign is plain: If the investigation was a fraud, then the prosecutions of Trump associates that emerged from that investigation were, by definition, unjust. But the president can rectify those “injustices” — by granting pardons to the men who could have testified against him.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s as if a mob boss had the authority to pardon any underlings who might implicate him (instead of having them whacked).</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Emboldened by the Senate’s impeachment acquittal, despite his obvious guilt, Trump now feels free to fulfill the obstruction conspiracy. He is certain that the Senate Republicans — not to mention his wholly owned attorney general — will do nothing to oppose the brazen scheme. They are all implicated in his criminality now.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By uttering a few little squeaks of protest, they help him create a scrim of normality around his gangsterism. So various senators tut-tutted Trump’s latest intervention in the sentencing of Stone as “inappropriate.” And so, Barr himself complained publicly that Trump’s tweeting about the Stone prosecution makes his job “impossible,” which simply means that Barr and the Republicans prefer assaults on democratic norms to occur in the back room, without too much noise.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When lawful government is restored someday, Trump may have to answer for having misused the pardon power for obstruction of justice. There was firm precedent in the Justice Department’s investigation of former President Bill Clinton’s pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich. Until then, the American system of justice and constitutional liberty will remain in the gravest jeopardy.</font></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">truscott</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/were-slipping-further-into-fascism-as-trump-indulges-all-his-worst-instincts-with-the-help-of-his-toadies/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/were-slipping-further-into-fascism-as-trump-indulges-all-his-worst-instincts-with-the-help-of-his-toadies/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx...</font></div></div></div></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/republicans-want-to-either-rule-america-or-destroy-it-for-everyone-else-political-scientist"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/republicans-want-to-either-rule-america-or-destroy-it-for-everyone-else-political-scientist</font></a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republicans want to either rule America — or destroy it for everyone else: political scientist</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Tom Boggioni / Raw Story February 2, 2020</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In a scorching column for the Daily Beast, David Rothkopf writes that the refusal of the Republican-controlled Senate to agree to hear witnesses in the impeachment trial of the Donald Trump is one of the darkest moments in U.S. history — ranking up with the start of the Civil War.</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Getting right to the point, he wrote, “Jan. 31, 2020, was the worst day for democracy in America since April 12, 1861, when South Carolina forces opened fire on Fort Sumter. Both days represented a moment when an old guard representing a dying way of life placed their own survival ahead of that of the United States and our Constitution,” before adding, “It is an irony that the GOP was founded as an anti-slavery party, a harbinger of the changes to come in the mid-19th century, and today has become a reactionary force surviving by stoking fears of the massive U.S. social transformation that is already well underway.”</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Focusing on the Senate impeachment trial that is expected to culminate with the acquittal of the president along party lines, he explained, “What took place in the Senate on Friday when it voted not to hear witnesses in the trial of Donald Trump— when witnesses such as John Bolton were available who could corroborate his guilt—may have been the most damaging blow of all. Because this decision effectively ensured that Trump would not only be acquitted of crimes he certainly committed, it also ensured a number of key points made by Trump and his defenders would in months and years to come be supported by the precedent of the momentous Senate action. These include a virtual ratification of the idea that anything a president might do to win reelection would be acceptable.”</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The columnist goes on to state that the Republican Party fears the rising tide of change in the country so they are hell-bent are destroying all norms in a desperate attempt to hold onto power in a deeply divided country.</b></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Now they know it is not only OK for them to try put a thumb on the scale of the U.S. elections but that the president and the senate of the United States will ensure they are protected if they do it,” he wrote. “The desperate GOP, seeing the clock running out on their brand of racism- and ignorance-fueled, aging white male-based power, will compound the above with renewed efforts to suppress the vote during the months ahead. Who is going to stop them? The courts they have packed? The Department of Justice? The president and the Republican Party that are rooting for their success?”</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“This election is likely to be the most at risk to foreign and domestic meddling and distortion in modern history,” he continued. ” t is clear that the GOP will stop at nothing, use every legal or semi-legal trick in the book and then, when they run out of those, they will move on, as the president did, to the illegal—and the GOP will seek to find new ways to forgive or even endorse that behavior.”</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Where they can undermine the law and the Constitution to advance their own narrow interests they will continue to do that, without regard for the lasting damage they are doing—because for them there is only now. For them, tomorrow is the enemy and certain defeat,” he concluded.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">You can read the whole piece here (subscription required).</font></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">see for pol</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/01/trump-has-never-been-anti-war-if-you-understand-the-history-of-gop-foreign-policy-hes-always-been-just-another-republican/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/01/trump-has-never-been-anti-war-if-you-understand-the-history-of-gop-foreign-policy-hes-always-been-just-another-republican/</font></a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...Having said that, there is still a crucial difference between our isolationist and interventionist eras — as well as a way of understanding how Donald Trump, for all his efforts to depicting himself as something new on the foreign policy scene, is just a continuation of the status quo that has existed for the last century or so.</font></div><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">1. Republican foreign policy was isolationist from the party’s founding through the 1890s...</font></strong></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</b></font></div><div><a href="https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/some-gop-lawmakers-are-thawing-on-climate-change"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/some-gop-lawmakers-are-thawing-on-climate-change</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2/19?</font></div><div><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Congressional Republicans seem to be thawing on climate.</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Rep.&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?44624&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none;">Mark Meadows</a>, the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus who has denied the science behind climate change, told reporters Wednesday he was open to confront the peril of the warming planet.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“There are some things I’m willing to look at,”&nbsp;the North Carolina Republican said of addressing climate change. While he remains skeptical of climate science, he said, “I think that greenhouse gas emissions is certainly something that we need to look at.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Last week,&nbsp;<b>Senate&nbsp;</b>Environment and Public Works Chairman&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?2484&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">John Barrasso</a>&nbsp;of Wyoming&nbsp;said America can cut its carbon output. It’s a business opportunity for U.S. firms, he said. “You know, as other countries grow their economies, they should be using the best possible technology to capture carbon emissions.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And Illinois Republican&nbsp;<b>Rep.&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?175&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">John Shimkus</a>,</b>&nbsp;who in 2008 called a carbon tax “the only intellectually honest way to move forward on global climate change,”&nbsp;said Wednesday, referring to a possible climate bill, that there are “areas of agreement where Republicans can be supportive so that you might have a legislative solution that actually gets signed into law.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As the long-set Republican opposition to addressing climate change recedes on Capitol Hill, even highly conservative members in the House and Senate are indicating they view greenhouse gases as a problem and are open to climate measures that would emphasize an expanded role for the private sector rather than the federal government.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While no deal is imminent or likely in this Congress, Republicans have set out areas they might be willing to compromise on or use as bargaining chips in negotiating climate legislation, including carbon-capture technology, energy efficiency, nuclear power, battery storage and funding for basic energy research and development.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In a column published Wednesday, a trio of top Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee — ranking member&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?402&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none;">Greg Walden</a>&nbsp;of Oregon, Rep.&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?245&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none;">Fred Upton</a>&nbsp;of Michigan, and Shimkus — offered an “innovation” pitch to address the issue with what they called “bipartisan solutions”: renewable energy development, carbon capture and utilization, hydropower and nuclear power.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“These are bipartisan solutions we must seize on to deliver real results for the American people,” they wrote.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That type of offer may have an audience with Democrats who may view a proposal with more federal involvement, like the Green New Deal resolution from Rep.&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?118914&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez</a>&nbsp;of New York and Sen.&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?220&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Edward J. Markey</a>&nbsp;of Massachusetts, as less politically palatable. The resolution aims to overhaul the U.S. energy system and swiftly pull away from carbon-heavy sources.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?404&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Peter A. DeFazio</a>&nbsp;of Oregon, who opposed cap-and-trade legislation Democrats narrowly passed when they last had control of the House, said he was interested in what Republicans had to offer.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Renewable energy, R&D, energy efficiency, research into new battery technology, massive federal investments in those areas? Sure, I’m interested in that,” DeFazio said.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He said that before he’s willing to work with Republicans on these efforts, they must acknowledge the science behind climate change and the related risks presented to the planet.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“They have to acknowledge there’s a problem if they want to spend a bunch of money to solve it,” he said. “If they’re going to spend a bunch of money on a problem they say doesn’t exist, it doesn’t make a lot of sense.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Shimkus said that he, with Walden and Upton, was trying to move beyond the topic of climate science, which “we all agree with,” to a strategy of “how we can move forward.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republicans are considering “where are there areas of agreement where Republicans can be supportive so that you might have a legislative solution that actually gets signed into law,” he said.</font></p><h2 style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1.1; margin-top: 20px; margin-bottom: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">‘No-regret solutions’</font></h2><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing last week, Sen.&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?17262&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Lisa Murkowski</a>,&nbsp;who chairs the committee, laid out similar grounds for compromise.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I have often spoken about clean energy innovation policies as ‘no-regret solutions,’”&nbsp;the Alaska Republican&nbsp;said. “But in reality, these are just those first steps.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Deploying low-carbon energy infrastructure worldwide requires research and cost-cutting, she said, underscoring carbon capture technology, which is still in its infancy.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“It is time to push hard to bring down the cost of clean energy technologies like renewables, advanced nuclear, next-generation energy storage and carbon capture,” Murkowski said. “If we want credible technological solutions that are cost-effective and deployable globally and at-scale, we must ensure that the policies we put in place propel those efforts.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Energy and Natural Resources ranking member&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?2120&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Joe Manchin</a>&nbsp;III said at that hearing that a comprehensive measure like the Green New Deal could be a way for lawmakers of both parties to “come together and understand that it’s a really lofty goal.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We get these divides where our caucuses, whether it be within the Democrat or Republican, or divide within the whole Senate or the whole Congress,”&nbsp;the West Virginia Democrat said. “We don’t want to drink dirty water. We don’t want to breathe dirty air. We want our kids to have a future. We really do. They also realize they have to have a job to sustain themselves.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Shimkus agreed with the sentiment that Democrats’ Green New Deal created an opportunity to craft a more politically-moderate approach to addressing climate that could receive buy-in from his party.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I think that’s helpful in getting us to look at something ... that we might be willing to consider,” he said.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In an interview, Rep.&nbsp;<a shape="rect" class="memberLink" title="Click to view member info in a new window" href="https://www.rollcall.com/members?29506&utm_source=memberLink?utm_source=memberLink" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">Paul Tonko</a>, who is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce’s Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee, lauded the Republicans’ willingness to address climate change but said their push for innovation falls short of what is needed to tackle such as sprawling threat.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Innovation and research are important but again that's only picking two tools out of the kit,”&nbsp;the New York Democrat said. “And if we’re going to get to this very lofty ambitious goal with urgency, we’re going to need to have many more elements to be part of the equation for success.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Tonko, whose subcommittee would be the first stop for legislation in the House to address climate change and energy issues, said there are opportunities to work out a deal between both chambers and parties.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He mentioned energy efficiency, weatherization, conservation, research and upgrading the electric grids as areas of collaboration — points Republicans have broadly said they would be open to.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I applaud they're coming around,” Tonko said. “It appears as though the denial syndrome or the delay syndrome has been abandoned and that people are now talking solutions.”</font></p><div style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump: Green New Deal sounds like a ‘high school term paper that got a low mark’]</font></span></span></p></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></b></font></div></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">1219 an</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div><b>Listen: Top Trump advisor admits GOP ‘traditionally’ suppresses votes</b></div><div>
</div><div>Written by David Badash / The New Civil Rights Movement December 21, 2019</div><div>
</div><div>A bombshell audio recording reveals a top Trump campaign official admitting that the Republican Party regularly suppress ES the vote and he is promising a much more aggressive and “better-funded” program for the 2020 election after relaxed Election Day rules.</div><div>
</div><div>“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” the&nbsp;<b>senior political adviser and senior counsel to the Trump re-election campaign, Justin Clark,</b>&nbsp;says in the audio, according to the Associated Press.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Let’s start&nbsp;<b>protecting our voters</b>. We know where they are. … Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”</span></div><div>
</div><div>Clark, who made the remarks during an event with influential Republicans, “said he was referring to false accusations that the GOP engages in voter suppression,” the AP notes.</div><div>
</div><div>“Neither I nor anyone I know or work with would condone anyone’s vote being threatened or diluted and our efforts will be focused on preventing just that,” Clark said.</div><div>
</div><div><b>The audio offers other insights.</b></div><div><b>“We were able to change state party rules in 37 states around the country that are not only streamline [sic] the process but really beneficial to the President</b>,” Clark says (below).</div><div>
</div><div>Former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams, who lost her gubernatorial election campaign by 50,000 votes after the Georgia Secretary of State, her opponent, kicked 670,000 voters off the rolls, weighs in:</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Ahem. ?? Voter suppression isn’t a bug; it’s a feature for the GOP. Wisconsin, Georgia, Ohio, Michigan, Florida…you name the competitive state, and I can tell you their plan. They’re just finally saying the quiet part out loud. @fairfightaction</span>&nbsp;#FightVoterSuppression https://t.co/7gSU0QkIoe</div><div>
</div><div>— Stacey Abrams (@staceyabrams) December 20, 2019</div><div>
</div><div>Clark’s remarks begin at the 5:00 minute mark. At the 7:30 mark Clark begins to brag about how they have been able to change state rules to make them better for President Trump.</div><div>
</div><div>Listen:</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/impeachment-underscores-the-moral-relativism-of-trumpian-republican-and-knocks-conservatives-of-a-high-horse-political-journalist/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/impeachment-underscores-the-moral-relativism-of-trumpian-republican-and-knocks-conservatives-of-a-high-horse-political-journalist/</a></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">majority of fox viewers favor impeach?! 1219 but see 10 things wrong believe</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/this-disturbing-psychological-analysis-of-trump-supporters-has-exposed-key-5-traits-about-them/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/this-disturbing-psychological-analysis-of-trump-supporters-has-exposed-key-5-traits-about-them/</font></a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div><b>This disturbing psychological analysis of Trump supporters has exposed key 5 traits about them</b></div><div>
</div><div>Written by Bobby Azarian / Raw Story December 16, 2019</div><div>
</div><div>The lightning-fast ascent and political invincibility of Donald Trump has left many experts baffled and wondering, “How did we get here?” Any accurate and sufficient answer to that question must not only focus on Trump himself, but also on his uniquely loyal supporters. Given their extreme devotion and unwavering admiration for their highly unpredictable and often inflammatory leader, some have turned to the field of psychology for scientific explanations based on precise quantitative data and established theoretical frameworks.</div><div>
</div><div>Although analyses and studies by psychologists and neuroscientists have provided many thought-provoking explanations for his enduring support, the accounts of different experts often vary greatly, sometimes overlapping and other times conflicting. However insightful these critiques may be, it is apparent that more research and examination is needed to hone in on the exact psychological and social factors underlying this peculiar human behavior.</div><div>
</div><div>In a review paper published in the Journal of Social and Political Psychology, Psychologist and&nbsp;<b>UC Santa Cruz professor Thomas Pettigrew</b>&nbsp;argues that five major psychological phenomena can help explain this exceptional political event.</div><div>
</div><div>1.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Authoritarian Personality Syndrome</div><div>
</div><div>Authoritarianism refers to the advocacy or enforcement of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom, and is commonly associated with a lack of concern for the opinions or needs of others.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Authoritarian personality syndrome—a well-studied and globally-prevalent condition—is a state of mind that is characterized by belief in total and complete obedience to one’s authority. Those with the syndrome often display aggression toward outgroup members, submissiveness to authority, resistance to new experiences, and a rigid hierarchical view of society. The&nbsp;<b>syndrome is often triggered by fear, making it easy for leaders who exaggerate threat or fear monger to gain their allegiance.</b></span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Although authoritarian personality is found among liberals, it is more common among the right-wing around the world. President Trump’s speeches, which are laced with absolutist terms like “losers” and “complete disasters,” are naturally appealing to those with the syndrome.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">While research showed that Republican voters in the U.S. scored higher than Democrats on measures of authoritarianism before Trump emerged on the political scene, a 2016 Politico survey found that high authoritarians greatly favored then-candidate Trump, which led to a correct prediction that he would win the election, despite the polls saying otherwise.</span></div><div>
</div><div>2.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Social dominance orientation</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Social dominance orientation (SDO)—which is distinct but related to authoritarian personality syndrome—refers to people who have a preference for the societal hierarchy of groups, specifically with a structure in which the high-status groups have dominance over the low-status ones. Those with SDO are typically<b>&nbsp;dominant, tough-minded, and driven by self-interest.</b></span></div><div>
</div><div>In Trump’s speeches, he appeals to those with SDO by repeatedly making a clear distinction between groups that have a generally higher status in society (White), and those groups that are typically thought of as belonging to a lower status (immigrants and minorities).</div><div>
</div><div>A 2016 survey study of 406 American adults published this year in the journal Personality and Individual Differences found that<b>&nbsp;those who scored high on both SDO and authoritarianism were those who intended to vote for Trump in the election.</b></div><div>
</div><div>3.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Prejudice</div><div>
</div><div>It would be grossly unfair and inaccurate to say that every one of Trump’s supporters have prejudice against ethnic and religious minorities, but it would be equally inaccurate to say that many do not. It is a well-known fact that the Republican party, going at least as far back to Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy,” used strategies that appealed to bigotry, such as lacing speeches with “dog whistles”—code words that signaled prejudice toward minorities that were designed to be heard by racists but no one else.</div><div>
</div><div>While the dog whistles of the past were more subtle, Trump’s are sometimes shockingly direct. There’s no denying that he routinely appeals to bigoted supporters when he calls Muslims “dangerous” and Mexican immigrants “rapists” and “murderers,” often in a blanketed fashion.&nbsp;<b>Perhaps unsurprisingly, a new study has shown that support for Trump is correlated with a standard scale of modern racism.</b></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>4.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Intergroup contact</div><div>
</div><div>Intergroup contact refers to contact with members of groups that are outside one’s own, which has been experimentally shown to reduce prejudice. As such, it’s important to note that there is growing evidence that Trump’s white supporters have experienced significantly less contact with minorities than other Americans.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;For example, a 2016 study found that “…the racial and ethnic isolation of Whites at the zip-code level is one of the strongest predictors of Trump support.” This correlation persisted while controlling for dozens of other variables. In agreement with this finding, the same researchers found that support for Trump increased with the voters’ physical distance from the Mexican border.</span></div><div>
</div><div>5.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Relative deprivation</div><div>
</div><div><b>Relative deprivation refers to the experience of being deprived of something to which one believes they are entitled. It is the discontent felt when one compares their position in life to others who they feel are equal or inferior but have unfairly had more success than them.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Common explanations for Trump’s popularity among non-bigoted voters involve economics. There is no doubt that some Trump supporters are simply angry that American jobs are being lost to Mexico and China, which is certainly understandable, although these loyalists often ignore the fact that some of these careers are actually being lost due to the accelerating pace of automation.</div><div>
</div><div>These Trump supporters are experiencing relative deprivation, and are common among the swing states like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. This kind of deprivation is specifically referred to as “relative,” as opposed to “absolute,” because the feeling is often based on a skewed perception of what one is entitled to. For example, an analysis conducted by FiveThirtyEight estimated that the median annual income of Trump supporters was $72,000.</div><div>
</div><div>If such data is accurate, the portrayal of most Trump supporters as “working class” citizens rebelling against Republican elites may be more myth than fact.</div><div>
</div><div>Bobby Azarian is a science writer with a PhD in neuroscience. His research has been published in journals such as Cognition & Emotion and Human Brain Mapping, and he has written for The Atlantic, The New York Times, BBC Future, Scientific American, Psychology Today, and others. Follow him on twitter @BobbyAzarian.</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/russia-and-the-republicans-vladimir-putins-american-subsidiary"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/russia-and-the-republicans-vladimir-putins-american-subsidiary</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><table width="550" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" margin="margin" auto="auto" style=""><tbody><tr><td width="5"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></td><td valign="top" width="410"><p class="yiv8357454816headline3" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" margin="margin" padding="padding"><a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://click1.e.alternet.org/invzdtcpcfgwgdqqwbvccwcqqbwqpmnrzfcgvytvvbvv_wwdldjzjbdgnswlvwnl.html?a=&b=3239&c=21989&d=2" style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Russia and the Republicans: Vladimir Putin’s American subsidiary</font></a></p><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" font-style="font-style" italic="italic" color="color" rgb="rgb" margin="margin" padding="padding"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Russians went looking for allies on the American left for…</font></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">trump deserves abuse for pulling out of paris, but it was GOP PLATFORM (how long)</font></div><div><p style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-bottom: 16px; margin-top: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">There has been a flurry of recent Republican efforts to stall action on climate policy, including a pair of bills just introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives. Bill H.R. 861, introduced by Representative Matt Gaetz, proposes “to terminate the EPA.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">”&nbsp;<b>This bill may not even get a vote, but as&nbsp;</b></span><b><em style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;">The New York Times&nbsp;</em><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">reported earlier this week, Pruitt “has a blueprint to repeal climate change rules, cut staffing levels, close regional offices and permanently weaken the agency’s regulatory authority.”</span></b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-bottom: 16px; margin-top: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Meanwhile, Bill H.R. 673, introduced by Representative Blaine Luetkmeyer, proposes to “prohibit United States contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Green Climate Fund.”</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;It’s also no secret that many Republicans want to halt funding for the UN FCCC, the international treaty system of 195 nations that produced the Paris Agreement.&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">As the <b>Republican party platform stated in the run-up to the presidential election: “We reject the agendas of both the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement.”</b></span></font></p></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/here-are-5-huge-lies-republicans-are-telling-about-the-new-report-on-the-russia-probe" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/here-are-5-huge-lies-republicans-are-telling-about-the-new-report-on-the-russia-probe</font></a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Here are 5 huge lies Republicans are telling about the new report on the Russia probe</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Cody Fenwick December 10, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s new report on the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, commonly called the Russia investigation, blew up many of the right wing’s favorite talking points and conspiracy theories about the FBI.</b>&nbsp;At the same time, it exposed real failures of procedures meant to protect American citizens against undue surveillance and exposed the need for serious law enforcement reforms.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But most Republicans seem unfazed that the report undercuts President Donald Trump’s repeated accusations of “treason” and a “witch hunt,” and they show no genuine interest in pushing policy to generally make law enforcement more responsible. Instead, they’re trying to pin the blame on the Obama administration and bias against Trump,&nbsp; even though these claims actually distract from the genuine problems uncovered.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So instead of grappling with the complicated facts of the report, Republicans are just lying about what it says. Here are five huge lies you should be on the look out for, and why they’re false:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Aaron Rupar</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@atrupar</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump on the IG report: "It is incredible. Far worse than I ever would've thought possible. It's an embarrassment to our country, it's dishonest. It's everything that a lot of people thought it would be, except far worse."</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Embedded video</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is absolutely not true. Trump has accused the FBI of “treason” for its investigation of members of his campaign, an accusation that was always ludicrous. Obviously, the report didn’t find anything “far worse” than treason — the worst finding seems to be that an FBI lawyer falsified a piece of evidence in an application for surveillance, making Carter Page’s activities look more suspicious than they otherwise would. This is quite bad, if true, but it’s far milder than much of what the FBI’s critics have claimed.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And in contrast to what Trump has been saying for more years now, the report said: “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decisions to open” investigations of Trump associates.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Ronna McDaniel</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>@GOPChairwoman</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The mainstream media cannot dispute this fact:</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Comey’s FBI repeatedly misled the FISA court and omitted key facts about the phony Steele Dossier, which launched the 2-year, $35M Russia investigation.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This should have never happened!</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fact, the media can dispute this fact, because it’s not true. The work of Christopher Steele did not “launch” Crossfire Hurricane, as Horowitz made perfectly clear. It explained that the officials working on the investigation “did not become aware of Steele’s election reporting until weeks [after the investigation began] and we therefore determined that Steele’s reports played no role in the Crossfire Hurricane opening.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Senator John Cornyn</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>@JohnCornyn</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>It confirms that the Obama Justice Department spied on an American citizen by misleading the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court into issuing 4 separate warrants.</b>&nbsp;https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1204151940202020864 …</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">also scalise...</font></div></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div><div class="header-list-style" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h2 class="entry-title grid-title" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;" open="Open" sans="Sans" sans-serif="sans-serif" letter-spacing="letter-spacing" px="px"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/republican-bigotry-and-obedience-to-the-nra-endanger-renewal-of-the-violence-against-women-act/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer; letter-spacing: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Republican bigotry and obedience to the NRA endanger renewal of the Violence Against Women Act</font></a></h2><div class="grid-post-box-meta" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 12px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="author-italic author vcard" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/author/joan-mccarter/" title="Posts by Joan McCarter" class="author url fn" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Joan McCarter</a>&nbsp;/&nbsp;<a href="https://www.alternet.org/author/daily-kos/" title="Posts by Daily Kos" class="author url fn" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Daily Kos</a></span><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">December 6, 2019</span></font></div></div><div class="item-content entry-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 18px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Violence Against Women Act expired in February. While the Democratic House has responded, passing an expanded reauthorization of it in April, Moscow Mitch McConnell has&nbsp;refused to take it up&nbsp;in…</font></p></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/welcome-to-the-new-mainstream-gop-conservative-website-delivers-sobering-news-about-republicans-descent-into-the-alt-right/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/welcome-to-the-new-mainstream-gop-conservative-website-delivers-sobering-news-about-republicans-descent-into-the-alt-right/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>'Welcome to the new mainstream GOP': Conservative website delivers sobering news about Republicans' descent into the alt-right</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Alex Henderson <b>November 27, 2019</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Founded by Charlie Sykes and Bill Kristol in December 2018, The Bulwark has become a refuge for conservatives who are disdainful of Donald Trump's presidency. And contributor Laura K. Field, in a November 27 article, delivers some sobering news to The Bulwark's right-wing anti-Trump readers: the alt-right fringe has become the mainstream of the Republican Party.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Most of The Bulwark's readers probably knew that already, but Field (who has held faculty positions at Georgetown University and American University) offers a lot of evidence to drive the point home. Under Trump, Field laments, alt-right figures like Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka and Stephen Miller have become "the face of today's conservatism and today's Republican Party."</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Field demonstrates the prominence that extremists have achieved in the GOP by discussing an event held during Donald Trump Jr.'s recent book tour in support of "Triggered: How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us." The writer notes that when the tour took Trump Jr. to the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Trump Jr. and the group Turning Point USA were described as "mainstream conservatives" - and Trump Jr. was heckled by supporters of antisemite Nick Fuentes.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"This shift in language represents a victory for Don Jr., as well as for the extremists who attacked him," Field explains. "Now that Junior has been upstaged by the neo-fascist far right, he gets to be cast as mainstream. And if Turning Point USA counts as establishment, it means that the extremists aren't so far out there anymore. It's a win-win for them all."</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Field goes on to say that many of the people who defined "movement conservatism" in the past have been marginalized in the modern GOP.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>"You don't have to lionize the old GOP to see that many of the think tanks, magazines and intellectuals that made up movement conservatism since the Reagan years have slid into irrelevance under Trump, while talk radio and Fox News have grown in influence,"</b> Field observes.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> "Individuals and organizations dedicated to defending Trump and promoting Trumpism have prospered."</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Field also laments that recently, "e-mails were leaked that definitively proved Stephen Miller's white supremacy, and not a single Republican member of Congress has joined the call for his resignation."</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The leaked e-mails that Field is referring to were exchanges between Miller and journalist Katie McHugh, formerly of Breitbart News, in 2015 and 2016. Some of the e-mails show Miller recommending that McHugh use white nationalist websites like VDare and American Renaissance as sources of information.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Field wraps up her article on a troubling note, warning that extremists such as Fuentes won't be disappearing from the GOP anytime soon.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>"The extreme environmentalists and <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Green New Dealers are fighting for the future of life on this planet; Nick Fuentes and his ilk want a white Christian ethnostate,"</span></b> Field writes. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">"That conservatives today aren't reeling at this difference tells us all we need to know about the successes of the alt-right…. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the new mainstream GOP."</span></font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2018/12/two-years-republican-government-has-been-incompetent-circus-and-even-worse-we-expected/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2018/12/two-years-republican-government-has-been-incompetent-circus-and-even-worse-we-expected/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Two years of Republican government has been an incompetent circus — and even worse than we expected</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Heather Digby Parton / Salon December 24, 2018</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Poor Paul Ryan. The golden boy of the Ayn Rand crowd was once assumed to be a future president, or at least one of the great statesmen of the Republican Party. He was considered a rarity among Republican pols — a policy wonk with the polish and personality of Ronald Reagan. (I know that sounds crazy, but people really did think that.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When Barack Obama came into office he saw Ryan as a partner in reducing the federal deficit and the White House went out of its way to feature him prominently in various domestic policy "summits" that were held in the early months of that administration. Obama's opinion changed after he tried to negotiate with Ryan and his cohorts in the House Republican leadership, but it took years for the political media to see Ryan for what he really was: a callow ideologue without much character when the chips were down.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Paul Krugman had his number back in 2010:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Mr. Ryan has become the Republican Party’s poster child for new ideas thanks to his "Roadmap for America’s Future,” a plan for a major overhaul of federal spending and taxes. News media coverage has been overwhelmingly favorable; on Monday, The Washington Post put a glowing profile of Mr. Ryan on its front page, portraying him as the G.O.P.’s fiscal conscience. He’s often described with phrases like “intellectually audacious.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But it’s the audacity of dopes. Mr. Ryan isn’t offering fresh food for thought; he’s serving up leftovers from the 1990s, drenched in flimflam sauce.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But oh, did they love those blue, blue eyes of his.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ryan never wanted to be House speaker. He wanted to be president. But when John Boehner was finally forced out by the Freedom Caucus and his heir apparent, Kevin McCarthy, tanked his chances with loose talk about using the Benghazi hearings to hurt Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, Ryan was the only person&nbsp; all Republicans could agree on. He reluctantly signed on. And in doing that he ended up signing his political death warrant.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ryan's performance as speaker showed him to be feckless, hypocritical and weak in just about every way. He couldn't control his crazies on the one hand and couldn't deal effectively with the crazy in the White House on the other. He ended up being a yes-man for an unfit president who didn't even understand how the three branches of government work. Krugman nailed it again this year upon word of Ryan's retirement. Commenting on the media's surprise, even now, that Ryan and his cohorts have blown the deficit up to unprecedented proportions and happily enabled Donald Trump, Krugman wrote:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[T]he principles they claimed to have never had anything to do with their actual goals. In particular, Republicans haven’t abandoned their concerns about budget deficits, because they never cared about deficits; they only faked concern as an excuse to cut social programs.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And if you ask why Ryan never took a stand against Trumpian corruption, why he never showed any concern about Trump’s authoritarian tendencies, what ever made you think he would take such a stand? Again, if you look at Ryan’s actions, not the character he played to gullible audiences, he has never shown himself willing to sacrifice anything he wants — not one dime — on behalf of his professed principles. Why on earth would you expect him to stick his neck out to defend the rule of law?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Surprise. Paul Ryan is just another partisan hack. Still, I don't think even I expected him to be as terrible at the job as he has been. As he takes his farewell tour, which President Trump generously stepped all over with his silly government shutdown, it pays to recall just what a disaster he has been and the rubble he leaves in his wake.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">First, let's recall that when Boehner saw the writing on the wall, he at least made a deal to keep the government open and raise the spending limit for two years as a parting gift to the American people. Granted, he wasn't negotiating with an insane president, but he did have the insane Freedom Caucus in the House, allied with the meddling Ted Cruz in the Senate at the time. He spent every last chit trying to calm things down on his way out the door. Ryan's just rolled along with all of Trump's lurching about on the budget and the wall and is leaving in the midst of total chaos.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We have finally reached the end of this two-year period of total Republican control of the government. It's important to look at what they did when they had it. They managed to pack the courts with unfit, inexperienced extremists in the mold of the man who nominated them. No matter how few people agree with their agenda or vote for them in the future, they will have a strong influence through the extremist right-wing judiciary they have installed in lifetime positions. That's one mission they actually accomplished. Of course, that had nothing to do with Paul Ryan.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They managed to get tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, their Holy Grail, enacted. That was just a generous gift to their big donors, no strings attached and no expectation that it would benefit average Americans. It hasn't.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They just passed a criminal justice reform package that was backed by the Koch brothers and other big-money libertarian types, one suspects just in time to help a spate of rich white guys heading off to jail. (Presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner pushed this through having lived through his father's incarceration for fraud. What a family.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They couldn't get Obamacare repealed, although Trump's minions have been working overtime to sabotage it from within. They didn't get Trump's wall. The national debt has exploded and the president is on the verge of being impeached. That's quite a record.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But don't worry. This will work out just fine for them. It's just a more extreme version of what they always do. They wreck the economy and destroy all faith in government. Then when the Democrats win as a result of their malfeasance, they stand on the sidelines and wail about fiscal responsibility and demand that Democrats cut services for average people. Like clockwork, rich media celebrities will undoubtedly stroke their chins and sagely advise the people to "grow up" and "take their medicine" by giving up things like health care and retirement security.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Look for Paul Ryan to be batting those baby blues and wringing his hands on TV over debt and deficits any day now. It's a beautiful scam and it's been working for decades. If you didn't know better you'd almost think they planned it this way.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div><div><div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">aha see confluence of forces, eg racism, authoritarian, ...</font></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/stephen-miller-proves-the-trump-regime-is-a-white-supremacist-enterprise-will-americans-choose-to-save-our-multiracial-democracy/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/stephen-miller-proves-the-trump-regime-is-a-white-supremacist-enterprise-will-americans-choose-to-save-our-multiracial-democracy/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Stephen Miller proves the Trump regime is a white supremacist enterprise. Will Americans choose to save our multiracial democracy?</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Chauncey DeVega / Salon November 25, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Like the president he serves, White House senior adviser Stephen Miller is a white supremacist. Miller believes that white people should be the most powerful group in the United States and around the world. He has worked diligently and enthusiastically to advance that goal through public policy.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Miller is not a “white nationalist.” To use such language is to legitimate the ways white supremacists have tried since the 1970s to repackage themselves so as to appear more “mainstream” and “reasonable” in order to win over more white Americans.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As though more evidence is necessary after three years of Stephen Miller’s influence on Donald Trump’s regime and its unrepentant and enthusiastic cruelty against nonwhites, 900 emails recently obtained by the Southern Poverty Law Center offer further proof of Miller’s white supremacist ideology.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In his communications with a former editor of the right-wing website Breitbart, Miller — then an aide to Sen. Jeff Sessions, who went on to become Trump’s first attorney general&nbsp; — advanced talking points from white supremacist websites that advocate eugenics against nonwhites and a general belief in the inferiority of black people and others.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Miller praised the notorious white supremacist novel “The Camp of the Saints” (also a favorite of former Trump adviser Steve Bannon) which depicts nonwhite immigrants and migrants in Europe as subhuman, murderous invaders.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In these emails Miller also channeled white supremacist talking points about nonwhite immigrants being “invaders” in “white countries” and the premise that white people are somehow being “replaced.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Writing at the New York Times, Jamelle Bouie observes that “there’s no way to spin these emails into something innocuous”:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The evidence is overwhelming: Miller was immersed in white power ideology. He was fluent in the language of white nationalism, attuned to its ideas. He was an obvious sympathizer who brought that sympathy to the federal government, where he has a direct hand in making immigration policy and choosing personnel.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For three years, Miller has used his perch to inflict fear and anxiety on refugees, asylum-seekers and unauthorized immigrants. Maybe, if you were charitable to Miller and sympathetic to restricting immigration, you could frame this as a misguided but good faith attempt to pull back from a more liberal status quo. No longer. These emails show that Miller’s views flow from his commitment to racist exclusion and the protection of a white demographic majority.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As a practical matter, Miller views nonwhite people as his enemies. In other words, a senior adviser to the president of the United States is crafting public policy that both directly and indirectly hurts tens of millions of nonwhite Americans. This is a treacherous betrayal of America’s multiracial democracy and a direct threat to its future, and provides more evidence that Donald Trump and his regime are illegitimate.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In response to Miller’s emails, more than 100 Democratic members of Congress have called for him to resign. No senior Republican elected officials, to my knowledge, have done the same.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These “revelations” about Stephen Miller’s white supremacist emails are not secondary to the current impeachment inquiry, or somehow coincidental to a rogue regime’s assault on the rule of law and the Constitution.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Indeed, Miller’s emails are better understood as huge flashing road signs that illustrate how racism and the ideology of white supremacy made Trump’s presidency possible and continue to fuel the Republican Party’s fascist and authoritarian crusade against American democracy.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There are many examples. Social scientists and others have shown that white racism in combination with nativism and hostile sexism (and assisted Russian interference) that gave Donald Trump the White House in 2016.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Vladimir Putin’s spies and other agents launched a sophisticated psy-ops campaign, via social media and other means, to exacerbate racial tensions. The goal was to mobilize Trump’s voters and demobilizing those more likely to vote for Hillary Clinton.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Research shows that Trump’s racially intolerant white voters reject the very idea of democracy if it means that white people will no longer be the dominant and most powerful group in America. A large proportion of Trump’s voters are racial authoritarians.</b></font></div></div></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">----</font></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/fundamentalism-and-authoritarianism-how-the-party-of-law-and-order-become-the-party-of-crooks-and-crime"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/fundamentalism-and-authoritarianism-how-the-party-of-law-and-order-become-the-party-of-crooks-and-crime</font></a></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx many</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Fundamentalism and authoritarianism: How the party of ‘law and order’ became the party of crooks and crime</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Paul Rosenberg / Salon November 24, 2019</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Whatever happened to the Republicans as the “party of law and order”? True, Richard Nixon, who first branded the party that way, was lying when he famously said, “I am not a crook.” Both Watergate and the Iran-Contra scandal rank among the most notorious examples of executive branch lawlessness in our nation’s history. But through it all, the narrative commitment to the brand never wavered. It was a source of moral and political strength, always to be contrasted with “soft on crime” Democrats, however contrary the front-page facts might be.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But not anymore. As noted here by&nbsp;<b>Jennifer Mercieca, a historian of rhetoric whose book, “Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump” (table of contents here)</b>, will be published next year, it’s the Democrats who are the party of law and order in the impeachment drama, while the GOP is the party of conspiracy:</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Democrats, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are betting that public opinion will move toward impeachment and removal once more information is made public. To try to shape public opinion they are relying on a law-and-order frame that tells Americans that the impeachment inquiry is legitimate and legally justified.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Democrats are positioning themselves as the only ones willing to uphold the rule of law and the Constitution.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Republicans, led by President Trump, are counting on their power to frame reality to prevent the public from moving toward impeachment.</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The GOP is relying on a conspiracy frame that tells Americans that the impeachment inquiry is illegitimate and part of a plot to destroy America.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Of course the rhetoric of conspiracy isn’t entirely synonymous with that of crooks and criminals — but when you start to insist that career law-enforcement officials are all in on it, and you’ve abandoned the “law and order” frame to the Democrats, the crooks and criminals stench is difficult to dispel. And it’s not happening in isolation, either — above and beyond the plethora of scandals Trump generates, and the lockstep support Republicans are giving him.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That lockstep support is perhaps the most striking difference between now and Watergate-a difference most readily understood via the role of asymmetric polarization and negative partisanship, which cautions us not to expect the kind of gradual but inexorable opinion shift seen 45 years ago in response to the buildup of evidence.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In turn, dramatically increased polarization is a predicted result of historical trends described by structural demographic theory (SDT)</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, which I wrote about previously in October 2016, reviewing “Ages of Discord,” an analysis of American history by evolutionary anthropologist Peter Turchin.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;SDT identifies three underlying factors contributing to increased levels of political instability: mass immiseration (stagnant or falling wages, worsening health, declining well-being), elite overproduction (increased competition for wealth and power), and fiscal distress (a product of both public debt and trust in public institutions). Mass immiseration helps fuel elite overproduction, since stagnant or falling wages leaves more money for elites, and the increased competition that results reduces broad cooperation and intensifies elite fragmentation (which also contributes to fiscal distress). In America, political polarization is a prime indicator of that fragmentation.</span></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The fact that polarization has been asymmetric deserves special attention, as it’s not yet implicated in SDT. But it can be credibly explained</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;In “The&nbsp;<b>Authoritarian</b>Dynamic,” Karen Stenner presented compelling evidence that expressed intolerance resulted primarily from two factors: an innate predisposition to intolerance, demanding obedience and conformity, (“authoritarianism”) interacting with increased societal threat, particularly dissension in public opinion and loss of confidence in political leaders. Thus, there is both a logical reason for the expression of authoritarianism to increase as political instability rises, and motivation for either authoritarian or opportunistic elites to strategically manipulate conditions to intensify this process.</span></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One can read “The Long Southern Strategy” (Salon interview with co-author Angie Maxwell here) as a coherent history of how GOP-affiliated elites have pursued just such a strategy over the past 50-plus years.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“Authoritarian attitudes peak not only when social conditions change, but also if folks are made to feel like social conditions are changing (even if they aren’t),</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">” Maxwell said. “</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The threats are recycled, renewed with a sense of urgency, stoking a fire that is always smoldering. It isn’t a natural rise in authoritarian attitudes, it is an orchestrated rise in authoritarian attitudes.”</span></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>SDT suggests that it may be both, but without the orchestration it would be much more manageable, and much less prone to produce lawless behavior.</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">One can also view conservative legal activism as a key component in that process</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">,</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;as well as a profound influence on elite politics as a whole. At the time of Watergate, authoritarians were more evenly divided between the parties, but they’ve become much more concentrated in the GOP since then. As their experience of threat has risen, they’ve become more inclined to lawlessness — although it’s not tolerated on the part of others, of course!</span></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In short, the lawlessness at the top of the GOP isn’t new — just vastly more blatant than it was during Watergate.&nbsp; But the infrastructure supporting, defending and excusing it is dramatically more powerful and robust, and the authoritarian mass base is much more consolidated within their voter base.</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Aside from impeachment itself, three other developments this month underscores the GOP’s broader embrace of lawlessness, in contrast to its decades-long self-branding. First, there is Trump’s pardoning of three war criminals</b>, burnishing his brand of support for official lawlessness and thuggish brutality. He may mistakenly believe this endears him to&nbsp; the military — which wants nothing to do with them — but it’s also meant to hype authoritarian support among his most rabid supporters.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Second, his&nbsp;</b><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Roy Cohn-style attorney general, William Barr, delivered a widely criticized authoritarian screed to the Federalist Society,</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;portraying the impeachment inquiry as dangerous to the rule of law, rather than warranted by Trump’s self-professed crimes.</span><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;Third, legal scholar</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;Steven Calabresi, chair of the Federalist Society’s</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">board of directors, wrote a pair of opinion articles accusing Democrats of violating Trump’s rights, one of which, according to Steven Mazie, the Economist’s Supreme Court correspondent, “reads like the first draft of an op-ed by a MAGA middle-schooler who was inspired by Jacob Wohl’s erstwhile Twitter account.</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">”</span></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The combination of Trump’s blatant endorsement of lawlessness and the double-whammy high-profile embarrassments of Calabresi and Barr reflects something much broader and profoundly troubling. The latter two offer striking indicators of just how seriously this is impacting establishment conservatism, in a way that can’t be fobbed off on Trump alone, while Trump’s pardons of war criminals — following earlier pardons, including that of ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio — not only enable brute lawlessness in uniform, but points towards outright valorization in the future, especially if performed in direct support of Trump himself.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>To better understand the role of the conservative legal movement, I turned to two law professors I</b>’ve interviewed before: Eric J. Segall, author of “Originalism as Faith,” to help illuminate the role that faith has played in this process, and David Pozen, co-author (with Joseph Fishkin) of the paper, “Asymmetric Constitutional Hardball,” which starts making sense of how the political asymmetry discussed above impacts norm-violating practices, with profound systemic results. In that paper, Fishkin and Pozen write:</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The “restorationist” constitutional narratives and interpretive theories promoted by Republican politicians and lawyers, [this] Essay suggests, serve to legitimate the party’s use of constitutional hardball.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">While this has surely been the elite focus of the actors involved, movement conservatives have also made remaking the Supreme Court and the entire judicial branch central to their politics in ways progressives have not, and this means engaging in authoritarian mobilization via threat manipulation, as described in “The Long Southern Strategy.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Originalism&nbsp;</b>plays a key role in this, but the meaning of that term shifted sharply in the process. At first, Segall told me, the originalist position argued that judges shouldn’t be engaged in moral reasoning:</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s not for judges to select the best moral position for a country, it’s for people who are elected to do it. Unless judges can point to something in the text of the Constitution or something clear in the history, then judges should say look, the Constitution doesn’t speak to this, vote on it.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Originalism, at first, “was inextricably tied to deference. That’s the only way that works.”</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">But that all changed when conservatives gained control of the court in the late ’80s and early ’90s,</b>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Segall says: “After 12 years of Reagan-Bush judges, the people who embraced originalism dropped the deference part.” That meant a return of moral reasoning, “because history cannot answer modern problems,” and while conservatives won’t admit that, “it’s true and they act that way.” The Constitution is silent about the rights of transgender people or the definition of marriage, to cite obvious examples....</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">quite long]</span></font></div></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/the-conservative-establishments-nightmare-is-only-just-beginning/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/the-conservative-establishments-nightmare-is-only-just-beginning/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The conservative establishment’s nightmare is only just beginning</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Matthew<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;Sheffield / Washington Monthly November 22, 2019</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Richard Viguerie, the conservative activist who invented direct-mail marketing, once said that “fear and anger are much stronger motivations than support for a cause.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Republican Party is now finding that out first-hand as it’s battling a white supremacist insurgency for the hearts and minds of Generation Z.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It wasn’t supposed to be this way.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The ranks of the “alternative right” political movement were decimated in the aftermath of the August 2017 Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Many of its top leaders faced arrest, lawsuits, or were banned from online fundraising and social media platforms.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>But after two years in the political wilderness, white nationalist activists have managed to regroup thanks to a new effort to attack on the highly lucrative right-wing infotainment industry that has sprung up around conservative think tanks, Fox News, and talk radio.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Unlike the original alt-right, which was mostly driven by lone trolls collaborating ad hoc on social networks, the far-right resurgence is being led by a single figure:<b>&nbsp;Nick Fuentes, a 21-year-old YouTube pundit who originally made a name for himself as a host on the Right Side Broadcasting Network</b>.&nbsp;</span>He was fired from that post in 2017 for saying it was&nbsp;<b>“time to kill the globalists</b>” at CNN for allegedly being unfair to President Donald Trump.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Since starting his own YouTube program (called “America First” after Trump’s slogan) shortly after his sacking, Fuentes has amassed a following that is just as dedicated and belligerent as the original alt-right via a re-calibrated message. Rather than using Hitler memes, Germanic sculptures, and mocking religion, Fuentes serves up a steady diet of Christian nationalism and hatred of immigrants, secular people, and Muslims.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Over the past several weeks, Fuentes and his fans—who call themselves “Nickers” and “Groypers” after a cartoon toad that serves as their mascot instead of Pepe the Frog—have been tapping into conservative Christian anxieties and melding them with concerns that President Donald Trump has failed to deliver on his campaign promises of mass deportations and a “big beautiful wall” on the Mexican border. Their preferred mechanism of attack has been to overwhelm question-and-answer sessions following the speeches of mainstream conservative figures.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>These appearances are typically organized by groups like Turning Point USA, Young Americans for Freedom, and the College Republicans.</b>&nbsp;Their purpose is to recruit young adults into the conservative movement. It’s not an easy task, however, as surveys increasingly indicate that socialism and pluralism have more appeal to students than unregulated capitalism and Christian nationalism.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Taking advantage of the fact that conservative college events are often sparsely attended, Groypers have easily mobbed the events—especially those of 25-year-old Turning Point founder Charlie Kirk—to ask questions designed to embarrass the speakers and question their fealty to the conservative cause.&nbsp;</span>In addition to invoking biblical injunctions against homosexuality, the hecklers have questioned whether the Republican Party can have a long-term future absent a complete stop to legal immigration and some sort of deportation of existing immigrant citizens.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Their crowd manipulation tactics—which are very similar to practices taught for decades at the conservative Leadership Institute—have succeeded over the past several weeks at embarrassing Kirk, Congressman Dan Crenshaw, a Republican from Texas, and Christian nationalist commentator Matt Walsh. In response, event organizers have often curtailed audience participation.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For the most part, the national press ignored the protests and the burgeoning insurgency until the Groypers employed the same tactics at a Nov. 10 event where Donald Trump Jr. was touting his new book, Triggered: How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Reports from the scene in Los Angeles indicated that the Groypers comprised about a third of the audience for the event and utterly dominated the proceedings. Even before the presidential son took the stage, Nickers began booing and jeering as an event staffer announced that Don Jr. and his girlfriend, former Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle, would not be taking any questions after their remarks.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The taunts, which also included audience members laughing at inappropriate times in a manner similar to Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker character and chants of “America First,” grew so loud that Don Jr. stopped speaking as he tried to figure out what was going on</b>. Guilfoyle lashed out at the audience, claiming they were not making their parents proud and that they probably couldn’t get dates. Eventually, the couple and a silent Kirk exited the stage as the Fuentes fans kept booing.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Since then, the scene has repeated itself at several other events, particularly those of Kirk. He and many other conservative figures have been forced to answer inconvenient questions about various topics including past criticisms of President Trump, transgender rights, and immigration. More often than not, Kirk has faced overwhelming audience jeers and has struggled to respond.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It remains to be seen what the commander-in-chief, who is reportedly extremely sensitive to embarrassment, will think of all this but one thing is clear: the conservative establishment’s nightmare is just beginning.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Long before Trump came along, conservatives have had a complicated relationship with extremism, both encouraging and shunning it.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>William F. Buckley,</b>&nbsp;founder of National Review and the most prominent early conservative figure, began his political career denouncing Dwight Eisenhower and atheist professors at Yale. His magazine published several pieces defending Jim Crow and South African apartheid.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Over the years, he often told supporters that they should always support the “furthest right” candidate that they believed to be electable, setting up a perpetual cycle of GOP candidates who constantly assert that they, alone, are the “true conservatives” out to save the nation from Republicans in Name Only (RINOs).</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fairness, Buckley strenuously opposed the John Birch Society, a conspiracy group funded by Fred Koch, father of Charles and David Koch, which was highly popular among the conservative grassroots. And National Revieweventually relented and came out against segregation and apartheid.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Former president Ronald Reagan also had a decidedly mixed record on racial matters, spending decades opposing sanctions on South Africa for apartheid and the creation of a national holiday to commemorate Martin Luther King, Jr. but eventually taking liberals’ positions on the two matters. He was also recently revealed to have privately referred to African United Nations delegates as “monkeys” who were uncomfortable wearing shoes.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Conservatives were also more than willing to welcome Strom Thurmond, the one-time segregationist senator who broke from the Democratic Party as it began supporting civil rights for African-Americans. Young Americans for Freedom, the group that preceded today’s Young America’s Foundation, hailed Thurmond as a “Man of Courage” in 1964 before he broke with his racist positions.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Many conservatives also had no problem with George Wallace, the Alabama Governor who ran for president on segregationist platforms. Richard Viguerie—who still is raking in the GOP direct-mail money today—handled Wallace’s fund-raising in 1976.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In light of the many ways in which conservative leaders were willing to side with them on particular issues, white nationalists have sought to openly enter Republican politics for decades.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Jared Taylor and his American Renaissance magazine were big promoters of Ron Paul’s presidential runs. As I’ve written previously, many alt-right activists were also strong Paul supporters before branching off to start their own movement. Former Klansman David Duke has repeatedly run as a GOP candidate in his native Louisiana but been rejected by party leaders.</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Progressives have long accused Republican strategists of trying to communicate indirect messages of support to white racists through the party’s infamous “Southern Strategy” which succeeded at turning the South away from its decades of loyalty to the Democratic Party. Few GOP strategists have ever been transparent about these efforts, but one who discussed them honestly was&nbsp;<b>Lee Atwater,</b>&nbsp;the widely successful consultant who passed away in 1991.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ten years before his death, while firmly ensconced within the Reagan White House, Atwater gave an anonymous interview (the audio recording was published posthumously) in which he stated definitively that Republicans used race to appeal to Southerners but did so in an effort to gradually wean them from bigotry in favor of small-government appeals.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to Atwater, the idea only worked because whites favorable to segregation understood that cutting the government would disproportionately harm African-Americans.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘N, n, n,’ he told interviewer Alexander Lamis, a Case Western Reserve political scientist. “By 1968 you can’t say ‘n’—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… ‘We want to cut this,’ is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘N, n.’”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More recently, numerous reports have exposed the role of the late Thomas Hofeller, a redistricting expert who worked for many Republican organizations over the years, in masterminding GOP state legislatures’ successful attempts to use race as the primary factor in congressional redistricting. Journalists have also exposed Hofeller’s covert advocacy for a new Census question about citizenship which he believed would suppress Hispanic responses and thereby harm Democrats.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The ascension of Donald Trump from wrestling sideshow to the heights of Republicanism has greatly increased the prominence and power of racists within the party. The 2015 launch of his presidential campaign with portrayals of most Mexicans as rapists and murderers electrified the white nationalists who had formerly supported Ron Paul’s quixotic efforts and they began flocking to the billionaire, producing hundreds of thousands of memes and trolling comments in his favor.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“White nationalists have always sought to inject their ideas into conservative politics, Fuentes is just the latest person to be doing it,” Howard Graves, a researcher at the Southern Poverty Law Center told me. “What’s different now is that is that they feel emboldened by our commander-in-chief.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Steve Bannon, who eventually became Trump’s campaign chairman, very carefully nurtured the online fascists. Referring to them as his “killing machine,” he threatened to use them as a force against any faction hoping to deny Trump the presidential nomination at a brokered convention. Bannon also boasted that he was fashioning Breitbart News into “the platform for the alt-right” as his editorial protégé Milo Yiannopoulos allowed racist activists to line-edit articles.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Once in office, Trump pandered to extremist supporters in numerous ways including his efforts to ban all Muslims from immigrating to the United States, break up families of unauthorized immigrants, and enact legislation exempting far-right Christians from any law they felt restricted their freedom to discriminate. Most infamously, Trump, acting on Bannon’s advice, repeatedly claimed that “very fine people” had attended the fascist-organized Unite the Right rally in support of Confederate memorials.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Recently, Stephen Miller, Trump’s top adviser on immigration was revealed to have regularly promoted white nationalist talking points to a Breitbart News reporter.</b>&nbsp;He is one of a number of Trump staffers who have been revealed to have ties to racist groups.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The growing closeness between the extremist right and Republican elites during the Trump era and the recrudescence of white supremacism has prompted several prominent conservative figures to try to take active measures to block the incursion.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Fuentes himself became a target of Turning Point USA after students at Iowa State University invited him to give a speech under the TPUSA banner in March.</b>The event attracted controversy and put Fuentes on the group’s radar permanently. Kirk’s organization further aroused the anger of Nickers in September after it cut ties with one of its social media advocates after she appeared at a private event with Fuentes.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Egged on by Fuentes’s insults and a pre-existing infiltration campaign of a small alt-right group called the American Identity Movement, far-right young men began crashing TPUSA head Charlie Kirk’s lavishly funded “Culture War” college tour events in early October and the Groyper rebellion was born.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As the campaign has gathered steam, Sebastian Gorka, the former Trump national security adviser who now hosts a daily radio program also called “America First” became the first prominent conservative outside of TPUSA to attack Fuentes as racist. Ben Shapiro, a talk radio host and co-founder of the conservative website Daily Wire, condemned Fuentes as a “garbage human being” during a lengthy speech to Stanford University students earlier this month.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the denunciations have done little to curb the insurrection, in part because Republicans have spent 50 years building their entire political edifice around implicit appeals to white Christian identity, granting at least some built-in support to anyone claiming to stand up for far-right Christians.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This lesson was made crystal clear during the 2016 Republican presidential nomination contest when Donald Trump kept amassing support among conservative fundamentalists despite his utterly irreligious demeanor and the many denouncements he faced from religious activists who supported Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). None of that mattered, however, because&nbsp;<b>Trump promised that if he became president, “Christianity will have power.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The Christian right has been remarkably effective at maintaining a market and culture of people who are fed hateful messages and that makes it almost inevitable that white nationalists would tap into that, especially during a time when many of those people feel like they are an embattled minority,” Graves, the researcher at the Southern Poverty Law Center told me.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Fuentes, who identifies as a traditional Catholic and is partially of Hispanic descent, is perfectly able to wrap his arguments in the Christian supremacist argot that has become central to almost all Republican rhetoric. He’s also been careful to disclaim the label white nationalist even as he has conceded that it could accurately describe his views.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While many in the “Nicker Nation” are obviously racist, it’s unclear what percentage of the people who’ve been disrupting conservative speeches are fully onboard with a white supremacist agenda. In fact, several of the questioners who have challenged establishment Republicans appear to be black or Hispanic.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The idea that minority Republicans would want to support a white nationalist makes little sense until one realizes that Fuentes is<b>&nbsp;fond of using coded language to hide messages intended only for racists, a practice frequently referred to within the alt-right as “hiding your power level.</b>” (He has slipped up a several times, however, including going on a profane and anti-Semitic rant in August and once joking about racial segregation.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As might be expected, Fuentes’s dog whistles are based on more up-to-date references than Atwater’s. Several of his fans were confused by them during the Nov. 5 broadcast of his “America First” show, when he used a coded reference to praise Andrew Anglin, the publisher of the&nbsp; racist Daily Stormer blog, a key figure in the original alt-right who has tried to re-brand himself from a neo-Nazi into a soldier for Christ.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the sly reference, couched as a shout-out to Daily Wire podcast host Andrew Klavan, confused some of Fuentes’s viewers.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I know that Andrew Klavan from Daily Wire has been very supportive,” Fuentes said in response to a viewer question. “And I appreciate that … I really do appreciate his support, I think he’s very funny, I love what he writes. He’s very funny, very talented writer, Andrew Klavan of Daily Wire. And I appreciate his support, I think it’s been very helpful. I think Andrew Klavan has been right about this country from the beginning. I think he’s been right about this—the things he’s been saying for the past two years, particularly about the right wing has been so true and we are vindicated together, Andrew Klavan from Daily Wire and me.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Not everyone watching the show could hear the dog whistle, however.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Why are you CRINGE shilling for Andrew fake Christian Klavan,” a commenter on Fuentes’s live stream wrote.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Daily Wire? Isn’t that Ben S?” another wrote, referring to Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Many of the viewers understood the reference, however, correctly pointing out that Fuentes was not actually praising Klavan.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Are you people stupid? He’s obviously talking about Anglin but framing it as Klavan,” a third fan replied.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“People are soo dumb who actually thinks [sic] he’s talking about Andrew Klavan,” said another.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">For his part, Anglin seems to have understood the reference. He responded to the praise on the Daily Stormer by posting a meme of two men bowing to each other.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fuentes’s habit of mostly sticking to standard-issue conservative talking points and masking his more extreme messages—including one in which he joked about the Holocaust through a Cookie Monster metaphor—has also led several prominent conservative figures to lend him their support.<b>&nbsp;Michelle Malkin, the Asian-American columnist and former Fox News commentator, has repeatedly praised Groypers and Fuentes specifically</b>&nbsp;for advocating against immigration, arguing that endorsing some of their views does not mean endorsing all of them.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Here’s my message to the new generation of America Firsters exposing the big lies of the anti-American open borders establishment and its controlled opposition operatives: If I was your mom, I’d be proud as hell,” she said during a Nov. 14 speech at UCLA. In her remarks, she also condemned Shapiro as “creepy” and “cringe” for calling Groypers losers just days earlier.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Alex Jones, the dietary supplement kingpin and radio host, has also expressed support for Fuentes,</b>&nbsp;inviting him twice onto his InfoWars platform to attack Charlie Kirk. Cassandra Fairbanks, a popular social media personality and writer at the right-wing conspiracy site Gateway Pundit, has also tweeted in support of Malkin’s position that conservatives should stand up for Fuentes’s ability to speak, even if they don’t like some of his statements. Ali Alexander and Wayne Dupreee, black conservatives who have built a following among Trump fans, have agreed with this sentiment.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The conservative establishment’s attempts to fight back against the growth of white nationalism have also been weakened by the fact that many of its voters have come to realize that American conservatism as presently constituted is heading for&nbsp; electoral extinction. Exit poll data from 2018 indicates that white Americans were the only racial group in which a majority voted for Republicans, but only by a slim margin. Fifty-four percent of people of European descent said they voted for a GOP House candidate while 44 percent picked a Democratic one. Among Hispanics, 69 percent went Democratic as did 90 percent of African-Americans.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Numeric analysis suggests that it is Republicans’ anti-government views and practice of white Christian identity politics that are driving voters away. African-American were formerly a Republican voting bloc but that changed after conservatives took over the GOP in the 1960s and forced the party to oppose civil rights and back massive spending cuts. A similar process, much less remarked upon, has happened among Asian-Americans, most of whom consistently voted for Republicans until the 2000 election and George W. Bush’s decision to re-brand the GOP as the party for Christians.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As a&nbsp;<b>demographic&nbsp;</b>group, it is difficult to speak generally about Asian-Americans since they come from so many dissimilar countries. But the one generalization that can be made about the fastest-growing racial group is that today’s Asian-American population is significantly less Christian than in prior decades. According to the American Religious Identification Survey, 66 percent of Asian-Americans were Christians in 1990. By 2008, this number had declined to just 38 percent.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The decline of Christianity among Asian-Americans has had an impact on their voting habits. In the 2018 election, 77 percent voted for Democratic House candidates.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But even younger whites are turning away from the GOP.</span>&nbsp;In the 2018 election, only 43 percent of European-Americans between 18 and 29 voted for a Republican House candidate. That’s a decline from the 47 percent who voted for Trump in 2016, and the 51 percent who voted Republican in 2012.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Instead of facing the uncomfortable reality that Americans don’t like their policies and presentation, most conservatives have simply ignored the party’s demographic dilemma, offering insulting platitudes to racial minorities while utterly ignoring the concerns of secular young whites.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Here’s how we look into the future,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw replied when asked about the GOP’s long-term future by a Fuentes supporter at a Nov. 4 event. “We don’t lie to minorities and tell them that we’re going to solve all of their problems. We tell them that they are included in this country and that the only colors that matter in this country are the red, white, and blue—that identity politics has no place in this nation.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While the Republican party itself issued an “autopsy report” after the 2012 election that indicated the party needed to do more to appeal to people who were not white, the document’s recommendations were utterly ignored by Trump in his 2016 campaign and ever since then.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">With conservative elites unwilling to talk about modifying some of their unpopular policy positions, the resulting vacuum in the conservative discourse has been mostly filled by immigration opponents who have been arguing that the GOP must stop legal and illegal immigration or risk electoral apocalypse. It’s a partisan-oriented, proto-white supremacist argument that some of the right’s biggest stars have repeated many times.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Fox News host Laura Ingraham has been one of its biggest boosters.</span>&nbsp;During her Nov. 6 program she blamed “foreign-born” people for enabling Democrats to take control of Virginia’s state government. Last August, she said that “the America we know and love doesn’t exist any more” thanks to “demographic changes” brought on by legal and illegal immigration.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Her colleague Tucker Carlson has also repeatedly pushed the same line. In December 2017, he claimed that Democrats were using a “flood of illegals” to force a “demographic replacement” which would bring them new voters. In July 2018, he asserted that “Latin American countries are changing election outcomes here by forcing demographic change on this country.” This past April, Carlson warned Democrats were trying to “change this country completely and forever” through immigration.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The two Fox News stars’ repeated statements about immigration and the GOP’s future are eerily similar to ones made by Fuentes. During his November 17 show, he called legal immigration a “critical threat to the Republican party” that will “make us unable to win a national election ever again.”&nbsp; This past August, Fuentes argued that both parties were seeking a “systematic replacement of the people that constitute the country.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Besides sounding like two of Fox News’s most popular prime-time hosts, Fuentes also has similarities to some of his most vociferous critics in the conservative establishment.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sebastian Gorka, the former Trump aide and current radio host who first condemned Fuentes, has his own history of accusations of fascist sympathies. Like Fuentes, Gorka has also called for executing people he believes have betrayed America.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Daily Wire co-founder Ben Shapiro, another one of Fuentes’s critics, has also made comments very similar to the embattled YouTube star.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While he currently argues that Republicans should not care about increasing non-white immigration levels and slams Fuentes supporters for saying otherwise, Shapiro had a very different stance in a 2014 video in which he argued that granting citizenship to undocumented immigrants was “absolute lunacy” that would doom the GOP because Hispanics “lean left on big government.” Three years later, he argued that Stephen Miller, the Trump aide who spread white nationalist material at Breitbart while Shapiro worked there, “knows what he’s talking about on immigration.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In some cases, Shapiro’s statements appear to be even more radical than Fuentes’s expressions.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In 2014, he did an interview with a white nationalist podcast in which he argued that Jewish media executives were trying to wage a “war on Christianity.” During the conversation—which was bundled alongside a promotion for a separate interview with white nationalist academic Kevin MacDonald—Shapiro repeated several anti-Semitic tropes but directed them only at secular or “leftist” Jewish people.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“There are a lot of Jews in Hollywood who feel the obligation—they have a perverse leftist view of history pushed by the Soviet Union that what really destroyed Europe was Christianity. It was not fascism, it was not communism, it was not leftism, it was Christianity,” he told host Lana Lokteff. “And therefore, the cure for intolerance is to bash the hell out of Christianity.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“There certainly is a war on Christianity, it’s coming from some people who are secular Jews, it’s coming from a lot of leftists,” he continued. “Most Jews in America don’t care about Judaism.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Ironically, Red Ice Creations, company which produced the show, is the former employer of Patrick Casey, the leader of the American Identity Movement which has been the boots-on-the-ground in the Groyper insurgency.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In the same broadcast, Shapiro also warned that entertainment studios seeking to condemn racism and sexism and include positive minority characters in their products are actually engaging in an insidious plot to “pervert” Americans’ minds as part of a “very subtle war on white males in our society.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“What they want is they want to destroy the foundations of American society,” Shapiro said, speaking of media executives. “There’s no question that this is what they want. I mean this has been the case for the left since the 1960s.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Shapiro has also endorsed ethnic cleansing in Israel of Muslims and Christians, writing in 2003 that forcibly removing Palestinians elsewhere is “an ugly solution, but it is the only solution” in the Middle East. Fuentes does not seem to have ever called for non-violent removal of Americans who are not white but Richard Spencer, one of the alt-right’s first figureheads, has. In the years since, however, Shapiro seems to have turned against the idea of ethnic cleansing.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Daily Wire did not respond to repeated requests for comment for this piece</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While most conservative pundits and activists appear blissfully unaware that their beliefs are generally unpopular, right-wing election consultants have long struggled to overcome this problem in their efforts to obtain winning electoral coalitions. Yet, rather than moderating their positions to appeal to centrists who disagree with conservative ideas on economics, religion, and social policy, they have opted instead to appeal to white religious fundamentalists who are anxious about a country that’s become more educated, secular, and tolerant since the 1960s.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Murray Rothbard, one of the most influential figures in early libertarianism who was also heavily involved in GOP politics, described the concept in a shocking and prescient 1992 essay that touted David Duke and Joe McCarthy as the exemplars of an “outreach to the rednecks” strategy that would build a coalition of racist fundamentalists, business leaders, and anti-government ideologues under a platform of “America First.” Donald Trump, who employed McCarthy’s lawyer and repeatedly refused to disavow Duke, only slightly updated the playbook for 2016.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Expanding the Republican political tent to protect and include extremists was profitable for the GOP in the short-term. Among other things, conservatives’ effective use of religion and race as distractions from unpopular economic policies has enabled them to keep the United States as the only wealthy country in the world without universal health-care for decades.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the conservative coalition’s days are numbered. In the last five presidential elections, the GOP has won the presidential popular vote only once. The white Christian identity politics which Republicans have long offered as an emotional inducement to voters is of no value to the majority of Americans who now want religion out of politics. Young people, meanwhile, are more interested in voting for democratic socialism than worshiping capitalists with Ayn Rand.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Despite its advocates’ claims of believing in “timeless principles,” American conservatism is actually a historical anomaly, one made possible by its host country’s geopolitical struggle with the atheistic and communistic Soviet Union. As that struggle fades into the mists of time, so do Republicans’ electoral victories.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The prudent, and indeed the conservative, approach would be to refashion American conservatism into something decent—a Republican Party that would promote efficiency while expanding the social safety net to support families, protect workers from exploitation, reduce immigration by improving life in other countries, and reject religious and racial bigotry while also making some space for people with traditionalist religious views.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In the face of overwhelming evidence that Americans want something different than what they’ve been offering, however, the powers-that-be on the right have resorted to gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement to forestall the inevitable.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But now, in addition to facing pressure from the center and the left, conservative elites are now feeling the heat from angry white Christians who have been promised everything for 50 years while receiving very little in return. Nick Fuentes and the Groypers may seem like a social media sideshow now, but in truth, they are only the beginning of a series of troubles that will destroy the Republican Party from within even as it’s caught within a demographic death spiral.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While the president’s consistent verbal appeals to Christian and white racial grievances was enough to get him the far-right’s loyalty in 2016, the serial humiliations of Donald Trump Jr., TPUSA, and their allies demonstrate that the resurgent alt-right wants more and that conservatives’ disingenuous attempts to portray themselves as free speech absolutists can easily be used against them. David French, a conservative writer and activist who has often been targeted by the alt-right, almost exactly described a year ago what the Groypers are doing today:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Hatred for political correctness has yielded an unhealthy fascination with and admiration for pure defiance. Young voices pride themselves on fearlessness and place attitude over thought in their words and deeds. They troll online and at school to ‘trigger the libs,’ and nothing triggers the libs more than defiance on matters of race.&nbsp; … If the ethos of the defiant Right is never, ever to accede to either a leftist or (what is, arguably, more hated) an ‘establishment’ or ‘elite’ conservative critique, then it’s easy to see how bigots can flourish.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fuentes has echoed this sentiment in his own way repeatedly, including during the same November 5 episode in which he endorsed a neo-Nazi. In the segment, he vowed to continue embarrassing the conservative establishment, regardless of the impact on Republicans’ 2020 chances.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We’re not asking for anything that is not just and owed to us,” he said. “Unless and until Charlie Kirk and these others are willing to give us what we deserve, which is a seat at the table in Conservative Inc. or the conservative movement or whatever, they allow us to spread our message in the same marketplace of ideas that they do, then this will continue. And if it’s a liability then so be it.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Perhaps links can serve to substantiate this. Who faced arrest, who was banned from online fundraising, and who was booted off social media platforms?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div></div><div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/republicans-have-become-a-cult-run-by-crooks-former-gop-congressional-staffer-explains-why-the-party-has-become-a-creepy-mashup-of-grade-b-totalitarianism-and-freudian-manias/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx many</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">‘Republicans have become a cult run by crooks’: Former GOP congressional staffer explains why the party ‘has become a creepy mashup of grade B totalitarianism’ and ‘Freudian manias’</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Mike Lofgren / Common Dreams November 3, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Item: Bob Livingston. Remember him? When last seen by the wider public in the waning, innocent years of the 20th century, he was the newly minted designee to succeed Newt Gingrich as Republican Speaker of the House.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But he abruptly resigned after it was revealed (thanks to the public service of Larry Flynt) that he had indulged in extramarital affairs. This was something of an inconvenience, given that he was tapped to lead the charge of the light brigade against incumbent president Bill Clinton, impeaching the latter because of his shocking dalliances outside matrimonial bonds.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Unlike you or me in similar circumstances, Livingston, a cog in the great clockwork of Republican influence-peddling, landed on his feet. Founding a lobbying shop modestly named the Livingston Group, he developed a brisk business of green-washing dictators (such as Muammar al-Gaddafi and Hosni Mubarak), fighting against formal recognition of the Turkish genocide of Armenians in World War I, and other worthy causes of clients with money.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Today’s GOP has become a creepy mashup of grade B totalitarianism and perverted Freudian manias disguised as family values.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Who could have imagined that Bob Livingston would link up with Giuliani and Associates to press the case that the United States needed to dump our career diplomatic personnel who actually knew something about Ukraine in favor of more transactional go-getters who would vigorously press the case that Kiev needed to get on board the Trump reelection campaign?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If you knew Livingston back in the day, you certainly could imagine it, because of course you could. Bob is the breed of Republican that Reagan inspired and Gingrich liberated, the breed that believes it’s all mine, the public be damned, accompanied by a hundred sermons from Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman. The breezy sunlit uplands of their dearest ideals are carpeted with money, soon to be whisked off to an offshore tax haven.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Will Bob end up at a witness table before the House intelligence committee, or in the stand at a grand jury proceeding? Who knows? He is just one element of the massive conservative infrastructure that weighs upon and dominates Washington like some monstrous stone idol. Future historians will boggle at the sheer numbers of the Republican establishment involved in covering up Trump’s illicit activities.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Item: By now, everyone who follows politics has heard of Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two Ukrainian “businessmen” (but only in the sense that Al Capone or Lucky Luciano were businessmen) who were arrested at Dulles airport while attempting to flee the country. Embarrassingly, they were business chums of Nosferatu-lookalike Rudy Giuliani, our very own president’s personal lawyer. They face charges of making illegal political campaign contributions.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But thanks to a local Michigan political blog, we now know that Parnas also traveled the country campaigning on behalf of Republican candidates. Not only has he been photographed several times yukking it up with Giuliani and the local GOP Great White Hope, but the events he attended often coincided with contributions made by someone with a name that looks suspiciously like Fruman’s, with two letters transposed.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Proving what—aside from providing additional clues about illegal contributions by a foreign national? Parnas and Fruman also acted as agents of Dimitry Firtash, a Ukrainian billionaire described by federal prosecutors as an organized crime associate. He made most of his money extracting vigorish from the Russia-Ukraine natural gas trade.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">It is difficult to imagine Firtash obtaining such a lucrative cash cow without being a de facto agent of the Kremlin; in fact, Putin advanced him an $11 billion credit line to buy influence in Ukrainian politics. Oh, he was also an associate of Paul Manafort. Remember him?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Firtash is currently in Vienna, fighting U.S. extradition charges that include bribery, racketeering, and money laundering. And, behold, Joe DiGenova and Victoria Toensing, the Nick and Nora Charles of GOP dirty operatives, have signed up to help defend this poor, friendless billionaire. Who could have imagined?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The tentacles of Russian organized crime, both the official kind emanating from the Kremlin and the more informal sort consisting of laundering hot cash into real estate, have slithered more deeply into the American heartland than most people realize, and it has colonized the Republican Party at the state and local level. The revelation that the National Rifle Association—variously described as an arm of the GOP or as the party’s master—was virtually taken over by Russian interests is just the tip of the iceberg.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The GOP, which loves to shriek from the housetops about its patriotism, is about as independent of hostile foreign influence as Vidkun Quisling’s Nasjonal Samling or Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists. Or, for that matter, France’s Vichy Republic, ever subservient to Nazi Germany.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Item: The other day, I had lunch with the Washington correspondent of a respected overseas newspaper. He recounted that he recently had covered an event at which<b>&nbsp;Greg Murphy, a Republican member of Congress from North Carolina, was in attendance. The member was very loquacious in support of the imaginary “fact” that Republicans were totally shut out of the hearings pertaining to the impeachment inquiry.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The correspondent gently remonstrated that it was public knowledge that any Republican who was a member of the three committees making the inquiry could and did take part in the proceedings. The member then merely repeated, with greater emphasis, that the Republicans were “shut out.” The journalist described the congressman’s face as having changed to something like an android, with blank eyes and a fixed stare. On cue, he had transformed himself into a zombie.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It did not help that the event occurred in a NATO ally’s embassy, where the congressman pounded the table and announced to all and sundry that he was so ashamed of liberals in this country gleefully burning American flags. What?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The correspondent speculated to me that there were, in fact, recent televised scenes of flag burnings, but they were staged by Kurds in Syria disgusted at their betrayal by the president on whose behalf the congressman had lobotomized himself. In the congressman’s mind, facts and reality were infinitely fluid, and perhaps the Kurds might as well have been the liberals who haunt his dreams.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He was all too typical of today’s Republican politician: whether he was attempting to gaslight his audience or whether he actually believed what he said is impossible to determine and probably irrelevant anyway. Like a Scientologist, his ideas cannot be rationally debated. It is best simply to avoid the species: insanity is contagious.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">What are we to make of all this? The notion, beloved by the press, that Trump holds Republicans in a kind of thrall, like the Klingons’ tractor beam, does not withstand scrutiny, because there is no evidence that the GOP will resume normal behavior once the beam is switched off. They have been getting crazier and crazier for years, which is why I departed Capitol Hill in 2011 to spread the news to all who would listen.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Republicans have now become seriously deranged, and even more cult-like. Louie Gohmert, once a comical outlier, but now the heart and soul of his party, is invoking civil war as a remedy to the potential impeachment of his beloved Führer.</b>&nbsp;And for sheer cringe-inducing weirdness, nothing matches the GOP’s fixation with abortion once they achieve power, which has now reached an almost unbelievable stage of sick obsession in Missouri. Today’s GOP has become a creepy mashup of grade B totalitarianism and perverted Freudian manias disguised as family values.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Once, I called them an apocalyptic cult, which they were and are. But in those relatively naïve days, even I underestimated their growing appetite for crime, betrayal, and certifiable lunacy.</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/heres-the-dark-side-of-billionaire-philanthropy-and-the-threat-to-american-democracy/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/heres-the-dark-side-of-billionaire-philanthropy-and-the-threat-to-american-democracy/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Here’s the dark side of billionaire philanthropy — and the threat to American democracy</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Anthony Quintano https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Independent Media Institute October 15, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">by Tom Conway</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, America’s fourth-richest person, finally admitted that no one deserves to accumulate as much wealth as he has.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But hey, he says, at least he plans to give a lot of his $69.6 billion net worth to charity.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">That’s nice. But it’s not enough considering the threat of concentrated wealth to the American ideal.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>America’s very democracy is dying because billionaires like Zuckerberg amass ever more wealth—and thus ever more political power—while everyone else struggles with less—less money, but, just as importantly, less clout in government.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Philanthropy is fine. But to preserve a functioning democracy, everyone, including billionaires, must pay a fair share of taxes so that America has the money it desperately needs to address shared priorities, reinvigorate the middle class and repair the social fabric torn by income inequality. And we need real limits on campaign contributions to stop the nation’s slide from democracy, where many have a voice, to oligarchy, where only the rich are heard.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The rich don’t pay anything like their proportionate share of taxes right now. Not even close.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In fact, a new study shows that the super-rich pay a lower rate than working Americans thanks to the Republicans’ 2017 tax giveaway.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Last year, the nation’s 400 richest families paid an average effective tax rate of 23 percent, compared to the 24.2 percent paid by the bottom half of U.S. households. It turns out hotel queen Leona Helmsley was right all those years ago when she said only the little people pay taxes.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In 1960, the tax rate for America’s 400 richest families was 56 percent. By 1980, it had dropped to 47 percent. As the tax rate for those families fell between 1960 and last year, the middle class shrank, income inequality rose to a 50-year high and the rich consolidated political power through unchecked political contributions.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">It’s a vicious cycle.</span>&nbsp;Rich people use their money to hijack the political process and pass laws, such as the 2017 tax windfall for the rich, that give them still more money to push their agenda at the expense of middle-class priorities like stronger Social Security and Medicare.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The few are ruling the many. Make no mistake, American democracy is under attack from within.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">During a company town hall meeting, a Facebook employee asked Zuckerberg about the morality of being a billionaire. Zuckerberg said no one “deserves” to accumulate the vast wealth that he has, but he quickly pointed out that he gives much of it away.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Better that rich people donate some of their money than blow it all on waterfront mansions, mega-yachts and sports cars for themselves. And philanthropy can fund important research and social service projects.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But it’s dangerous for a small group of rich people to decide which issues get attention and buckets of cash. This just enhances their status and power.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a functioning democracy, everyone gets a voice in these kinds of decisions through proper representation and taxation. Taxes are an obligation for the common welfare. Everyone contributes a fair share so that the pool is big enough for the people—through their duly elected representatives—to address shared priorities, from national defense to public schools.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">For example, with funds from equitable taxation of all people—rich and not rich—Americans might decide to overhaul their roads, bridges, tunnels, locks and dams. Their condition right now is a national disgrace. A major tax investment in infrastructure would generate family-sustaining jobs—something that would pump up the decimated middle class—and keep commerce flowing.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Some of the additional tax money also could be spent on programs to help Americans struggling to pay for college and health care. Or it might be used to provide food stamps for the poor.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Right now, to save $4.5 billion, the Trump administration wants to kick nearly 8,000 households off of food stamps and reduce benefits to thousands more. Yes, Trump intends to short-change the poorest of the poor after helping the super-rich dodge their tax obligations. But that’s what happens when the rich control the political process</span>.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">America’s political system, ideally, is based on a one person, one vote principle. That means each voter possesses the same political clout as every other.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But Americans don’t have an equal voice. And they will never get a just tax policy as long as the rich can buy whatever political policy they want with unchecked campaign contributions and loads of lobbyists. The U.S. Supreme Court gave the rich this gift—the power to spend unlimited amounts on campaign ads and use corporations to inject unlimited dark money into politics. The rich have used piles of money to muffle individuals, even large groups of individuals.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The relationship is transactional. The rich give Republican politicians the money they need to win elections. And then Republicans pass laws benefiting their benefactors and block laws for the 99 percent.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Just look at Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s opposition to a hike in the minimum wage.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The House this past summer passed a bill to increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour, up from the current poverty-level wage of $7.25 an hour. It would be the first increase since 2009. It’s urgently needed to help counter decades of general wage stagnation for American workers.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Kentucky, McConnell’s home state, had the nation’s sixth-highest poverty rate—16.9 percent—last year, and lots of Kentuckians would benefit from a minimum wage bump. But McConnell won’t bring the bill to the floor. Wealthy employers told him they don’t want it.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Similarly, the power of the 1 percent is the reason that far fewer workers will receive overtime pay than deserve it.&nbsp;</b>The Obama administration proposed extending overtime eligibility to all workers making $47,476 a year or less. The cut-off had been $23,660. But wealthy business groups protested the Obama number, won a court decision that the Republican Trump administration declined to appeal, and now Trump’s Labor Department has reduced the overtime number to $35,568. That means 8 million fewer workers will benefit. Great for wealthy business owners who don’t have to pay. Not so great for those who do the work.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Zuckerberg knows lack of equal representation is a problem. Last year, he gave $200 million in Facebook stock to the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, which asserts: “A healthy democracy is dependent on all community members influencing public policy decisions that affect their lives and neighborhoods.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Zuckerberg’s charity isn’t going to make that true nationwide, however. Americans must change the system corrupted by big money.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Tom Conway is the international president of the United Steelworkers Union (USW).</font></div></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" /></font></p><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/is-the-gop-really-willing-to-burn-our-republic-to-the-ground-in-order-to-maintain-its-hold-on-power"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/is-the-gop-really-willing-to-burn-our-republic-to-the-ground-in-order-to-maintain-its-hold-on-power</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font></div><h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Gaslighting for Beginners</font></h3><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The standard GOP gaslighting on Ukrainegate is beautifully exemplified by the columnist&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/03/democrats-are-misleading-public-about-william-barr/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Marc Thiessen</a>, a regular contributor to the Washington Post and a living rebuttal to the canard that the media leans left. Thiessen writes: “There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking foreign heads of state or intelligence officials to cooperate with an official Justice Department investigation.”</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">True. If this were a legitimate investigation aimed at advancing US national interests, rather than an illegal personal crusade to benefit Donald J. Trump. The attempt to spin it as the former is at the heart of the Republican counter-strategy, but it doesn’t hold a thimbleful of water.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s hardly worth the figurative ink required to dismantle all the dishonesty in his statement, but just as an exercise:</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The DOJ “investigation” that Bill Barr is heading—aimed at undermining the US Intelligence Community’s conclusion that Russian aided Trump in the 2016 election—is itself a partisan sham and abuse of power. Citing it as justification for Trump strongarming Kiev is a circular argument and master class in graft. Team Trump’s contention that its interest in Ukraine was and is an altruistic campaign against generic “corruption” is laughable, especially coming from the most corrupt presidency in modern US history. The only “corruption” Trump referred to in the Zelensky call was the fairy tale of Biden’s wrongdoing. (Even if one believes Hunter Biden was unethically trading on his father’s position, Joe Biden was in no way complicit in that…..and by the by, that is the entire stock-in-trade of the Trump children.) Only the willfully blind could fail to recognize Trump’s true motive as regards Ukraine—damaging a political rival, and using the full might of the US presidency to do so, which is the very epitome of the corruption in its own right.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Of course, it has grown tedious to point out that if Barack Obama had phoned a foreign leader and demanded an investigation of Tagg Romney while holding US military aid for ransom, he would already be the GOP poster child for a new version of “Strange Fruit,” covered by Kid Rock and Ted Nugent.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But Thiessen’s disgraceful apologia represents mainstream conservative thought in the age of Donald, where seldom is heard a discouraging word. Never, in fact.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>To that end, I was admittedly shocked to see some Republicans, including those twin pillars of hypocrisy Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham (to the extent that a pillar can be spineless and flaccid) push back over Trump’s unconscionable betrayal of our Kurdish allies this week</b>. Why the GOP is willing to risk incurring Trump’s wrath over that and not, say, over selling our country out to the highest bidder, remains a mystery. But no elected Republican, not even Mitt Romney, who is what passes for a GOP profile in courage these days (we’re grading on a sliding scale), has really stood up to the president in the way that his actions call for. And I am not confident that sufficient numbers will do so should it come down to an impeachment trial in the Senate.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">(On the subject of Syria, and adding to the madness, at a time when Trump desperately needs the fealty of Senate Republicans, why did he choose this moment to piss off even Moscow Mitch and Leningrad Lindsey? More proof that he doesn’t think strategically at all, only impulsively, despite repeated efforts to credit him for such.)</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But even this rare sighting of the elusive Republican vertebrate in the wild has a dark side, as noted by the New York Times’&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/08/opinion/republicans-trump-kurds.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Jamelle Bouie</a>&nbsp;in what may have been the most incisive observation of the week. In addressing this question of why Republicans stick with Trump so submissively, the conventional wisdom is that it’s a Faustian bargain. But Bouie argues convincingly that it’s really something much simpler and uglier: they agree with him.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">"Trump has taken an ax to domestic spending programs for the poor—his Agriculture Department just&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/us/politics/trump-food-stamp-cuts.html?module=inline" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">proposed</span></a><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">&nbsp;new cuts to food stamps; he signed a tax cut that funnels trillions to the highest earners; and he stacked the federal judiciary with right-wing ideologues. It’s hard to imagine a better outcome for a conservative politician."</span></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Bouie points to the pushback on Syria as evidence that this narrative that the GOP fears the wrath of Trump and his base is wrong. They&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">will</em>&nbsp;in fact stand up to him when they wish….and not only on foreign policy but on tariffs and economic issues as well. So perhaps we should take those Republicans at their word when they say they don’t think blackmailing foreign powers for personal gain with US tax dollars is a problem.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As long as it’s a Republican who does it.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font></p><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">vpence $600K limo to trump ireland</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/gop-blocks-probe-of-mike-pences-trip-to-ireland-after-vp-spent-600000-on-limousine-rides-so-he-could-stay-at-trumps-resort/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/gop-blocks-probe-of-mike-pences-trip-to-ireland-after-vp-spent-600000-on-limousine-rides-so-he-could-stay-at-trumps-resort/</a>
</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><div class="mag-header" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 19px; padding: 0px; position: relative; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h3 class="magcat-titlte entry-title" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; letter-spacing: 1px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/recent-republican-pushed-federal-shutdowns-gained-nothing-but-cost-taxpayers-at-least-4-billion/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer; display: block; letter-spacing: 0px; line-height: 1.4;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Recent Republican-pushed federal shutdowns gained nothing — but cost taxpayers at least $4 billion</font></a></h3><div class="grid-post-box-meta mag-meta" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 7px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span class="author-italic author vcard" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/author/daily-kos/" title="Posts by Daily Kos" class="author url fn" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Daily Kos</font></a></span></div></div><div class="mag-excerpt entry-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.5;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A new Senate report pegs the cost of the last three government shutdowns, from the bizarre 2013 Republican shutdown demanding the end of “Obamacare” to the two 2018-2019 Trump-led shutdowns.</font></p></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/the-man-who-sold-america-mcconnells-mountain-of-political-sins-catalogued-in-devastating-new-profile/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/the-man-who-sold-america-mcconnells-mountain-of-political-sins-catalogued-in-devastating-new-profile/</a>
</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">krugman rap sheet win at all costs</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">gop authoritarian, so dump trump&nbsp; not enuf</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/nobel-prize-winning-economist-republicans-show-a-total-contempt-for-democracy-and-constitutional-government/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/nobel-prize-winning-economist-republicans-show-a-total-contempt-for-democracy-and-constitutional-government/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;bktv 9/8/19&nbsp;</font></div><div><a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?462768-1/american-carnage"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.c-span.org/video/?462768-1/american-carnage</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><span class="time" style="margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-weight: 600; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-transform: uppercase; display: block; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><time style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">JULY 18, 2019</font></time></span><h1 class="video-page-title" itemprop="name" style="margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 2px 0px 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">American Carnage</font></span></h1><div class="initial" style="margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.3; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.3em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Politico Magazine chief political correspondent Tim Alberta explored divisions in the Republican Party that led to the election of President Trump.</font></p></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">1016 debate newt losing by attacking other cands, so goes after media 2 nuke ["no" i don't want to address current scandal?], won NC primary when he was in single dig?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">mcconn dangled scotus seat to hard rw and evang;;pence tem sure beat until comey re-open hillary emails</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/the-cost-of-the-gops-degradation-could-be-the-death-of-the-party-itself/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/the-cost-of-the-gops-degradation-could-be-the-death-of-the-party-itself/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The cost of the GOP’s degradation could be the death of the party itself</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Nancy LeTourneau / Washington Monthly<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>September 6, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Pollster and author Stanley Greenberg has written a book about the death of the Republican Party titled, “R.I.P. G.O.P.”</b> Stephanie Mencimer wrote a review of it in the latest edition of the Washington Monthly. Noting that the author focused a whole chapter on J. D. Vance’s best-selling memoir, Hillbilly Elegy—which suggests that the challenges faced by people from his community were the result of “poor life choices that bore little relationship to larger economic or political forces”—Mencimer summarizes Greenberg’s point with this.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">What bothers Greenberg most about Hillbilly Elegy is that many of Vance’s Republican enthusiasts (though not Vance himself) have concluded from the book that nothing can be done about the social collapse. Their takeaway, he says, is that “government activism is ineffective and counterproductive.”</span> That crabbed view of government, Greenberg notes, has restricted Republicans’ ability to do much for the very voters who helped put Donald Trump in the White House. Once they were in charge, he notes, Republicans’ most significant policy initiative aimed at the working class was to add work requirements for Medicaid and food stamps. “Is that really all they have to offer working people?” Greenberg asks. “What an insult.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This meager gruel is what helped fuel the blue wave election in 2018, Greenberg says. Republicans lost dramatically all across the industrial Midwest and the Rust Belt because it turned out that the non-evangelical working class “wanted more from Republicans than this anti-government trope.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Republicans would do well to unlearn the lessons of Hillbilly Elegy,” he concludes, if they want to remain relevant.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Mencimer is right to suggest that Republicans don’t seem interested in remaining relevant when it comes to policy. She echoes what Zach Roth suggested when he wrote that, at some point, the GOP decided that “being outnumbered didn’t have to mean losing.” Instead, they zeroed in on things like obstruction, voter suppression, and gerrymandering. More recently, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has demonstrated that he is content with undermining Congress while stacking the courts with extremists in an attempt to bypass the majority of voters.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But both Greenberg and Mencimer fail to address what Zak Cheney-Rice captured in an article titled, “A Non-Racist Conservative Movement Would Kill the Republican Party.” He focused on pieces from Ross Douthat and Timothy P. Carney, which articulated the same theme: “<b>American conservatism has a racism problem, </b>and conservatives who care must build a movement that is unwelcoming to racists.” Cheney-Rice points out the issue both Mencimer and Greenberg missed.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">[I]t’s been apparent since the Nixon administration that the Republican Party would collapse without support from racists….In any case, the GOP hasn’t been able to convince most voters that corporate welfare, reduced protections for marginalized people, and diminished health-care options for all but the most financially secure are good things on their own terms, without using racism to sweeten the deal.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">It was during the Nixon administration that a massive political realignment began. The so-called “party of Lincoln” launched its Southern Strategy following the passage of civil rights laws. As Cheney-Rice noted, “The mid-century black exodus from the GOP was no fluke or paranoid manifestation. It was a response to sustained antagonism toward their rights by Republicans.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">A critical part of this movement for Republicans was to become what David Roberts called the <b>“post-truth party.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Republicans thus talk about “taxes” and “spending” and “regulation” in the abstract, since Americans oppose them in the abstract even as they support their specific manifestations. They talk about cutting the deficit even as they slash taxes on the rich and launch unfunded wars. They talk about free markets even as they subsidize fossil fuels. They talk about American exceptionalism even as they protect fossil-fuel incumbents and fight research and infrastructure investments.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In short, Republicans have mastered post-truth politics. They’ve realized that their rhetoric doesn’t have to bear any connection to their policy agenda.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As Cheney-Rice articulated, the success of their “post-truth politics” depended on “using racism to sweeten the deal.” Meanwhile, the Cold War provided cover for their military interventionism all around the globe.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">All of that came to a screeching halt near the end of George W. Bush’s presidency. The “global war on terror” had become the substitute for the Cold War and resulted in the country being mired in two wars. Post-truth politics were destroyed by the Great Recession. The country responded by electing the country’s first African American president.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As I have often stated, that was the point at which the Republican Party faced a crucial question. Should they double-down on post-truth politics or re-evaluate their agenda? In many ways, they did neither. Instead, they launched their plan to obstruct anything Obama and the Democrats tried to do and became the “post-policy party.” Other than continue to support tax cuts for the wealthy, they pretty much abandoned the rest of the conservative agenda and zeroed in on simply being against anything Democrats supported. They didn’t, however, abandon racism as their cover.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In order to justify their total obstruction against Obama—even during the height of the Great Recession—narratives flourished about how the president was not really American, didn’t love his country, hated white people, and was probably a secret Muslim. Right-wing media carried the ball on most of those accusations, while Republican politicians simply looked the other way. That is what made John McCain’s moment of moral clarity stand out. On the other hand, it should come as no surprise that Donald Trump launched himself onto the national political stage by embracing birtherism. His eventual campaign was a hodgepodge of policy proposals, which he has mostly abandoned, while the racism remains.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As a result, the conservative agenda at this point was summarized pretty well by Cheney-Rice.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">[T]he implementation of conservative policies means that migrant children are dying in cages, black voters are being purged from voter rolls by the thousands, Native lands are being plundered for oil infrastructure, and black mothers are losing their lives and babies because adequate health care is out of reach.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>That is precisely why Mitch McConnell is happy to embrace the idea of being the “grim reaper.” He has no policy agenda, which is the ultimate conclusion for a party that has been built of the idea that “government isn’t the solution, it’s the problem.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When it comes to the possible demise of the GOP, I don’t think that it is possible to predict what happens next because there are simply too many possibilities to consider. But it is nevertheless important to be clear about what brought us to this point. Heading towards the moment that white people become a minority in this country, the Republicans have positioned themselves such that, if they abandon racism, they have nothing.</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">crit of NYT column white educate trumpistas</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/nyt-steers-dems-away-from-the-obvious-formula-for-defeating-trump/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/nyt-steers-dems-away-from-the-obvious-formula-for-defeating-trump/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/do-conservatives-believe-there-are-more-bad-people-in-america-than-elsewhere/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/do-conservatives-believe-there-are-more-bad-people-in-america-than-elsewhere/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Do conservatives believe there are more bad people in America than elsewhere?</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by David Atkins / Washington Monthly<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>September 2, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">After every mass shooting in America comes the same refrain from gun-loving conservatives: guns don’t kill people, people kill people. The causes of gun violence are always presumed to be something other than the guns themselves: mental illness, video games, parenting, et cetera, despite no correlation ever being found. What we do know is that the vast majority of mass shooter are men, that the looser a state’s gun laws the more mass shootings it has, and that America has far, far more gun violence and mass shootings than other developed countries.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>What’s most curious about conservative arguments on guns is how easy they are to disprove.</b> <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Economic and social theory will always have an air of mystery about them because it’s practically impossible to run complex enough models and experiments to definitively prove one ideological framework over another. But with gun it’s astonishingly simple just to look at the experience of other countries. Do the Japanese play a lot of violent video games? Yes. Do they have high rates of gun violence? No. Is there just as much mental illness in England as in the United States? Certainly. Is there as much gun violence? Certainly not. Literally the only possible correlating factor for American gun violence is American access to guns.</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>But one of the most amazing conservative arguments is that we should not enact stronger gun control measures because the problem is innate human evil. </b>This notion comes up frequently among evangelical conservatives, including just this evening by Texas 6th district representative Matt Schaefer who embarrassed himself with a revolting twitter thread that included the following:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Matt Schaefer</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">@RepMattSchaefer</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;· Aug 31, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>&nbsp;“Do something!</b>” is the statement we keep hearing. As an elected official with a vote in Austin, let me tell you what I am NOT going to do. 1/6</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>I am NOT going to use the evil acts of a handful of people to diminish the God-given rights of my fellow Texans. Period. None of these so-called gun-control solutions will work to stop a person with evil intent.</b> 2/6</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Let’s leave aside the fact that no divine entity or precept of natural law gives anyone the right to own an assault weapon. Let’s also ignore the fact that it’s entirely likely that gun control solutions would have denied the Odessa shooter easy access to the firearms with which he carried out his killings.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The most interesting question here is about evil intent. If human evil is the ultimate cause of gun violence–rather than the shocking ease with which modern firearms allow tense situations to escalate into deadly violence and unbalanced individuals to become mass murderers in a matter of seconds–then presumably there must be more bad people in America than anywhere else in the world.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">It’s not clear to me if American evangelicals who tout this line about “evil” in the context of gun violence have spent even a few seconds thinking it through. Perhaps they haven’t stopped to consider why evil doesn’t seem to manifest this way in other developed countries. Perhaps they haven’t asked themselves why America seems to be beset by so much more human evil despite being much more religious than most other developed countries. Are the bodies of murdered children just part of God’s benevolent plan in divinely inspiring the 2nd Amendment, or are Americans unique in being especially susceptible to the wiles of the Devil? And why should that be?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">[evangelists have long and routinely said whatever evil that befalss the US eg 911 is punishment for our sins, but not mass shootings?]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It hardly matters, of course. The pro-gun crowd isn’t motivated by honest argument, but by motivated reasoning. There is no amount of evidence, no amount of logic, no number of dead and injured children that will convince them that the guns themselves are the danger, not the people wielding them. All that decent and good people can do is defeat this evil at the ballot box.</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/08/ex-republican-national-committee-chair-explains-why-cracks-within-the-party-are-becoming-exposed/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/08/ex-republican-national-committee-chair-explains-why-cracks-within-the-party-are-becoming-exposed/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/08/not-all-republicans-are-neo-nazis-but-are-they-still-evil-for-not-fighting-the-neo-nazis"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/08/not-all-republicans-are-neo-nazis-but-are-they-still-evil-for-not-fighting-the-neo-nazis</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Not all Republicans are neo-Nazis — but are they still evil for not fighting the neo-Nazis?</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Frank Vyan Walton / Daily Kos<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>August 25, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In previous articles, I’ve discussed how the GOP has openly become the party of racism, white supremacy, and nationalism; why you can’t be nice to neo-Nazis or their enablers in the GOP; and how the recent racism leading to violent acts of terrorism and mass murder wasn’t started by Donald Trump himself—he just brought the kerosine and the s’mores to the fire. <b>What I’ve always wondered is: At what point would the majority of the GOP finally come to their senses and recognize all of this, and begin to denounce Trump’s many bigoted statements and policy positions? When will they reach the breaking point?</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But It seems as though waiting for Trump to go too far, or to say too much,is a fool’s errand. The rank-and-file Republicans have repeatedly said they don’t care what Trump says, or for that matter what he does, as long as they themselves are economically alright. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Not that there hasn’t been a slow trickle of converts, including former Republicans and never-Trumpers like Joe Walsh, Max Boot, Jennifer Rubin, Justin Amash, Jeff Flake, Bill Kristol, Michael Cohen, George Conway, and lately Anthony Scaramucci. </span>But the basic bread-and-butter Republicans still don’t give a shit, even when there are neo-Nazi Proud Boys marching in the streets wearing #MAGA hats, or when thousands of children and families are being held by Trump’s immigration forces indefinitely at concentration camps in crowded unsafe conditions, without proper sanitation, and without flu shots, in violation of federal court orders and international law.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If they can’t stand up against any of this, does this mean they are providing a tacit endorsement for it? Are they not willfully permitting this abject evil?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There is danger in saying that “all Republicans” are bigots, because it’s clearly not true. It couldn’t possibly be true. It’s understandable that making such a broad and unfounded claim would clearly generate outrage and a backlash for the person making such an outlandish claim. As I’ve said before, however, there are worse things than just being a racist.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Unfortunately, it’s becoming more and more difficult to observe Trump and not see that he traffics in bigotry and that each time he has an outburst of bias, members of the GOP scramble to ignore it, excuse it, justify it, and rationalize it.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Worse, it’s become more common that they echo the themes of supremacy by supporting ideas such as the <b>“great replacement.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In July 2017, white nationalist Youtube star Lauren Southern posted a video called “The Great Replacement” that has since garnered more than 670,000 views.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In the monologue, Southern blends fear-mongering about the supposed Islamification of Europe with specifically American concerns about automation and disappearing jobs to create a narrative of whites being replaced.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The future of Europe looks pretty halal,” she says, before discussing how technology makes jobs — and people — redundant. “It’s all replaceable and there’s nothing particularly significant about the thing being replaced.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to Keegan Hankes, the interim research director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project, the theory is a “dressed-up version” of older ideas that white nationalists have peddled about supposed conspiracies to destroy the white race.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“It’s not that the ideas are new, it’s new packaging,” he said.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the idea has caught fire on the U.S. far-right since Trump’s election.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Rather than remaining on the fringe, these ideas have been echoed within the mainstream GOP.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Fox News has begun to propagate aspects of the racist narrative over the past year, without necessarily adhering to the theory itself. The Fox News version is more narrowly focused on domestic electoral politics, accusing Democrats of pushing for replacement for partisan political advantage.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Laura Ingraham</b> has subscribed to the notion that Democrats are trying to use “chain migrants” to replace Americans. She said in one appearance last year that Democrats “want to replace you, the American voters, with newly amnestied citizens and an ever-increasing number of chain migrants.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Tucker Carlson has also echoed elements of the theory — “demographic replacement” is his term — using it as a partisan bludgeon to accuse Democrats of trying to seed the country with liberal constituencies.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, for example, Carlson claimed that leftists were advocating for a “genocide” of white men. He has also characterized the difference between U.S. policy towards immigrants and towards its native-born citizens as “it’s like, shut up, you’re dying, we’re gonna replace you.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump himself has promoted this idea with his rallies and ads about the scary migrant “caravan” during the midterm elections.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The “Great Replacement” was a specific idea that was espoused by the Pittsburgh synagogue and the Christchurch shooters last year.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Only 19 minutes before 911 was first alerted that a terrorist shooting had occurred in El Paso, Texas on Saturday, the suspect posted a 2300-word manifesto online that outlined his motives. The suspect spoke of a “Hispanic invasion of Texas,” asserting, “If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can be more sustainable.” At the heart of the manifesto, titled “The Inconvenient Truth,” was a belief that is central to modern white nationalist and white supremacist ideology: the Replacement Theory, which argues that whites are being replaced by “non-whites” around the world. And the Replacement Theory has been a primary motivation in a series of deadly terrorist acts, from Pittsburgh to New Zealand to Virginia.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In “The Inconvenient Truth,” acts of terrorism are characterized not as extremism or murdering innocent people, but as acts of self-defense against a non-white “invasion.” And the manifesto openly praises the worst act of terrorism in New Zealand’s history: an attack on two mosques in Christchurch on March 15, 2019 that left 51 people dead. In the manifesto written before that attack, the Replacement Theory was specifically mentioned as a motive — and “The Inconvenient Truth,” in solidarity, asserts, “In general, I support the Christchurch shooter and his manifesto. This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Christchurch terrorist specifically thanked Donald Trump, but somehow the National Review thought it was totally unfair to link Trump to his actions.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I do not recall hearing President Donald J. Trump urge anyone to enter a mosque and gun down Muslims. Still, Trump’s critics — whose volcanic rage makes Vesuvius resemble Old Faithful — hold him responsible for March 15’s mayhem in Christchurch, New Zealand.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Police say that an Australian white supremacist opened fire inside two local mosques, killing 50 worshipers and wounding some 50 more. Yet, somehow it’s all Trump’s fault — his detractors argue.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Senator Tim Kaine (D., Va.) said: “The president uses language often that’s very similar to the language used by these bigots and racists, and if he’s not going to call it out, then other leaders have to do more to call it out.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Time and time again, this president has embraced and emboldened white supremacists,” said Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.). “Instead of condemning racist terrorists, he covers for them.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[…]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These scathing attacks raise this philosophical question: If the president of the United States speaks, and the Trump-loathing media and his critics ignore his words, has he made a sound?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fact, President Trump has praised Muslims at home and abroad. He has denounced white supremacists. And he has embraced the two groups whom Klansmen, neo-Nazis, and their ilk detest the most: blacks and Jews. This news may shock most Americans, since anti-Trump journalists conceal these facts like classified data.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Oh sure, Trump said that he “condemns” all types of violence, and he’s criticized white supremacists once or twice. But frankly, nobody, including the white supremacists, believe any of that because he’s also criticized the “alt-Left” and Antifa. They said so during the recent Portland Proud Boys rally.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The organizer of a far-right rally in Portland, Oregon claimed the event was a “success” after President Donald Trump attacked Portlandiers protesting the group.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“A confluence of protesters on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum merged on Portland’s waterfront Saturday in a tense but relatively uneventful face-off that brought national attention, including a tweet in the hours before the protest by President Trump decrying the city’s signature anti-fascist movement,” the Oregonian reported Saturday.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[…]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Joe Biggs, a former InfoWars staffer and the organizer of Saturday’s right-wing demonstration, was asked by The Oregonian/OregonLive what message the effort got across,” the newspaper reported.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Go look at President Trump’s Twitter,” Biggs said. “He talked about Portland, said he’s watching antifa. That’s all we wanted. We wanted national attention, and we got it. Mission success.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In recent weeks, white supremacists have murdered dozens of people in El Paso, Texas, and Gilroy, California. Several others have been thwarted before they attacked, including one who praised Trump as he threatened to kill Hispanics and blacks.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Eric Lin, 35, was charged with interstate transmission of threatening communications. According to the criminal complaint against him, Lin targeted an unnamed victim who lives in Florida but is from Spain with threatening Facebook messages, repeatedly indicating he identified with Hitler’s views. He also referenced the President.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Our Great President Donald John Trump is too Nice of Man. But I will say it,” Lin allegedly wrote on July 15 to his victim, before unleashing a series of racial slurs and saying that Hispanic, black and Muslim Americans “will be Killed!”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I Thank God everyday President Donald John Trump is President and that he will launch a Racial War and Crusade to keep [various slurs] and any dangerous non-White or Ethnically or Cultural Foreign group ‘In Line,’” he allegedly wrote a few days later.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Another white nationalist was arrested for planning an attack in Ohio.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The FBI raided the home of James Reardon, 20, on Friday and found a stockpile of weapons that included dozens of rounds of ammunition, several semi-automatic weapons and protective gear like a gas mask and bulletproof vest, according to multiple reports. Police also found white nationalist and anti-Semitic imagery in his home.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Reardon was initially flagged by authorities last month when he posted a video on Instagram that showed a man shooting a semi-automatic rifle. Sirens and screams were heard in the background of the video, according to ABC News and Reardon tagged Jewish Community Center of Youngston in the Instagram post.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And yet another anti-trans, racist Trump fan from Connecticut was arrested for making violent threats.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A Connecticut man who had amassed an arsenal of tactical weapons and body armor, and who police say may have been preparing for a mass shooting, left a trail of virulently racist and anti-trans postings online.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">TPM found that social media accounts registered to Norwalk, Connecticut resident Brandon Wagshol both reflected elements of the police accusations against him and contained rants against minorities.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[…]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In January 2018, for example, after Trump complained that immigrants were coming into the U.S. from “shithole countries,” Wagshol posted memes riffing on the term.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In one post, a meme appears to show the popular 23andme genetic testing kit offering consumers the opportunity to discover “which shithole country are you from?”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And these three were just the tip of the floating turdberg.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s impressive that all of these whack jobs were caught before things went completely off the rails, but none of that was thanks to Trump or the White House ,who have been repeatedly ignoring the threat of growing white nationalism.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Homeland Security officials battled the White House for more than a year to get them to focus more on domestic terrorism,” one senior source close to the Trump administration tells CNN. “The White House wanted to focus only on the jihadist threat which, while serious, ignored the reality that racial supremacist violence was rising fast here at home. They had major ideological blinders on.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The National Counterterrorism Strategy, issued last fall, states that “Radical Islamist terrorists remain the primary transnational terrorist threat to the United States and its vital national interests,” which few experts dispute. What seems glaring to these officials is the minimizing of the threat of domestic terrorism, which they say was on their radar as a growing problem.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Ultimately the White House just added one paragraph about domestic terrorism as a throw-away line,</span>” a senior source involved in the discussion told CNN. That paragraph mentions “other forms of violent extremism, such as racially motivated extremism, animal rights extremism, environmental extremism, sovereign citizen extremism, and militia extremism.” It made no mention of white supremacists. (A separate paragraph in the report mentions investigating domestic terrorists with connections to overseas terrorists, but that does not seem to be a reference to white supremacists.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Also, Homeland Security has been struggling to deal with domestic terrorists because of the White House’s obsession with immigrants.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">An unnamed current DHS official told the Daily Beast on Tuesday that the department is “scrambling” to deal with domestic terrorism following the mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“These two shootings have caused a mad scramble where they are pulling every publication and book off the shelf in an attempt to figure out what they can do to address this problem,” a former DHS official told the Daily Beast.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Former DHS deputy Counterterrorism Coordinator John Cohen said the struggle is a “direct result” of “no serious planning efforts by the department” to fight domestic terrorism.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“That’s due in large part because of the insistence by the White House that the department first and foremost focus on immigration and border security,” he said.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Under President Donald Trump, who’s fixated on immigration and Islamic terrorism, the department’s seen major cuts in resources for addressing domestic terrorism.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump has ignored asylum law, which allows people to legally enter the nation from any port of entry. He’s detained asylum seekers, even though as many of 99 percent of them make it to all of their court dates. Now he’s both implementing indefinite detention for families and children while denying them flu shots, when several kids have already died as a result of the flu. Remember that Anne Frank didn’t die in a gas chamber: She died of typhus while at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump’s goal is simple: to make the risk of trying to enter the U.S. so painful, dangerous, and perilous that it’s not worth it, even when the alternative is death as a result of crime, gangs, and drug lords.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And all this came after acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan revealed that domestic terrorism is now a greater threat to the U.S. than al-Qaida or ISIS.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan stated that domestic terrorism is “absolutely” a bigger threat than international terrorism on Sunday.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Is it fair to say that you want to change the priority–that your priority needs to be domestic terrorism?” NBC host Todd asked during an interview with McAleen. “Is that a greater threat, right now, than international terrorism?”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Absolutely,” the acting DHS secretary replied, adding that the DHS “has to balance threats.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">McAleenan said that his department’s emphasis is providing support for “prevention, awareness, and response capability” regarding domestic terrorism on a local and state level.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Just to re-emphasize: As the threat of foreign terrorism slows, the Trump administration would rather continue to focus on that and immigration issues (such as their sudden huge raid at a chicken plant in Mississippi) instead of address terrorists that are right here, right now, and who are killing Americans by the dozens.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>And then you have the House GOP caucus</b>, which concocted talking points about white supremacy intended to minimize the issue and instead attack so-called “left-wing” violence.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In an email to constituents reported by the Tampa Bay Times, Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) included a series of talking points that his spokesperson told the paper were “provided by the House Republican Conference.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If asked, “Do you believe white nationalism is driving more mass shootings recently?” the talking points falsely respond that the El Paso shooter and the man who shot Congresswoman Gaby Giffords were politically “from the left.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“White nationalism and racism are pure evil and cannot be tolerated in any form,” the talking points included in the email said, according to the Tampa Bay Times. “We also can’t excuse violence from the left such as the El Paso shooter, the recent Colorado shooters, the Congressional baseball shooter, Congresswoman Giffords’ shooter and Antifa.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Rather than address these terrorists, the right would rather attack Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib for their support of human rights in Palestine, by arguing that doing so “supports terrorism.</b>” This tactic is shown in the video below, where The Atlantic’s Peter Beinart engages in an amazing shouting match with the National Review’s Rich Lowry. He repeatedly denies that they or he support Palestinian terrorism, but repeats that the basic humanity of the Palestinians itself is inherent.&nbsp; Beinart argues powerfully that Palestine is an apartheid state, and that you can’t understand how bad conditions are for the those on the West Bank until you visit there and see that it is as bad and tragic as the Jim Crow South. Lowry blows all that off.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">During the civil rights movement, Dr. Martin Luther King jr. and groups like SNCC, led by John Lewis, were called “communist.” The same went for Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress, which fought against South Africa’s apartheid system—and not always with nonviolent methods.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This basic and clear inhumanity was what Tlaib and Omar were attempting to highlight and unveil by visiting Israel, but Trump asked Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to block them. Netanyahu did just that, with frankly bogus claims of “anti-Semitism” and support for terrorism on their part.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The irony of that is just delicious.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Rather than admit the truth that Beinart speaks or call out domestic terrorists, conservative columnists have instead claimed that Trump has been the “victim’ of racism, and that bringing up these white supremacist terrorists is mere “identity politics.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Writing in the Wall Street Journal, conservative columnist Heather Mac Donald says that Trump himself is a victim of racist attacks.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a story headlined “Trump Isn’t the One Dividing Us by Race,” Mac Donald claims that “He hardly mentions it, while his adversaries are obsessed with ‘whiteness’ and ‘white privilege.’”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“It is the media and Democratic leaders who routinely characterize individuals and groups by race and issue race-based denunciations of large parts of the American polity,” Mac Donald claims. […]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Identity politics dominate higher education: Administrators, students and faculty obsessively categorize themselves and each other by race. “White privilege,” often coupled with “toxic masculinity,” is the focus of freshmen orientations and an ever-growing array of courses.” […]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“To note the inevitability of white identity politics in no way condones the grotesque violence of men like the El Paso killer,” she says. “But the dominant culture is creating a group of social pariahs, a very small percentage of whom—already unmoored from traditional sources of meaning and stability, such as family—are taking their revenge through stomach-churning mayhem,” Mac Donald argues.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And many conservatives, including Newt Gingrich and Erick Erickson, apparently lost their minds over The New York Times’ 1619 Project, which is a series of essays about the impact of slavery in America published on the 400th anniversary of the first Africans landing on North American soil.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Some commentators, like Elie Mystal, have noted the absurdity that all these complaints seem to center on the idea that no one would like America if a full and complete history of slavery and its brutality was debated publicly.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>But there is another, deeper common thread that runs through all these complaints. Conservatives seem to be bristling at the idea that slavery is not just something in our past, but something that shapes what our nation is to this day.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>They don’t want to grapple with the structures</b> we have cyclically built and rebuilt to reduce black Americans to a state “almost” like slavery, from mass incarceration to attacks on voting rights.</span> They don’t want to talk about how stereotypes we formed about black people during slavery affect everything from how willing employers are to hire them to how willing doctors are to prescribe them pain medicine. And they also don’t want to hear how white people were not, in fact, selfless saviors who swooped in and ended slavery in 1863, because that forces them to confront how unwilling they are to address its lasting effects now, from civil rights to reparations.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Admitting and acknowledging the experience of African Americans is a threat. It validates the evil, discriminatory, and bigoted acts of (some) white people during the past four centuries, and if those acts are admitted then it requires action—largely by white people—to change and correct those actions. That’s exactly what the GOP doesn’t want. It’s certainly what Trump doesn’t want.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Instead of correcting the consequences of discrimination, Trump’s Labor Department has been establishing rules to legalize LGBTQ discrimination for “religion-exercising organizations.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Labor officials have made public a new rule—no Congress, needed, thank you—to allow companies contracting with the federal government who are “religion-exercising organizations” to ignore federal laws protecting the rights of gays, transsexuals, and who knows who else in hiring or workplace practices. Religious employers and companies with “closely held” religious ties now will be shielded from claims of bias in court or other law enforcement actions, says the rule..</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump supporters like goofy game show host Chuck Woolery claim “racism has nothing to do with race.” Yeah—okay, Chuck.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rather than point advocate against any of this, other Trump supporters are instead holding rallies against “hate” directed at Trump.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump supporter Tammy Curry, who sells log cabin accessories and CBP products at a pair of local shops, organized a “Make America Great Again” rally Friday evening at a picnic grounds, where supporters gathered to celebrate the president.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We have to do something about all the hatred,” Curry said. […]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The 61-year-old Curry was instead concerned about criticism against one of the most unpopular presidents in modern history.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I just think right now the president is being attacked unjustly,” Curry said. “People don’t respect the office of the president. Never have I seen this much hate. It scares me.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Most of Trump’s supporters are just as oblivious, if not more so. His base’s support hasn’t wavered, remaining in the 80 percent range both before and after his “very fine people” reaction to the neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville. They fail to see these events, his disgusting treatment of immigrants, and his dismissive attitude toward the dangers of white supremacist terrorism as being relevant to them.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">His support among the GOP actually increased after his attacks on Reps. Omar, Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ayanna Pressley, which were launched to tamp down their criticism of his inhumane immigration policies.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Support for U.S. President Donald Trump increased slightly among Republicans after he lashed out on Twitter over the weekend in a racially charged attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen, a Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll shows.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The national survey, conducted on Monday and Tuesday after Trump told the lawmakers they should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came,” showed his net approval among members of his Republican Party rose by 5 percentage points to 72%, compared with a similar poll that ran last week.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They don’t really mind any of this, because they like his immigration policies. But that doesn’t make them all racist. It just makes them racist-adjacent.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One of the key things learned from the 1619 Project is the fact that there was never any point in time when most Americans were racist. I believe they were not. The issue of slavery something that only impacted the slave owners themselves, and few people (even among Southerners) belonged to that class. If you read the letters of Civil War soldiers, rarely are the issues of slavery or abolition discussed. More often, their issues are personal and more prosaic. Union soldiers were, at least originally, not fighting to free the slaves, despite what Newt Gingrich says. In fact, they were somewhat concerned with the ramifications of the Emancipation Proclamation.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One of those new measures that is taken to fight the war is the Emancipation Proclamation. The preliminary Emancipation Proclamation had been issued on September 22nd of 1862 and the Emancipation Proclamation really changed the whole aim of a war that had been begun to save the Union. Now it becomes a war also to end slavery. Now those two goals had never been completely separable but the official line had always been “This is a war to save the Union” and not to have really much of anything to do with slavery. Those changes really rocked much of the Civil War North, particularly the Northern home front.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">You have quite a lot of dissent among white Northerners over the Emancipation Proclamation. Black Northerners, there is no dissent. They think this is exactly what has been needed since well before the war began. There are a number of issues at stake in the 1862 elections. There are economic issues, there are issues having to do with civil liberties, what actions can and cannot the United States government take during wartime and there’s the war and of course there’s the Emancipation Proclamation.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">All of those from the North weren’t abolitionist heroes, and all those from the South weren’t slaver bigots. Then, as now, most people were largely trying to get on with their lives and not so much concerned with the matters of others.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is why it is only the threat of a looming recession that has Trump starting to worry he just might lose the support of his base. Trump can use the exact same anti-Semitic trope of suggesting that Jews aren’t “loyal” that Rep. Ilhan Omar was slammed for when she criticized AIPAC, and his base won’t care one wit. What they care about is their own pocketbook, and hardly anything else.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci, who has always supported Trump’s policy positions (even though they are all still based on bigoted ideas) is someone who reached the breaking point with Trump’s racist attacks on “the Squad” when he said they should “go back where they came from.” He believes there are other Republicans who are merely in the closet on their moral objections to Trump’s behavior.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He claims he can take five points off of Trump’s support using his new SuperPAC and gathering Republicans who supposedly have the strength of moral conviction to try and primary Trump in 2020. The goal is to continue Trump’s policies without all the embarrassing, silly, and racist parts.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Oh, really?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We’ll have to see how he does with that effort, but I’m not optimistic.<b> The problem is the core of the “Great Replacement” idea is that it’s not just racial, it’s also economic</b>. It’s about jobs and opportunities being supposedly taken or blocked from white people who because of immigration now have to compete on the level that the market actually demands. To keep their jobs and avoid being “replaced,” they’d have to accept a cut to their pay or their benefits, which migrants are willing to tolerate. According to the paranoid theory, white people would likely have to move to another state, or possibly even out of the country because that’s where their jobs just might be going.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump has been selling his base the idea that he’s going to bring those overseas jobs back, and he’s going to get rid of all those pesky immigrants (even a lot of the legal ones!) and that’s what is going to “Make America Great Again.” The economic and the racial have always been linked in his vision; it’s not really possible to separate them.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In order to bring about his economic vision, Trump has to totally amp up the cruelty toward immigrants. He has to attack even our allied nations and portray China and the E.U. as taking “unfair advantage” of us on trade, because you see “those other people” are always the problem. “They” are the issue. We just need to put all those other people in their proper shithole place, and America will be better off—the “real” America, that is: not Baltimore and all its rats and rodents, of course.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is why the white supremacists love him. This is why they feel emboldened by him. This is why they are acting out, and have become radicalized at increasing rates: because of him.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Meanwhile, the rest of the GOP stands idly by, in denial—and often, in delusion.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">During the height of the civil rights struggle, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. famously stated that his largest challenge wasn’t with the KKK, but with white moderates who remained idle in response to injustice.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice […]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s often said that all that’s required for evil to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Then, as now, the greatest challenge we have aren’t the white supremacists and racists who have rallied to Trump’s side: It’s the other loyal supporters of the GOP who have placed their own personal gain and comfort above the damage that Trump’s tragic trade, immigration, and domestic terrorism policies are doing to the lives of tens and hundreds of thousands. They just don’t care, because they don’t think they’re in the path of the wrecking ball.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I think they’re wrong about that.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They aren’t moved by pictures of children in cages. They aren’t moved by pictures of Americans dead and dying on the ground as a result of white supremacist terror. They aren’t moved by seeing throngs of Proud Boys marching in the streets of Portland, or by the “very fine people” in Charlottesville. They aren’t moved by Trump saying black and brown congresswomen should “go back where they came from,” and they aren’t moved by Trump saying that Jews that support Democrats are “disloyal.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They’re more concerned about being called “racist” for supporting Trump. They’re more concerned with being blamed for something, or being responsible for anything. They’re more concerned with their own 401(k). They’re more concerned with their own pension.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Technically, there’s nothing wrong with that. Obviously, people can make their own choices about what they’re going to care about. But I do wonder: When there is clear and obvious evil taking place on their behalf, on their watch, and under their nose; when terrorists are being radicalized by the rhetoric of the current White House resident, when does their standing on the sidelines become an act of enabling that evil?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Are you truly innocent if you only act when your own financial interests are threatened by a recession?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And naturally, in anticipation of this Trump is already scapegoating the news media for creating a recession if there is one, so he won’t have to take the blame.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The Fake News Media is doing everything they can to crash the economy because they think that will be bad for me and my re-election,” Trump tweeted Thursday, apparently seeking to spread the outrageous theory that shadowy forces would wreck the economy for the sole purpose of damaging him politically.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Mr. Trump has repeated the claims in private discussions with aides and allies, insisting that his critics are trying to take away what he sees as his calling card for re-election,” Haberman writes</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Because of course, their money is all they truly care about. As for the rest of it, they’re just not interested or worse yet, they really do believe that wackadoodle conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton (on her day off from running the Comet Pizza teenage human trafficking ring and selling Benghazi secrets to Q-anon while laughing over Seth Rich’s grave) hired Christopher Steele to pay off a bunch of Russians to lie about Trump, and then used that information to manipulate the Deep State of Comey, Strzok, Page, Clapper, and Brennan to illegally spy on Carter Page and Trump in his tower. Then they called up Bigfoot and the Sasquatch for an Illuminati clam bake at Chappaquiddick and any minute now—literally any second—Attorney General Barr is gonna have them all, including Mueller, Hillary, and Jeffrey Epstein’s best friend Bill Clinton, in handcuffs and leg irons. Just you wait.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They think Trump saying that he’s the “King of the Jews” and the “chosen one” is cute and the best thing they’ve heard since the last chosen ones, Neo of the Matrix and Anakin Skywalker.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Scaramucci is betting that GOP rank-and-file will get up off the sidelines and support his alternative candidate to Trump in 2020 on essentially moral grounds. He’s not the first to try and make this argument. Former Sen. Jeff Flake tried to stand up to Trump too, and it didn’t work out so well for him. Rep. Justin Amash is trying to do it, but the verdict is still out on how that’s going. The Mooch might have a better shot if he was willing to go third-party rather than try and work inside the GOP, because I think that the rank-and-file Republicans are frankly long, long gone from being who and what he seems to think they are. The cancer of the Trump cult —which Trump claims is a “movement based on love”—has already metastasized.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">At its core, Donald Trump’s love is filtered through fascism and authoritarianism. His form of tainted love rests upon moral inversion, a state of being in which truth is replaced by lies, empirical reality itself is usurped, and the evil and immoral are transformed into the good and the noble. As Hannah Arendt warned in her landmark book “The Origins of Totalitarianism”:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In this malignant reality, people who are in thrall to Donald Trump (or the other ignominious fascist and authoritarian leaders whom he adores and imitates) do not know what right and wrong are anymore. When these distinctions are pointed out, Trump’s supporters double down on their investment in the Great Leader and “the Movement,” focusing their rage and violence against the political truth-teller.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Donald Trump’s love is exclusive rather than inclusive, narrow rather than broad. It is focused inward on the in-group as a way of legitimating violence and meanness towards the out-group. Trump’s love is not a celebration of the best of humanity but is itself inhumane.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>They have become an authoritarian cult.</b>&nbsp; Maybe they already were after the days of George W. Bush and decades of Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson, Pirro, the rest of Faux Snooze, Sinclair, Newsmax, Breitbart and RT. They don’t flinch at his crazed, inhumane, and racist actions because they support his inhumane and racist actions. They like it. They think every little time the media has a bovine birth over his latest nutball action like trying to buy Greenland like it’s on sale at Walmart is great. He’s just trolling the media, and also “pwning the libs,”, ha ha! He called the prime minister of Denmark “nasty”? Just like Meghan Markle and Elizabeth Warren? Fine. He also said London’s Mayor Saddiq Khan was a “Nasty guy” and a “total loser” but since he’s a dude, that makes it fine.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I don’t think they’re ever coming back from being enablers for Trump’s bigotry. They like that he says out loud what they’re afraid to admit they think. He says pretty boldly what Limbaugh and Ann Coulter only hinted at previously. His supporters have completely lost their moral compass down the garbage disposal if they can’t see this man is totally bankrupt not only six times financially, but also morally and ethically. And I when Trump is finally gone—whenever that maybe—they’ll still be here, raging about immigrants and foreigners, and enabling and rationalizing monsters.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And if I’m wrong, nobody is stopping them from proving this isn’t the case.</font></div></div><div><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></font></p><p><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/08/rich-republicans-sell-a-woe-is-me-story-seeking-to-hide-big-dollar-campaign-contributions/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/08/rich-republicans-sell-a-woe-is-me-story-seeking-to-hide-big-dollar-campaign-contributions/</font></a></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Rich Republicans sell a woe-is-me story seeking to hide big-dollar campaign contributions</b></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Laura Clawson / Daily Kos<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>August 9, 2019</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Days after one of its star reporters jumped on the Republican faux-outrage bandwagon over a Democratic congressman’s use of publicly available campaign finance information, The New York Times offers up a furrowed brow of a story about whether it might be a good idea to hide the names of political donors—after all, people who’ve donated the legal maximum to Donald Trump don’t like the response.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Calling out the people who fund campaigns is not a new tactic in politics,” Katie Rogers and Annie Karni write, “but the question of how much should be publicly disclosed about those donors has been an issue that Republicans, led by the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, have repeatedly raised in recent years.” In other words, Republicans want all dark money, all the time. No accountability, no sunlight.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Because otherwise, people who can afford to write $2,800 checks—and more—to Donald Trump might get calls saying things like, “Hey, we were going to use you for business, but we found out you’re a racist,” and we can’t have that!</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In an article about public disclosure and Republican opposition to such disclosure, nowhere does the Times say in so many words that information on people who give more than $200 to a campaign is publicly available on a government website. Probably the closest is this: “While the Supreme Court ruled in the 2010 Citizens United case to uphold public disclosure—with <b>Justice Antonin Scalia, the court’s conservative stalwart, arguing later that without such revelations ‘democracy is doomed</b>’—Republicans and wealthy allies like the Koch brothers have argued that it results in donor harassment and has a chilling effect on free speech.” So the Supreme Court, including its leading right-wing voice, was for disclosure … BUT!</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is The New York Times dedicating 1,400 words to the wish of rich Republicans to change the law to provide less transparency and accountability, only it’s not reporting on that campaign, on the fact that this is what rich Republicans want to do and why that might be and how they’re going about it. Instead, it’s dutifully reporting their cover story as if it has merit and substance. It’s stenography on the “woe is me” of rich people who got some angry—but apparently not threatening, since heaven knows, if anyone had been threatening, we would have heard about it—phone calls because they gave thousands of dollars to a racist.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When we talk about the rules being written for rich people, this is a perfect example of how it happens.</font></p><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">dereg nation 719</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div>good? Republicans in Congress form an environmental caucus</div><div>Some House and Senate Republican lawmakers have formed a new ad hoc group within Congress, the “Roosevelt Conservation Coalition,” to “embrace and promote constructive efforts to address environmental problems, responsibly plan for all market factors, and base policy decisions on science and quantifiable facts.”</div><div>
</div><div>“Unleashing solutions that enhance and protect our environment are essential to ensuring economic growth, energy independence, and national security,” said South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham in a statement announcing the coalition.</div><div>
</div><div>The “Roosevelt” moniker is a 100-year callback to President Theodore Roosevelt, a conservation advocate who championed the creation of Yellowstone National Park, along with scores of wildlife refuges across the country.</div><div>
</div><div>(It’s worth recalling that Republican Party positions of 1900 were much like those of today’s Democratic Party, with few points of resemblance to the contemporary GOP.)</div><div>
</div><div>Is this a good-faith effort “to strengthen conservation programs, promote public health, defend our environment, keep our air clean and protect our waterways,” as Congressman Brian Mast (R-Florida) said in the statement?</div><div>
</div><div>The fact that the words “climate change” do not appear anywhere in the coalition’s statement does not inspire confidence.</div><div>
</div><div>But the reference to “national security” could be read as subtle push-back against the White House’s resistance to recognizing climate risks to national security.</div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx many</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/fragile-patriotism-right-wing-snowflakes-are-triggered-by-any-criticism-of-america/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/fragile-patriotism-right-wing-snowflakes-are-triggered-by-any-criticism-of-america/</a></div><div>
</div><div><b>Fragile patriotism: Right-wing snowflakes are triggered by any criticism of America</b></div><div>&nbsp;[pix: A Trump supporter threatens to burn down Revolution Books in Berkeley, California (Screengrab)]</div><div>
</div><div>written by Matthew Rozsa / Salon July 14, 2019</div><div>
</div><div>The term “patriotism” may be associated with strength, but at least in the United States, the people who crow the loudest about loving their country are often the most fragile when it comes to expressing that love in a healthy way.</div><div>
</div><div>This ongoing problem of fragile patriotism — a phenomenon particularly prevalent among Trump-flavored American conservatives — contributes to many of the most persistent injustices that plague our country.</div><div>
</div><div>As with love in interpersonal relationships, love of one’s country has to encompass the ability to accept criticism. If you love an individual uncritically, you forfeit your capacity for independent thought and leave yourself vulnerable to abusive behavior. Similarly, if you love your country uncritically, you ignore the sins of its past — and make it more likely that they will recur in the future.</div><div>
</div><div>This object lesson was demonstrated for me personally on the Fourth of July, when I published an opinion essay pointing out the overt racism and sexism that marred the events that led to the founding of our country, including the writing of the<b> Declaration of Independence</b>. I noted that Thomas Jefferson had initially considered condemning slavery but then refrained from doing so; that Abigail Adams asked her husband to remember the rights of women when creating his new country but was laughed off; and that the language of the Declaration both directly and indirectly demeaned Native Americans. The purpose of the piece was to simultaneously honor what was right about the Declaration of Independence, and the events that surrounded its creation, while acknowledging its shortcomings.</div><div>
</div><div>Many conservatives responded by revealing the fragility of their own patriotism. Infowars editor Paul Joseph Watson tweeted that “it used to be a cliche, but what other conclusion can we draw at this point other than they really hate America?” Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit called my article “a hateful and inaccurate smear piece,” while Josh Hammer of The Daily Wire (with whose editor-in-chief, Ben Shapiro, I recently had a disputatious conversation) described Salon as a nest of “leftist ingrates” who are “profoundly ungrateful.”</div><div>
</div><div>Famed civil liberties attorney Alan Dershowitz responding to a series of tweets promoting the article from Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., by attacking her but not me: “Is this woman out of her mind? The Declaration of Independence was written in 1776! Did she take history in grade school? I think now [sic].” (Dershowitz calls himself a liberal, by the way, but has lately become a prominent defender of President Trump.) Numerous commenters simply expressed outrage that anyone would assert the Declaration of Independence had a racist and sexist history, while others responded with personal attacks against me as a Jew and an autistic person.</div><div>
</div><div>It is worth a brief response to the main points made against the article. Is it unfair to apply the standards of 2019 to 1776? Yes and no. Some contemporaries of the document’s drafters absolutely wanted slavery to be abolished and women’s rights to be recognized. Furthermore, even if that weren’t true, the human rights of black people, women and Native Americans were unquestionably being ignored. Is the fact that society was far more racist and sexist than it is now really an excuse?</div><div>
</div><div>The founding fathers knew that they were drafting a revolutionary text, not only in the immediate political sense but in terms of its long-term philosophical implications. They were bold enough to go beyond merely condemning King George III — which could have been the extent of what they did — and instead made broad proclamations about human rights. It is to their credit that they went as far as they did, and it’s an undeniable fact that they could have gone further but did not.</div><div>
</div><div>Another response that frequently popped up was that the Declaration of Independence actually sowed the seeds for the eventual elimination of injustices like slavery. While abolitionists frequently claimed this was the case in order to advance their cause — and other oppressed American groups have likewise insisted that the Declaration’s underlying spirit validates their social justice movements — that doesn’t mean the founding fathers saw that coming or intended it that way.</div><div>
</div><div>Saying that they prophesied the end of slavery, for example, is a classic example of the logical fallacy known as “hindsight bias” or “creeping determinism.” Although some of the authors and signers of the Declaration of Independence were quietly opposed to slavery and hoped it would someday be abolished, none of them could have reasonably assumed that was inevitable. There were periods in American history when it seemed like slavery would spread into the Western territories and become a permanent fixture of our economy — that concern led to the creation of the Republican Party — or when it seemed like women would never obtain basic legal equality or the right to vote. Those things only look inevitable in the rear-view mirror. As for the continent-wide genocide against hundreds of Native American tribes and millions of people, I fail to perceive any historical happy ending.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The common theme that linked all the responses to my article, however, was the assumption that if you criticize the Declaration of Independence — even when saying that it had an “overwhelmingly positive impact on history,” is “one of the most eloquent and morally moving political documents ever penned” and that without it, “every social justice movement that has followed would never have come to pass” — you clearly<b> hate America. </b></span>The idea that on America’s birthday we can celebrate the nation’s greatness while being mindful of its flaws — or we can take a mixed, nuanced view of the founding fathers without despising the country they created — is totally incompatible with the doctrine of fragile patriotism.</div><div>
</div><div>There is a danger here, beyond the fact that it risks whitewashing America’s past. To understand why, it is helpful to look at the full argument posted by Rep. Pressley in response to the article (and later retweeted by Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.)</div><div>
</div><div>“The impact of the prejudices, biases & contradictions codified by our founding fathers is still felt today. We continue to struggle as a nation to embrace our full history, one that includes family separation of black families at the auction block & today of migrants at camps,” Pressley wrote. “A country that has yet to realize it’s full promise for every person that calls it home & indeed makes it great, & yet it is a free country, one where I can resist, offer dissenting & critical opinion & challenge with bold activist leadership. Dissent is the ultimate patriotism, & as such I will continue to be a patriot. On this day, I am grateful for the freedoms afforded me in this country to do so. #resist #HappyFourthOfJuly.”</div><div>
</div><div><b>Pressley later added, “‘I love America more than any other country in this world, and exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.’</b> -<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">James Baldwin</span> But not only to criticize, to also celebrate & most of all to Work daily in coalition to preserve what is good & working, & to dismantle what is broken while mitigating the hurt caused by broken systems. The Work of progress & realizing a more equitable & just world never stops, but today we pause to reflect & fortify for the Work ahead.”</div><div>
</div><div>There is a direct line between taking offense at any criticism of the founding fathers and taking offense when modern injustices are pointed out. Insisting on a version of American exceptionalism that claims our history is above reproach — or that its ugliest aspects were minor flaws or anomalies — leads all too easily to turning a blind eye to migrants held in cages, people of color being targeted for abuse by police, or poor people who can’t make ends meet because of systemic economic inequality.</div><div>
</div><div>But if we view the Declaration of Independence as the imperfect articulation of a perfect ideal — the ideal being that all human beings should have equal rights, equal opportunity and (as Franklin Roosevelt later observed) by implication a decent standard of living — we can honor the document’s larger purpose while recognizing its flaws. If the injustices embedded in the Declaration of Independence are viewed as invisible or unassailable, however, then by extension many other injustices become invisible as well.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Hence the fragile patriotism of so much of the right-wing Twitterverse.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick provoked similar controversy during the holiday when it was reported that he had persuaded Nike to abandon a sneaker line that included the Betsy Ross version of the American flag, a symbol embraced by some white supremacists.</span> Kaepernick has of course criticized for kneeling during the national anthem as a silent protest against racial injustices by the police. Any form of protest against America’s symbols — even when wordless and entirely non-confrontational — is a challenge to fragile patriotism.</div><div>
</div><div>The same can be said of others who have drawn attention to America’s past and present injustices.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> <b>Sebastian Gorka</b>, a former adviser to Trump, has accused Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., of hating America because she compared the migrant detention centers at the border to concentration camps. On a deeper level, his complaint was that “she unapologetically supports <b>socialism, hates the founding principles of the United States, and relentlessly pushes identity politics</b> for the purpose of further dividing our country along racial and class lines.”</span></div><div>
</div><div>Gorka did not provide any examples of how Ocasio-Cortez “hates the founding principles” of this country, aside from his general references to her criticisms of economic inequalities and racial persecution. Once again, a direct connection is made between criticizing the political or social status quo and opposing the nation’s fundamental ideals — an assumption that depends on the perceived infallibility of the founding fathers.</div><div>
</div><div>This trend goes even further back then Kaepernick and Ocasio-Cortez, of course. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">When President Barack Obama apologized to other nations that had been victimized by America’s foreign policy in the past, the Heritage Foundation claimed that he had “humiliated” the United States. Civil rights activists in the 1950s and 1960s were routinely accused of being Communists, an accusation that was even levied against Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (who was hated by the conservatives of his day until his martyrdom made him unassailable). From those decades onward, almost any protesters have been told that if they don’t love America, they should leave it.</span></div><div>
</div><div>It’s fair to add that leftists can also be guilty of lacking balance in their perspective. I agree with the criticism of historians like Howard Zinn who find “much to condemn in American history, little or nothing to praise” (that’s from the New York Times, one of Trump’s supposed “enemies of the people”). An impartial look at America’s history requires a balancing of the positive and the negative, which is never easy. It is important to remember that America has made progress toward fixing original sins like allowing sexism, racism and poverty — not as much as needs to be done to be a fully just society, but more than many other countries have even attempted.</div><div>
</div><div>It is time to start calling out the fragile patriots for being what they are. If they can get away with promoting the idea that criticizing America’s founding fathers or other revered historical figures is the same thing as hating America, it becomes that much easier to gloss over the injustices that exist today. Their mentality is meant to silence dissent by letting dissenters know they will be subjected to virulent straw-man attacks whenever they speak out. Even worse, it corrupts Americanism from the inside, turning it from a noble aspiration into an angry, defensive, emotionally brittle cult.</div><div>
</div><div>We are better than that. At least, I think so.</div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/how-republican-lies-and-hypocrisy-hit-an-all-time-high/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/how-republican-lies-and-hypocrisy-hit-an-all-time-high/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx many</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>How Republican lies and hypocrisy hit an all-time high</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">written by Paul Rosenberg / Salon July 14, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Last week, before Trump’s buffoonish cave on his attempt to hijack the census, Greg Sargent wrote about Attorney General William Barr’s emerging role as Trump’s enabler in undermining the rule of law — first in the census case, then in the challenge to the Affordable Care Act.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The connection between the two is straightforward, according to University of Michigan law professor Nicholas Bagley. “In both, Barr directed his lawyers to make bad-faith arguments, just because Trump said so,” Bagley told Sargent. “That’s a blow to the integrity of the Justice Department and a threat to the rule of law.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As with much else about the Trump administration, the bad-faith arguments are nothing new; Republicans have long been the party of bad faith. The most notorious Supreme Court decisions of recent years — from Bush v. Gore through Shelby County, Citizens United and more — can all be attributed to bad faith arguments and actions by the justices involved.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Then there’s the <b>myth of originalism</b> and the long history of lying during Supreme Court confirmations, with Brett Kavanaugh’s example only the most recent. If the judicial doctrine known as “originalism” was rhetorically advanced by conservatives to supposedly counter “activist” judges, in practice it accomplishes exactly the opposite, as Richard Posner’s critique of Antonin Scalia makes clear.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>What’s arguably new is the stark nakedness with which these ideas are advanced — revealing the bad faith as a feature, not a bug </b>— combined with the reckless three-ring-circus atmosphere in which they’re being tossed out. (That was what ultimately doomed the census question, not its substance.) That bad faith has long been evident in a wide range of forms, as Bagley told me by email.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republican arguments against the [Affordable Care Act] have been permeated with bad faith from the get-go. Some of that bad faith involves outright lies: Think death panels. Some of it reflects a willful or deliberate ignorance of the tradeoffs that health-care policymaking entails. (You can’t cover everyone, cut spending and eliminate insurance regulations at the same time.) And some of it is pure <b>gaslighting</b>,<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> like the claims that Republicans are dedicated to protecting people with pre-existing conditions (they’re not) and that they have a replacement plan to provide wonderful health coverage to everyone (they don’t).</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">There’s one more he left out: GOP complaints abou<b>t Democrats “ramming [the ACA] through Congress” via reconciliation without any Republican votes,</b> as if they’d made no effort to craft a bipartisan bill. As Salon noted at the time:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Senate Democrats have accepted at least 161 Republican amendments to their health care reform legislation, they’ve incorporated core GOP planks, and they’ve scuttled an aspect of the plan most popular with its base, the public option, because of opposition by Republicans as well as red state Democrats.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is a repeated pattern. It doesn’t seem to matter how much Democrats compromise on the details. Whatever they put forward, Republicans will counter with sweeping rhetorical bad-faith attacks as surely as night follows day, for reasons that will become apparent below — an asymmetry between the two party’s strengths. First, let’s establish some <b>historical reality about where all this bad faith is coming from.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Bad faith, Southern-style</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For that, I turned to Angie Maxwell, co-author of “The Long Southern Strategy,” whom I recently interviewed here. Her account about how the GOP had transformed Southern politics — and transformed itself in the process — was a tale drenched in bad faith, as I read it:&nbsp; All the NeverTrumpers who’ve now abandoned their party in horror had been cultivating Trump’s base for decades, whether they realized it or not, using manipulated public resentment for often-unrelated purposes. Trump is their comeuppance, but his bad-faith appeals are nothing new.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“If you think historically about what organization has operated in bad faith more than any other, you would have to say the Confederacy,” Maxwell said, pointing to “the idea that all of these poor Southern whites” — who did not themselves own slaves — “would take up the cause of the Confederacy for something that will not benefit them economically at all, the preservation of slavery.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Christian nationalism, particularly the way in which they couch it in terms of ‘states’ rights,’ was itself a bad faith argument. And it got worse years after the Civil War when arguments about why Reconstruction was wrong were made in bad faith — reasons that justified lynchings, all those arguments were made in bad faith. The Lost Cause is at its core a bad-faith argument.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">All that history of bad faith belonged to Southern Democrats at the time, of course. But Republicans eagerly took it over for themselves, as Maxwell’s book describes. As she notes, it wasn’t politically necessary to focus on bad faith:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If you decide as a party to try to go capture those voters, there are aspects of Southern white identity that are not bad faith that you could have tried to tap into: there’s the family, rural culture, there’s even good-faith ways to talk about religious values. But a whole other chunk of white Southern identity is really built on bad-faith arguments about white supremacy, patriarchy and Christian nationalism. So if you’re trying to win those voters, bad-faith arguments are kind of your bread and butter.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The story begins in earnest with Barry Goldwater’s 1964 campaign, when he won five states in the Deep South. That election provides a telling glimpse at how bad faith generalizes, which we’ll return to below. Four years later, the problem Richard Nixon and his advisers faced in the South, as Maxwell explains it, was that since Alabama Gov. George Wallace, running as a third-party candidate, was going to get the hardline white supremacists, “How do we get everybody else?”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Their answer, she says, was “law and order,” a “coded language” or bad-faith argument used to lure racist voters without quite saying so. Some voters were legitimately attracted to that argument, she noted, but plenty of others understood exactly what that meant.&nbsp; When Republicans denied any racist intention — “Well, I’m just talking about law and order” — they were making a bad-faith argument.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The same applied to the next stage of what Maxwell calls “<b>The Long Southern Strategy,” the attack on feminism that depicted it as a form of tyranny:</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Feminism is choice. That’s what it is. Well, Phyllis Schlafly creates a false equivalency of anti-feminism, and it’s a bad-faith argument. Because it cast feminism as the demand that you be a certain way, but … the opposite of feminism in that case is sexism, not anti-feminism. So, telling those women that the government is going to force them to put their children in day care, it was a bad faith argument, that manipulated a lot of people into going, “The feminists reject who I am. They want to make me be somebody I’m not.” And it worked. That is a bad faith argument by its very nature.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There were legitimate arguments to be had about how to achieve “opportunity, equality and choice” for women, Maxwell adds. Republicans were eager to avoid framing the argument as, “‘Well, you should have this equality, or you shouldn’t.’ You can’t really say, ‘We don’t support that.’ So you have to wrap it in some kind of bad faith camouflage. Like you say you’re worried about voter fraud, even though there’s no evidence of voter fraud. So what you’re really doing is just trying to suppress the vote.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Bad faith in the courts: A prelude</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Those are some highlights of how we’ve gotten here, but none of that can explain what’s happening in the courts. Indeed, for a long time the courts seemed to pose a kind of limitation on bad faith. As Maxwell put it, “When you get court and you try to justify your argument, it looks contrived. Because false equivalencies and bad faith arguments rarely stand up to logic and reasoning.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But the census case itself is proof of how determined Republicans are to push on this front — and how close they’ve come to success</span>. As Adam Serwer noted before Trump threw in the towel, “Again, this is not just Trump. The Republican establishment is urging the president to do everything he can to reestablish the foundations of white man’s government.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">To understand what’s happening in the courts, I think in terms of layers: There’s an asymmetry in our politics that shapes an asymmetry in our courts. As mentioned above, Goldwater’s capture of five Deep South states in 1964 provides a peek at how bad faith spreads in this environment.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Public opinion pioneers Lloyd Free and Hadley Cantril fielded a study that year, with results published three years later in “The Political Beliefs of Americans.” Their most striking discovery was a profound division: On the symbolic and ideological level, Americans lean more to the right, favoring “free markets” and “small government.” But they lean even more strongly to the left when it comes to operational details — support for specific spending programs. In fact, they found that 23% of all Americans were both i<b>deologically conservative and operationally liberal, a condition they called “almost schizoid.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">What’s usually overlooked, however, is that this figure doubles to 46% within the <b>Deep South</b> states that Goldwater won. There are both good-faith and bad-faith ways of dealing with these contrasting views. A good-faith way would be to say, “I’m in favor of the free market and limited government, but when the market fails government action is absolutely essential.” A bad-faith way would be to say: “Welfare only helps the undeserving — and by the way: Keep the government’s hands off my Medicare!” Guess which one you hear most often? It’s no surprise the South was a Petri dish for cultivating bad-faith narratives.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republicans naturally focus on the ideological and symbolic side, while Democrats focus on operational specifics, which is a key component of Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins’ book “Asymmetric Politics” (Salon review here.) The lack of symmetry between Democrats and Republicans is also reflected in clashes over constitutional norms, producing what Joseph Fishkin and David Pozen describe as “Asymmetric Constitutional Hardball” (Salon story here.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Since at least the mid-1990s, Republican officeholders have been more likely than their Democratic counterparts to push the constitutional envelope, straining unwritten norms of governance or disrupting established constitutional understandings,” they wrote. A followup paper, “Constitutional Hardball vs. Beanball,” by Jed Shugerman (Salon story here), introduced the element of bad faith into the mix.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“You have another category of hardball,” Shugerman told me: “Bad-faith hardball,” in contrast to “transparent hardball”:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The confirmation of Justice Neil Gorsuch was an example of “good-faith hardball,</b>” Shugerman said. Republicans “decided to get rid of the [Senate] filibuster because they want to get him through, but everyone sees it happening, and it’s not being constructed by a lie.” But Mitch McConnell’s Senate blockade of Merrick Garland, Barack Obama’s final Supreme Court nominee, was “bad-faith hardball,” and the battle over the<b> Kavanaugh confirmation was “bad-faith beanball.</b>”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So what seems a relatively simple story of bad faith as an important thread within the larger story of asymmetrical politics begins to get far more complicated. I reached out to David Pozen, one of the authors of “Asymmetric Constitutional Hardball,” to<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> ask whether the doctrine of constitutional “originalism” was in essence a bad-faith rhetorical framework, meant to delegitimize “judicial activism” by liberals or progressives while justifying it for conservatives.</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We could talk for hours about that,” Pozen said quoting his own prior article on “Constitutional Bad Faith.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“In a nutshell, I agree that ‘bad faith arguments have been used continuously to delegitimize liberal/progressive jurisprudence.’” To cite an infamous example, he said, “The majority opinion in Bush v. Gore seems to me to be drenched in bad faith. … Bad faith is all over the place in constitutional law — so much so that the most interesting question is often not whether bad faith is present but bad faith of what kind.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One of the main accomplishments of <b>Pozen’s paper is to develop a taxonomy or field guide of constitutional bad faith, </b>organized on two levels: three broad, generic varieties, and 10 more precisely-defined species. In his introduction, Pozen writes:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Typically associated with honesty, loyalty, and fair dealing, good faith is said to supply the fundamental principle of every legal system, if not the foundation of all law. With limited exceptions, however, good faith and bad faith go unmentioned in constitutional cases brought by or against government institutions. …</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This doctrinal deficit is especially striking given that the U.S. Constitution twice refers tofaithfulness and that insinuations of bad faith pervade constitutional discourse. … [I]n spite of, and partly because of, their uneasy status within the courts, these norms perform a variety of rhetorical and regulative functions outside the courts.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Varieties of constitutional bad faith</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At the top level, Pozen distinguishes between three main types of bad faith: First comes subjective bad faith, which “may involve the use of deception to conceal or obscure a material fact, a malicious purpose, or an improper motive or belief, including the belief that one’s own conduct is unlawful.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He identifies four species of subjective bad faith, starting with “facially neutral government actions that are in fact based on illegitimate motives or purposes,” which might describe Trump’s citizenship census question — if, that is, there were anything “facially neutral” about it.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Second comes objective bad faith, which, drawing on American contract law, “focuses not on the actor’s state of mind but instead on the fairness or reasonableness of her conduct, tested against the norms of a legally relevant community.” In the constitutional realm, Pozen notes, “Many disputes over objective bad faith in constitutional politics concern the interactions among the various institutions of government and a claim of unfair dealing.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Again, he identifies four species, starting with “unwillingness to compromise or negotiate across branch or party lines,” which has become increasingly characteristic of our politics over the past quarter-century. Trump may be ruder than most, but he’s hardly exceptional. McConnell’s refusal even to consider the Garland nomination was a classic example.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Third comes something more subtle: Sartrean bad faith, “a lie to oneself.”</b> (A reference to Jean-Paul Sartre’s classic of existential philosophy, “Being and Nothingness.”) The distinction from subjective bad faith is crucial: “A person in subjective bad faith necessarily understands that she is being insincere, or untruthful in her dealings. A person in Sartrean bad faith may not similarly appreciate that she is being inauthentic, or untruthful toward herself.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More concretely, Pozen writes, “The waiter in the café who identifies completely with his role and ceases to see that he is playing at being a waiter, to take Sartre’s best-known example, is in the latter sort of bad faith. So is the patriot who manipulates standards of evidence or assessment to sustain a conviction that her own government is uniquely virtuous.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As Pozen explains, this form bad faith tends to take one of two forms, which in turn give rise to specific forms of constitutional bad faith. Stick with me; this isn’t easy material:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Sartrean bad faith revolves around lies that deny either the full measure of one’s freedom (‘transcendence’) or the concrete details of one’s circumstances and constraints (‘facticity’).” The first of these gives rise to “necessitarian assertion[s] about what the law ‘must’ mean,” while the second gives rise to “minimizing of inconvenient facts about the Constitution and the judicial role.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Furthermore, each of these is associated with a specific ideological pole:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Whereas originalists tend to be charged with Sartrean bad faith for denying their own transcendence, living constitutionalists are more likely to be charged with Sartrean bad faith for denying the facticity of their situation: the concrete constraints that come with a written Constitution and the social expectations it generates … . The alleged bad faiths of our culture’s stereotypical originalist and its stereotypical living constitutionalist are mirror images of one another.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These are fair readings of the dangers inherent in these positions. But note that Pozen says “alleged bad faiths.” Given how freely conservatives overturn precedents, it’s not clear that “living constitutionalists” (i.e., liberals or progressives) actually deny “concrete restraints” more than conservative “originalists” do.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Bad faith at the Supreme Court&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Evidence of conservatives’ outsized “Sartrean bad faith” is overwhelming, as the Supreme Court’s landmark 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller is sufficient to show. In that 5-4 decision, the court’s conservative majority struck down a key gun control act of 1975, finding that the Second Amendment conferred a broadly defined right for individuals to own firearms.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One can imagine an alternative universe, with a far different history and constellation of current facts, in which a “living constitutionalist” interpretation of the Second Amendment could find good-faith justifications for ignoring the plain text that defined its purpose and intent: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But there is simply no way for an “originalist” reading of the text to arrive at the good-faith conclusion that the amendment was intended to apply to all individuals, with little or no restriction. Yet here we are.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The story with the history-shaping Bush v. Gore decision that decided the 2000 presidential election was similarly stark, although the details get messy. But former Yale and Berkeley law professor Robert Post has stated it clearly enough:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“I do not know a single person who believes that if the parties were reversed, if Gore were challenging a recount ordered by a Republican Florida Supreme Court,” that Justices William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas “would have reached for a startling and innovative principle of constitutional law to hand Gore the victory.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s worth noting that a 7-2 majority in that case found a violation of the 14th Amendment because imperfectly-marked ballots weren’t being uniformly counted or discarded — but only the five conservatives (“soft” conservatives Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O’Connor, plus the three named above) voted to denying any lower courts an opportunity to remedy that violation.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It was as clear a distinction between good-faith and bad-faith reasoning as one could possibly want: Denying the opportunity for a judicial remedy made certain that none of the questionable or uncertain ballots would receive any protection at all. “Protecting” voters’ rights by destroying their ballots is bad faith par excellence.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Geoffrey R. Stone, an editor of the Supreme Court Review, noted that over the previous decade, the three hardcore conservatives had cast 65 votes in non-unanimous decisions interpreting the Equal Protection Clause, 19 of which involved affirmative action. Collectively, the conservative justices cast exactly two votes finding Equal Protection Clause violations those cases — one less vote in an entire decade than they cast in the Bush v. Gore decision.&nbsp; Summing this up, Stone wrote:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">What does this tell us? It tells us that Justices Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas have a rather distinctive view of the United States Constitution. Apparently the Equal Protection Clause, which was enacted after the Civil War primarily to protect the rights of newly freed slaves, is to be used for two and only two purposes — to invalidate affirmative action and to invalidate the recount process in the 2000 presidential election.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A clearer example of constitutional bad faith would be hard to imagine. It dovetails perfectly with the historical account that Maxwell provides, except for the part about bad-faith arguments not holding up in court.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As the dust settles on the debacle of Trump’s “census question,” it’s imperative to pay attention to the bigger picture. Suppressing the count of undocumented immigrants was only one part of the overall scheme to “reestablish the foundations of white man’s government,” as Serwer succinctly put it. Already, as NPR’s Hansi Lo Wang noted on Twitter:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">NEW: Commerce @SecretaryRoss has directed @uscensusbureau “to produce Citizenship Voting Age Population (CVAP) information prior to April 1, 2021 that states may use in redistricting,” according to document uploaded July 3 to https://t.co/SshiHkRdbz?? https://t.co/SAvZG79Xfh pic.twitter.com/gqZiN2nAxH</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">— Hansi Lo Wang (@hansilowang) July 13, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>This is the next step in securing white minority rule through 2030.</b> Basing representation on “citizenship voting age population,” rather than total population, would be a radical departure from American tradition — just the sort of radical departure that bad-faith originalists love. It would allow Republican-controlled states to dramatically increase the number of seats elected by older, whiter, more rural districts, making infamous partisan gerrymanders like those in Wisconsin, Michigan or Ohio even more extreme than they already are.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There is growing popular support for a fairer redistricting process that does away with partisan gerrymandering. (It’s true, after all, that Democrats have done that too — although not nearly as much.) But the Supreme Court is pushing back hard. On the same day Chief Justice John Roberts turned away Trump’s census question, he also turned back any possibility of a federal court remedy to partisan gerrymandering, effectively giving a green light to the larger white supremacist project in which the flawed census question was a weak link.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Bad faith in “balls and strikes”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">It’s often said that Roberts cares deeply about the perceived legitimacy of the Supreme Court. That’s clearly true.&nbsp; But as the above summary suggests, that perceived legitimacy is itself a bad-faith fiction. Roberts is doing everything he can to ensure continued Republican rule while maintaining the illusion (perhaps to himself as well) that he is just “calling balls and strikes.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Even the metaphor is a lie. Trial court judges may call balls and strikes, but appellate justices decide which game is being played, and which set of rules apply. Every lawyer in America knows that,&nbsp; and to pretending otherwise is just more bad-faith posturing. Roberts excels at that, and his bad faith is far more dangerous to America than Donald Trump’s.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump’s bad-faith arguments, after all, are transparent, garish and impossible to miss. Roberts’ bad-faith arguments are subtle, fashionably attired and cloaked in intellectually respectable language. Almost everyone yearns to believe that the Supreme Court is above politics, that it represents a pure, hallowed realm where American ideals are preserved. That may be the biggest and most dangerous bad-faith lie of all.</font></div></div><div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></p><p><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/trump-and-the-gop-are-blatantly-encouraging-foreign-dictators-to-hack-the-2020-election/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/trump-and-the-gop-are-blatantly-encouraging-foreign-dictators-to-hack-the-2020-election/</font></a></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It looks like Donald Trump and the leadership of the GOP are encouraging other countries to hack our upcoming 2020 election.</font></p><div class="p1_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Donald Trump is&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/03/trump-xi-jinping-dictators/554810/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">sucking up to</a>&nbsp;dictators, strongman oligarchs, and autocrats&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/29/politics/g20-donald-trump-bin-salman-putin-xi-dictators/index.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">around the world</a>, while Mitch McConnell is using political brute force to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/08/opinion/mcconnell-hr1-democrats-ethics-voting-rights.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">prevent individual states from hardening</a>&nbsp;their election systems. Why?</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Looking at the entire picture in context, consider&nbsp;<a href="https://1000wordphilosophy.com/2015/05/13/karl-marxs-conception-of-alienation/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Karl Marx’s favorite question</a>: “Who benefits?”</font></p><div class="p3_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Who benefits when the leaders of countries with sophisticated internet hacking capabilities (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/world/asia/north-korea-hacking-cyber-sony.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">North Korea</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/saudi-arabia-hacked-jeff-bezos-035516374.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Saudi Arabia</a>) and no democratic oversight are told by Trump that as long as he’s in office he has their backs?</font></p><div class="p4_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Might Trump and McConnell hope they’ll intervene in our election to keep in power a political party that now disdains democracy and a free press, and embraces dictatorial behavior like calling for the&nbsp;<a href="https://politicaldig.com/trump-threatens-to-jail-fbi-officials-who-investigated-russia-interference-gets-brutal-response/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">imprisonment</a>&nbsp;of Trump’s political rivals, and of individuals in the intelligence agencies who have investigated him and the GOP?</font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Who benefits when countries with world-class internet hacking capabilities and less-than-democratic (<a href="https://www.inquisitr.com/4489075/donald-trump-tower-moscow-russia/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Russia</a>) or highly corrupted and oligarch-dependent (<a href="https://www.jpost.com/Real-Estate/Trump-Tower-Israel-takes-step-forward" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Netanyahu</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://tinyurl.com/y4go5gae" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Duterte</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.trump.com/residential-real-estate-portfolio/trump-tower-mumbai-india" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Modi</a>) leaders become “good friends” of Trump and/or help Trump build or brand properties in their countries?</font></p><div class="p6_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Might they intervene in our election directly or indirectly to keep in power an administration that both openly disdains the concept of “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/28/opinion/trump-putin-william-burns.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">liberal democracy</a>” and disrespects leaders of the largely European countries that practice it?</font></p><div class="p7_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Why would&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/28/opinion/trump-putin-william-burns.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Trump joke with Putin</a>&nbsp;in front of the world about the possibility of Russians hacking American voting systems in the 2020 election? Is he expecting it, or just hoping for it?</font></p><div class="p8_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Who benefits when mostly “red” states keep their voting systems’ defenses down and continue to use 17-year-old technology running on

...Who benefits when McConnell, Pence and Trump work together to make sure that, as&nbsp;"><a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-voting-machines-in-the-u-s-are-easy-targets-for-hackers/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">CBS News reported</a>&nbsp;this year, “Tens of thousands of voting machines in the United States [will continue to be] vulnerable to hacking” by refusing to fund upgrades?</font></p><div class="p10_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Who benefits when repeated Democratic Party&nbsp;<a href="https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/democrats-line-up-for-election-security-funds" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">efforts to harden</a>&nbsp;voting systems are&nbsp;<a href="https://www.govtech.com/dc/GA-Panel-Chooses-Voting-Machines-Tied-to-New-Govs-Deputy.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">blocked</a>&nbsp;by Republican governors?</font></p><div class="p11_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There’s no ideological argument to be made for America having easily hacked voting systems; it’s not something that conservatives like George Will or liberals like Robert Reich would reasonably disagree about.</font></p><div class="p12_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So what could possibly be motivating Mitch McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate, other than the hope that hackers will produce another “<a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2012/6/16/1100706/-Red-Shift-why-it-s-important" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">red shift</a>” miracle for them?</font></p><div class="p13_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We already know that the GOP and their partisans on the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-voting-idUSBRE95O0TU20130625" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Supreme Court have done</a>&nbsp;and are doing everything they can to make it hard for Americans—particularly those with darker pigmented skin—to vote or otherwise participate in the political arena... that’s probably not enough to guarantee the reelection of a man as reviled and unpopular as Trump, and thus keep the parade of&nbsp;<a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/trump-and-the-rhetoric-of-fascism.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">corporatist-friendly right-wing judges</a>&nbsp;moving through the Senate into lifetime appointments on the federal bench. They need more—a little help from their friends.</font></p><div class="p15_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republicans have been caught&nbsp;<a href="https://www.gregpalast.com/election-stolen-heres/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">manipulating voter rolls</a>; engaging in now-legalized&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/us/politics/supreme-court-gerrymandering.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">“political” gerrymandering</a>&nbsp;that magically corresponds to race; running ads in social media&nbsp;<a href="https://popular.info/p/facebook-allows-the-trump-campaign" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">filled with deception</a>&nbsp;and outright lies;&nbsp;<a href="https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-incitement-violence/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">encouraging right-wing violence</a>; and&nbsp;<a href="https://politicaldig.com/trump-threatens-to-jail-fbi-officials-who-investigated-russia-interference-gets-brutal-response/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">threatening treason charges</a>&nbsp;against American law enforcement officials who’ve investigated foreign manipulation of our elections.</font></p><div class="p16_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But it’s not working so far. Democrats—particularly progressive Democrats—were the big winners in the 2018 midterms. The GOP needs more help from their friends if they’re to reelect Trump and hold the Senate... turned the GOP into the Party of the Billionaires, complete with a phony “supply-side” and “trickle-down” story about fantasy economics to sell their&nbsp;<a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/trump-and-the-rhetoric-of-fascism.html" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">merger of state and corporation</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. But by the end of the Clinton administration, most Americans had figured out Reagan’s and the GOP’s scam and, since 2002, there’s been a curious </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“<a href="https://tinyurl.com/yylr2wv7" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">red shift</a>” disconnect between exit poll results and the reported totals from hackable voting machines.</span></font></p><div class="p18_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There aren’t enough really rich Americans to win elections, so&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/03/paul-manafort-american-hustler/550925/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Lee Atwater and his business partners Roger Stone and Paul Manafort helped</a>&nbsp;Reagan and Bush bring in the white racist vote. But even with all the American racists, Trump and McConnell must think they need foreign help again.</font></p><div class="p19_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Jerry Falwell Jr. (<a href="https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2018/12/jerry-falwell-jr-wife-met-young-pool-boy-vacation-started-helping/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">and his pool boy</a>?),&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/franklin-graham/527013/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Franklin Graham</a>, and other&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-hosts-televangelists-who-fleece-their-flocks" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">multimillionaire “Christian” hustlers</a>&nbsp;brought in the people&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-hosts-televangelists-who-fleece-their-flocks" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">televangelists</a>&nbsp;have exploited for a generation. But are there enough religiously gullible voters to tip the election to Trump and McConnell? They seem to think not.</font></p><div class="p20_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Add the&nbsp;<a href="https://thetruthwithnorestriction.wordpress.com/2016/07/19/republican-platform-confirms-homophobia-and-racism/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">homophobes</a>, the&nbsp;<a href="https://newrepublic.com/minutes/123930/obama-saved-his-harshest-words-for-republican-xenophobes-he-was-right-to-do-so" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">xenophobes</a>, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.niacouncil.org/first-vote-trumps-muslim-ban-republicans-fail-test/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">religious bigots</a>, and sexually insecure white men (from&nbsp;<a href="https://nypost.com/2018/04/27/the-online-incel-culture-is-real-and-dangerous/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">incels</a>&nbsp;to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.rawstory.com/2013/12/men-do-not-need-guns-or-violence-to-be-men/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">gun</a>&nbsp;fanatics), and the GOP may have&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">almost enough</em>&nbsp;votes to win a national election—but they’re still haunted by Trump losing the last election’s popular vote by 3 million; plus, they no longer have Scott Walker and Rick Snyder to throw Wisconsinites and Michiganders off the voting rolls just before the election....Trump and the GOP will still need a little help from their overseas friends, just as Trump Jr. reached out to or tried to take help from the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-mueller-report-trump-russia-collusion-20190418-story.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Russians</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20180520-trump-jr-met-uae-saudi-and-israel-emissary-offering-illegal-campaign-help/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Saudis and Emiratis</a>&nbsp;in 2016. They (and Trump’s American billionaire backers) benefited more from what&nbsp;<a href="https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/06/jimmy-carter-donald-trump-illegitimate/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">President Carter correctly</a>&nbsp;called Trump’s “illegitimate” presidency than anybody else in the world.</font></p><div class="p22_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Which is why Trump and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a27259438/oleg-deripaska-kentucky-aluminum-mitch-mcconnell-rand-paul/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">McConnell</a>&nbsp;are working as hard as they can to make sure&nbsp;<a href="https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari/watch/trump-i-think-i-d-take-foreign-help-for-2020-61802565891" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">those foreign oligarchs and autocrats know</a>&nbsp;how much they’ll appreciate that help, should it be forthcoming.</font></p><div class="p23_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">All they need is a little help from their friends, and they’re making sure their friends know in advance who will benefit.</font></p><div class="p24_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Thom Hartmann is a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thomhartmann.com/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">talk-show host</a>&nbsp;and the author of&nbsp;<a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Hidden-History-Second-Amendment-Hartmann/dp/1523085991/?tag=alternorg08-20" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">The Hidden History of Guns and the Second Amendment</a>&nbsp;and more than&nbsp;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Thom-Hartmann/e/B000AQ449C" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">25 other books in print</a>. He is a writing fellow at the&nbsp;<a href="https://independentmediainstitute.org/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Independent Media Institute</a>.</font></span></p><div class="p25_26" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">This article was produced by the&nbsp;</span><a href="https://independentmediainstitute.org/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Independent Media Institute</span></a><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">.</span></font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">dereg nation</font></div><div><h2 style="font-family: " sf="SF" compact="Compact" display="Display" apple-system="apple-system" blinkmacsystemfont="BlinkMacSystemFont" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" roboto="Roboto" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" apple="Apple" color="color" emoji="Emoji" symbol="Symbol" margin="margin" em="em" px="px" rgb="rgb" font-size="font-size"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">good: a Trump appointee bucks the administration’s policy of climate denial</font></h2><ul style="margin: 1em 0px;"><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One member of a powerful federal financial commission is setting himself up for a head-to-head confrontation with the Trump administration over climate change.</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rostin Behnam, a Trump appointee to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/11/climate/climate-financial-market-risk.html" style="">told a New York Times reporter on Monday</a>&nbsp;that “it’s abundantly clear that climate change poses financial risk to the stability of the financial system.”</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Benham is kicking off an investigation by the commission on how growing climate instability may harm different sectors of the U.S. economy, including agriculture, the mortgage and insurance industries, and more.</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The report will probably be ready just as Trump hits the 2020 campaign trail in farm country.</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Benham’s seat on the commission must by law be given to a Democrat, an “unusual status [that gives] him a measure of political protection” from reprisal by Trump or his other appointees. He thinks.</font></p></li></ul></div><div><blockquote style="border-left: 4px solid rgb(139, 196, 74); padding: 0px 0px 0px 1em; margin: 1em 0px;"><h3 style="font-family: " sf="SF" compact="Compact" display="Display" apple-system="apple-system" blinkmacsystemfont="BlinkMacSystemFont" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" roboto="Roboto" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" apple="Apple" color="Color" emoji="Emoji" symbol="Symbol" margin="margin" em="em" px="px" font-size="font-size"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">also good</font></h3><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/some-republican-lawmakers-break-with-party-on-climate-change-11560337010" style="">The Wall Street Journal reports that</a>&nbsp;<b>“a small but growing number of Republican lawmakers are urging action on climate change, driven by shifting sentiment among GOP voters and the effects of global warming, from stronger hurricanes to more-destructive wildfires.”</b></font></p><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to the Journal,&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">longtime Republican pollster Frank Luntz (author of a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2003/mar/04/usnews.climatechange" style="">now-infamous memo on how to confuse and divide voters&nbsp;</a>about climate change) has warned Republicans that their obstruction and anti-science rhetoric are driving away voters, particularly younger conservatives.</span></font></p></blockquote><h2 style="font-family: " sf="SF" compact="Compact" display="Display" apple-system="apple-system" blinkmacsystemfont="BlinkMacSystemFont" segoe="Segoe" ui="UI" roboto="Roboto" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" apple="Apple" color="color" emoji="Emoji" symbol="Symbol" margin="margin" em="em" px="px" rgb="rgb" font-size="font-size"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">great: flood survivors want answers for unnatural disasters</font></h2><ul style="margin: 1em 0px;"><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After her hometown flooded for the fourth time in three years, killing some of her neighbors,<b>&nbsp;Missourian</b>&nbsp;Susan Liley got mad.</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Liley and other De Soto residents founded the Citizen’s Committee for Flood Relief in 2015 with two initial goals,&nbsp;<a href="https://ensia.com/features/flood-survivors-victims-organize-for-change/" style="">as Ensia, the solutions-focused digital magazine, reports:&nbsp;</a>“figure out some kind of early warning system” and “understand the root causes of repeated flooding and address them”</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Now they’re networking with dozens of other flood survivors’ groups to strategize, connect with scientific assistance, and petition elected officials for answers to why this is happening, along with funding and action to slash future flood risks.</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Human-caused climate change is driving rainfall and sea level changes, which are contributing to the growing number of disastrous flood events across the country.</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But lax zoning and construction rules also contribute by allowing overdevelopment on floodplains, which puts more people in the way of these more frequent and destructive floods.</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Questions of fairness are increasingly on flood survivors’ minds,” notes Ensia. “A substantial body of&nbsp;<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2378023118816795" style="">research</a>&nbsp;(highlighted in a recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/688786177/how-federal-disaster-money-favors-the-rich" style="">exposé&nbsp;by NPR</a>) shows that&nbsp;federal aid actually leaves wealthy, white communities better off after natural disasters — while the reverse is true for low-income communities of color.”</font></p></li><li style="margin: 7.5px 0px 7.5px 15px;"><p style="line-height: 1.6em; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://ensia.com/features/groundwater-recharge-aquifer-water-storage/" style="">Another new Ensia piece explores the promise and challenges</a>&nbsp;of moving urban floodwaters underground to better cope with increased flooding, and recharge aquifers at the same time.</font></p></li></ul></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">origins of political polarization?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?458812-3/sex-power-partisanship">https://www.c-span.org/video/?458812-3/sex-power-partisanship</a></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div>APRIL 6, 2019</div><div>Sex, Power, and Partisanship</div><div>University of Texas Professor Hector Garcia talked about his book, Sex, Power, and Partisanship: How Evolutionary Science Makes Sense of Our Political Divide, in which he explored why people hold certain political ideas through the lens of evolutionary science&nbsp;&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>fear corelates to conservative, makes sense when foreigners had germs; biological "fitness" means passing on your genes, so killing all the men in a riad and taking all the women makes perfect sense; our programming no longer fits/works in modern global world, tho after 9/11 left got more conservative, which was adaptive.</div><div></div></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">// 519 freakonomics</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">susan douglas 2014</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><a href="http://inthesetimes.com/article/17426/we_cant_all_just_get_along"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">http://inthesetimes.com/article/17426/we_cant_all_just_get_along</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I hate Republicans. I can’t stand the thought of having to spend the next two years watching Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Ted Cruz, Darrell Issa or any of the legions of other blowhards denying climate change, thwarting immigration reform or championing fetal “personhood.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>This loathing is a relatively recent phenomenon</b>. Back? in the 1970s, I worked for a Republican, Fred Lippitt, the senate minority leader in Rhode Island, and I loved him. He was a brand of Republican now extinct—a “moderate” who was fiscally conservative but progressive about women’s rights, racial justice and environmental preservation. Had he been closer to my age, I could have contemplated marrying someone like Fred. Today, marrying a Republican is unimaginable to me. And I’m? not alone. Back in 1960, only 5 ?percent of Republicans and 4? percent of Democrats said they’d? be “displeased” if their child married someone from the opposite? party. Today? Forty-nine percent ?of Republicans and 33 percent of? Democrats would be pissed.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to a recent study ?by Stanford professor Shanto? Iyengar and Princeton researcher ?Sean Westwood, such polarization has&nbsp;<a href="http://pcl.stanford.edu/research/2014/iyengar-ajps-group-polarization.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; transition: all 0.2s ease 0s;">increased dramatically</a>&nbsp;?in recent years. What’s noteworthy ?is how entrenched this mutual animus is. It’s fine for me to use the word “hate” when referring to Republicans and for them to use the same word about me, but you would never use the word “hate” when referring to people of color, or women, or gays and lesbians.&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>And now party identification and hatred shape a whole host of non-political decisions.</b>&nbsp;Iyengar and Westwood asked participants in their study to review the resumés of graduating high school seniors to decide which ones should receive scholarships. Some resumés had cues about party affiliation (say, member of the Young Republicans Club) and some about racial identity (also through extracurricular activities, or via a stereotypical name).&nbsp;Race mattered, but not nearly as much as partisanship. An&nbsp;<a href="http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/october/dems-gop-polarized-10-08-14.html" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; transition: all 0.2s ease 0s;">overwhelming 80 percent of partisans</a>&nbsp;chose the student of their own party. And this held true even if the candidate from the opposite party had better credentials.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">How did we come to this pass? Obviously, my tendency is to blame the Republicans more than the Democrats, which may seem biased. But history and psychological research bear me out.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Let’s start with the history.</b>&nbsp;This isn’t like a fight between siblings, where the parent says, “It doesn’t matter who started it.” Yes, it does.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">A brief review of Republican rhetoric and strategies since the 1980s shows an escalation of determined vilification</span>&nbsp;(which has been amplified relentlessly on Fox News since 1996). From Spiro Agnew’s attack on intellectuals as an “effete corps of impudent snobs”; to Rush Limbaugh’s hate speech; to the GOP’s endless campaign?to smear the Clintons over Whitewater, then bludgeon Bill over Monica Lewinsky; to the ceaseless denigration of President Obama (“socialist,” “Muslim”), the Republicans have crafted a political identity that rests on a complete repudiation of the idea that the opposing party and its followers have any legitimacy at all.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Why does this work? A series of studies has found that political conservatives tend toward certain psychological characteristics. What are they? Dogmatism, rigidity and intolerance? of ambiguity; a need to avoid uncertainty; support for authoritarianism; a heightened sense of threat from others; and a personal need for structure. How do these qualities influence political thinking?</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>According to researchers, the two core dimensions of conservative thought are resistance to change and support for inequality.&nbsp;</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">These, in turn, are core elements of social intolerance.&nbsp;</span>The need for certainty, the need to manage fear of social change, lead to black-and-white thinking and an embrace of stereotypes. Which could certainly lead to a desire to deride those not like you—whether people of color, LGBT people or Democrats. And, especially since the early 1990s, Republican politicians and pundits have been feeding these needs with a single-minded, uncomplicated, good-vs.-evil worldview that vilifies Democrats.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.66667;" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">no lnx</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Republicans turn to Frank Luntz’s playbook instead of developing a real climate plan</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Republican senator's Green New Deal alternative puts lipstick on fossil fuels.</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">JOE ROMM</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">MAR 27, 2019, 1:27 PM</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">&nbsp;Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), right, and Joe Manchin (D-WV) in the U.S. Capitol on December 2018. CREDIT: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">]</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>The Senate “debate” about the Green New Deal resolution Tuesday revealed that while the American public is clamoring for concrete climate action, Republicans still deny climate science and have no plan for tackling the greatest preventable threat to the nation and the world.</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Indeed, the only GOP senator to release a plan with any actual details is<b>&nbsp;Lamar Alexander (R-TN). But in a remarkably self-contradictory NPR interview Tuesday, he claimed America can address the climate crisis by keeping coal plants open and building more natural gas plants.</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">One of the pillars of Alexander’s plan is a<b>&nbsp;renewed push on “fusion” power,</b>&nbsp;which the nation and the world have been pursuing for a half century and which experts say still won’t be commercial for many decades, if ever. Even Alexander’s plan concedes, “This is still a dream,” but expresses hope that we can make a little progress in five years.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">All of the latest science makes clear that we have no time for dreams. Deep cuts in fossil fuel use and carbon pollution must be made by 2030, or we will be unable to stop a series of ever more costly climate impacts, including mega-droughts, super-storms, floods, and rapid sea level rise.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">That’s the central point of the Green New Deal resolution, which calls for a plan to decarbonize the U.S. economy as rapidly as possible, starting with the electricity sector, where we have so many cost-effective alternative to fossil fuels, including solar, wind, and energy efficiency.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) unveils the Green New Deal resolution in front of the U.S. Capitol, February 7, 2019. CREDIT: Alex Wong/Getty Images.]</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">‘Spectacular’ price drops for clean energy obliterate the cost arguments against Green New Deal]</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Some GOP senators mocked the whole notion of climate action, most notably Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) who went on a bizarre rant Tuesday about Star Wars and Sharknado. He ended by saying that the solution to climate change, like “the solution to so many of our problems,” is “to fall in love, get married, and have some kids.”</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>The remaining Republican senators were hardly more serious, since they repeated the tired talking points from a playbook developed two decades ago by Republican pollster and messaging expert Frank Luntz — a plan built around repeating the poll-tested words “technology” and “innovation” over and over and over.</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“The way to do this consistent with American values and American capitalism is through technology and innovation,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Tuesday.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Fox news has devoted more time to covering the Green New Deal than other TV media outlets.]</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The 20-year-old playbook that explains Republicans’ attacks on the Green New Deal</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">“The Republicans want to solve this problem with belief in the innovation fairy” which “will spray innovation pixie dust on this problem and it’ll go away,” as Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said Wednesday. “You can’t just say the word innovation, you have to change the economic structure to allow innovation to happen.”</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Alexander’s 10-point plan — “A New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy” — is nothing but technology and innovation on steroids. There are no emissions reduction targets or specific goals of any kind.</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But in reality, Republicans have long opposed or mocked actual federal investments in clean energy development. Remember their incessant mocking of loans to solar companies like Solyndra? And&nbsp;<b>President Donald Trump has repeatedly proposed gutting federal investment in clean energy despite overwhelming popularity among GOP voters.</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">While Alexander may accept the scientific consensus that climate change is an urgent threat, a baby step many of his fellow Republicans have yet to take, his plan is empty and full of contradictions.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">For instance, he bragged to NPR that “the United States leads the world in reducing carbon emissions.” But then he immediately criticized the “conversation” around the Green New Deal, saying that what Democrats “usually mean when they have this kind of conversation is, we’re going to close the coal plants. That’s not necessary.”</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Apparently Alexander is unaware that the main reason we lead the world in reducing carbon emissions is that we lead the world in shutting down coal plants.</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">There is no possibility that some miracle technology will appear in a few years to somehow make existing coal plants both carbon free and yet more competitive than new solar and wind power plants. After all, those plants are already money losers without any new technology added on.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">A major new report released this week found that replacing 74 percent of coal plants with renewable energy sources would immediately reduce costs. And by 2025, virtually all existing coal plants — and many natural gas plants — will be unable to compete with renewables.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Wind turbines generate electricity at the San Gorgonio Pass Wind Farm near Palm Springs, California, with snow-covered Mt. San Jacinto in the background. CREDIT: Robert Alexander/Getty Images]</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">It’s cheaper to replace most coal plants with renewables than keep them open, per report</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Yet Alexander’s plan calls for investment in natural gas power plants. Again, the country needs a carbon-free grid as soon as possible, not one built around dirty and costly fossil fuels.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>
</b></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>The plan also calls for more nuclear power,&nbsp;</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">while pointing out that “building the Vogtle nuclear plant in Georgia, the only two new reactors being built in the U.S., could cost as much as $27.5 billion,” and while conceding that the cleaner alternatives are 10 times cheaper. This is not a discrepancy that “innovation pixie dust” can fix.</span></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">“This is a bold agenda,” Alexander’s plan claims, but in reality it is just more delay, more hand-waving, more lipstick on a pig, more tired talking points from two decades ago.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" /></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">All his plan demonstrates is just how intellectually bankrupt the entire Republican Party is in responding to the existential threat of climate change.</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;=</font></font></font></p></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">gop got trounced on pre-exist conds 2018, now trump doubles on on killing ACA, promsing again great health care, also brke promise not to touch ss mediciad?</font></font></font></div><div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">big week for barr, squelch mueller (recall 19 pp audition memo, unitary exec BS can not obstruct just by def then walk back, then&nbsp;<b>try kill ACA</b></font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/republicans-want-to-do-vast-harm-on-health-care-because-its-only-a-right-for-the-rich/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/republicans-want-to-do-vast-harm-on-health-care-because-its-only-a-right-for-the-rich/</a></font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><p class="p1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>This week, U.S. Attorney General William Barr, a Republican, announced that his predecessor, Jeff Sessions, just hadn’t gone far enough&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/sessions-takes-aim-heart-obamacare-coverage-pre-existing-conditions-n881396" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">when he asked a federal judge to kill the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) protections for people with pre-existing medical conditions</span></a>—that is, stuff like asthma, diabetes and high blood pressure.</b></font></span></font></font></p><div class="p1_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Barr told an appeals court that he does not want it to merely murder that one provision but, instead,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/27/us/politics/trump-aca.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">will insist that it massacre the ACA’s entire 1,990 pages</span></a>—death to every clause protecting patients from insurance company abuses, every portion devoted to containing costs, every phrase extending health care to the nation’s young adults and working poor....It is essential, Barr contends, that the court rip insurance from&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/health/obamacare-trump-health.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">21 million people</span></a>&nbsp;covered by the ACA health insurance marketplaces and Medicaid expansion; that the court deny insurance to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/health/obamacare-trump-health.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">2 million young adults</span></a>&nbsp;covered by their parents’ plans; that the court foreclose substance abuse treatment to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/health/obamacare-trump-health.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">800,000 Americans</span></a>&nbsp;suffering opioid addiction.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p3_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It is critical, Barr insists, to deprive the ACA’s guarantee of medical insurance access to<b>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/health/obamacare-trump-health.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions</span></a>&nbsp;</b>and to<b>&nbsp;increase medication and premium costs for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/health/obamacare-trump-health.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">60 million senior citizens on Medicare</span></a></b>. Also, of course, Barr says, the court must restore the medical insurance caps that bankrupted and killed Americans who suffered diseases that are expensive to treat, like cancer, or whose babies were born prematurely requiring costly long-term care.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p4_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Barr is not an outlier. He is the face of a Republican Party that has done everything in its power to rob Americans of ACA benefits every minute of the nine years that the law has existed</b>.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/resources/primers/medicaidmap" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">GOP governors have vetoed the ACA extension of Medicaid</span></a>, denying insurance to millions of low-income working people. When the U.S. House was controlled by the GOP, it voted more than&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/03/21/the-house-has-voted-54-times-in-four-years-on-obamacare-heres-the-full-list/?utm_term=.f1bd79feafcb" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">50 times to repeal</span></a>&nbsp;all or parts of the ACA.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20180710.935457/full/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Twenty GOP state attorneys general</span></a>&nbsp;asked a federal judge to overturn the law after Congress zeroed out its tax penalties for people who refuse to get insurance.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p5_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">All of this is blatantly mean-spirited because the GOP never produced a plan to replace the ACA health insurance guarantees. In medical terms, it is the opposite of the physician mission to heal. It is Republican machination to harm.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p6_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">People who drive a Mercedes,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-accuses-wealthy-parents-including-celebrities-in-college-entrance-bribery-scheme/2019/03/12/d91c9942-44d1-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html?utm_term=.c4fc7d8a58d4" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">spend half a million bucks</span></a>&nbsp;to get their children into high-status universities and lull away weekends at&nbsp;<a href="https://www.coastalliving.com/travel/top-10/most-expensive-beach-towns" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">$3 million Nantucket beach homes</span></a>&nbsp;will always have health care. The price is irrelevant to them. Even if denied insurance, they can afford chemotherapy, or the monthly bill for insulin or the cost of a leg broken in a sail-boating accident.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p7_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For everyone else, for coal miners and code writers, for registered nurses and Starbucks baristas, for Amazon warehouse workers and independent truck drivers, health insurance is vital. Workers, whether low-income or middle class, don’t have hundreds of thousands sitting around for a heart transplant or repeated cancer treatments or neonatal care.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p8_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Before the ACA, health insurance corporations took advantage of this situation. They raised premiums at&nbsp;<a href="https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article228416754.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">twice the rate of inflation</span></a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">.</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;They refused to insure sick people—the people who desperately need insurance, people with inherited conditions and chronic illnesses. Even some&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/health/obamacare-trump-health.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">employer-based insurance plans excluded coverage</span></a>&nbsp;for certain medical conditions. Insurers dropped coverage when people got sick. They capped coverage—<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/jan/16/bankrupted-by-giving-birth-having-premature-twins-cost-me-everything" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">so that if $1 million or $2 million—or some other random amount—was spent to save the preemie’s life in the first 18 months</span></a>, the still-fragile baby was uninsured after that.</span></font></span></font></font></p><div class="p9_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://tinyurl.com/6onzl2q" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Uninsured people died</a></span><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">&nbsp;of treatable conditions because they couldn’t afford care. Inadequate insurance&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thebalance.com/medical-bankruptcy-statistics-4154729" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">bankrupted families</span></a>. Americans worried incessantly about whether they would be able to afford to maintain their insurance or whether an illness would cost them their coverage.</span></font></font></font></p><div class="p10_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The ACA cured many of these problems in addition to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/slower-premium-growth-under-obama/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">lowering the rate at which the cost of health insurance rose.</span></a>&nbsp;As it accomplished those things, it became more popular. Its approval rating&nbsp;<a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">rose from around 40 percent</span></a>&nbsp;initially to&nbsp;<a href="https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/03/21/obamacare-affordable-care-act-anniversary" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">51 percent now</span></a>. That’s not great, but it sure as hell is better than the way people felt about insurance before the ACA.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p11_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The position of Republicans, however, is that some people just don’t deserve health insurance. It’s similar to saying some children just don’t deserve an education. Or some families just don’t deserve to have a fire department respond to a blaze at their home.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p12_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Republicans’ first effort to thwart the ACA was a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality.&nbsp;</b>The U.S. Supreme Court&nbsp;<a href="https://tinyurl.com/6ma8wpn" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">ruled that most of the law complied</span></a>&nbsp;but that the federal government could not force states to expand Medicaid. Under the ACA, the federal government&nbsp;<a href="https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2019/fiscal-case-medicaid-expansion" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">initially paid 100 percent, and later 90 percent</span></a>, of what it cost states to extend&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/utah-lawmakers-scale-back-voter-approved-medicaid-expansion/2019/02/11/fecaf742-2bcc-11e9-b2fc-721718903bfc_story.html?utm_term=.357a0d93e1cc" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Medicaid coverage to people who earned up to 138 percent of the federal poverty threshold</span></a>, which is about $17,000 for an individual or $35,000 for a family of four.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p13_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">As a result, Republican governors and lawmakers denied Medicaid to millions of eligible low-income working people and their families.&nbsp;</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Some Republican governors went so far as to defy the will of the people of their states. In Maine, for example, voters approved expanding Medicaid in 2017 in a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/24/health/maine-medicaid-expansion-lepage.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">binding referendum by 59-to-41 percent</span></a>&nbsp;after the Republican governor five times vetoed Medicaid expansion proposals.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/24/health/maine-medicaid-expansion-lepage.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Even after the referendum and a court decision ordering expansion</span></a>, the Republican governor refused to do it. Not until a Democrat took the governor’s seat this year did it happen. Similarly, Virginia and Kansas got Medicaid extensions only after they elected Democratic governors.</span></font></span></font></font></p><div class="p14_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In Idaho and Utah, just like Maine, Republicans are defying the will of the people in their states who passed referendums to extend Medicaid.</b>&nbsp;In Idaho, the Republican-controlled House&nbsp;<a href="https://www.boisestatepublicradio.org/post/idaho-house-gives-green-light-medicaid-restrictions-bill#stream/0" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">decided to require those to whom Medicaid would be extended</span></a>&nbsp;to buy insurance on the ACA exchanges instead. The Republican-controlled&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/utah-lawmakers-scale-back-voter-approved-medicaid-expansion/2019/02/11/fecaf742-2bcc-11e9-b2fc-721718903bfc_story.html?utm_term=.357a0d93e1cc" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">legislature in Utah voted to expand Medicaid only to people earning up to 100 percent</span></a>&nbsp;of the poverty threshold, instead of 138 percent, and, at the same time, demanded that the federal government reimburse Utah at the 90 percent rate as if the state had properly expanded Medicaid.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p15_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In addition, in Idaho,&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article228504344.html" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">the GOP-controlled House voted to require Medicaid recipients to prove they are working</span></a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;to qualify.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-job-scarce-town-struggles-with-arkansass-first-in-nation-medicaid-work-rules/2019/03/26/f551c352-5012-11e9-8d28-f5149e5a2fda_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a579a05682dd" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Arkansas was the first state where Republicans imposed this demand, and quickly 18,000 residents lost their insurance</span></a>, either because they didn’t report work or failed to follow complicated rules, which include providing an email address in a state where less than half of residents of some counties have internet access.</span></font></span></font></font></p><div class="p16_19" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fourteen other states have imposed work requirements or want to, but a federal judge this week told&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/27/health/medicaid-work-requirement.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Arkansas and Kentucky to stop it.</span></a></font></span></font></font></p><div class="p17_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They&nbsp;<a href="https://www.governing.com/topics/health-human-services/gov-medicaid-work-requirements-judge-arkansas-indiana-kentucky.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">probably will appeal</span></a>—at the same time Republican Attorney General Barr is trying to blow up the entire health care law. The message is clear: to Republicans, health care is a right only for the rich; the rest can suffer and die. The GOP Hippocratic oath is: Do vast harm.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p18_19" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p class="p1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span class="s1" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">This article was produced by the&nbsp;</span><a href="https://independentmediainstitute.org/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;"><span class="s2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Independent Media Institute</span></span></a><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">.</span></font></span></font></font></p></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/how-republican-administrations-always-lead-to-an-economic-meltdown-in-10-easy-steps/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/how-republican-administrations-always-lead-to-an-economic-meltdown-in-10-easy-steps/</a></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p class="AlignCenter" style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Neverending Story of Republican Economic Incompetence</font></strong></font></font></p><div class="p1_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Here’s the standard Republican Economic Playbook ever since Reagan took office in 1981:...>Step 1:&nbsp;Republicans get into power and then cut taxes as much as possible on the rich and big corporations....Republicans brag about how the economy has improved on essentially borrowed money since reduced tax income means that more money must be borrowed to offset the loss in taxes. Interest will then have to be paid on that borrowed money for a long, long time, thus reducing the ability of the government to invest in people and programs.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p4_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 3:</strong>&nbsp;Republicans suddenly notice that less tax money is coming in, and cut government spending on programs for the poor and middle class.</font></font></font></p><div class="p5_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 4:</strong>&nbsp;Republicans undermine unions as much as possible to try and help their corporate friends pay as little as possible in wages. Over the long term, this results in regular people having very little money. Republicans also resist raising the minimum wage and resist all wage increases as much as possible. This also results in the poor and middle class having little money over the long term. Income inequality expands. The well off get richer, and everyone else gets poorer.</font></font></font></p><div class="p6_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 5</strong>: Republicans avoid much-needed infrastructure spending programs, which would help the nation by providing jobs,<em style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">&nbsp;</strong></em>growing the economy, and increasing the amount of taxable income which could help pay off debt.&nbsp; Republicans tend to avoid big infrastructure programs because they have convinced themselves that, in general, Government Spending Is Bad—except on certain things like expensive military weapons, in which case, they seem to believe that one can never spend too much.</font></font></font></p><div class="p7_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 6:</strong>&nbsp; Republicans watch in total surprise as businesses start collapsing, and more and more regular people start defaulting on their mortgages, bank loans, and credit cards. Since most businesses cater to the poor and middle class, when regular people do not have any money, most businesses end up with fewer customers, and thus, little money. Welcome to another Republican created recession.</font></font></font></p><div class="p8_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 7:</strong>&nbsp;Republicans do little to fix the recession, since fixing the economy would involve reversing what the Republicans actually did while in office. Eventually, voters put Democrats back into power, hoping that the Democrats will be able to fix the bad economy. The Democrats increase Government spending with an infrastructure program to counteract the economic slowdown caused by the Republicans. Republicans scream bloody murder about how the Democrats are creating government debt with their spending. As Republicans do this, &nbsp;they ignore the huge amount of government debt which was created by 1) Republican tax cuts, 2) the economic slowdown caused by Republican cuts in spending to pay for their tax cuts, and 3) the economic slowdown caused by Republicans fighting unions, fighting wage increases, and fighting all efforts to implement big infrastructure programs.</font></font></font></p><div class="p9_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 8:</strong>&nbsp; The economy slowly recovers due to measures which were both pushed for by Democrats and fought against by Republicans every step of the way.</font></font></font></p><div class="p10_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 9:</strong>&nbsp;After years of economic improvement under Democratic leadership, Republicans spend countless millions of dollars trying to convince voters that they will do a better job with the economy than the Democrats did.<b>&nbsp;[<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">cu unlimited secret corp cash $ = speech</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">]</span>&nbsp;Voters eventually vote the Republicans into power.</font></font></font></p><div class="p11_12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 17px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Step 10:</strong>&nbsp;Go to Step 1.</font></font></font></p></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></font></p><ul style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; background-color: rgb(241, 242, 243);"><li style="text-align: left; box-sizing: border-box; list-style-type: none; padding: 0px 0px 23px; line-height: 1.33;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a data-ga-action="Widget: Headline" href="https://www.democracynow.org/2019/1/23/headlines/gop_considers_nuclear_option_to_confirm_trump_nominated_judges" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; border: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="caps" style="box-sizing: border-box;">GOP</span>&nbsp;Considers “Nuclear Option” to Confirm Trump-Nominated Judges</font></a></font></font></li></ul><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">history</font></font></font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4"><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://kpfa.org/episode/against-the-grain-march-19-2019/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://kpfa.org/episode/against-the-grain-march-19-2019/</a></font></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4"><font face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4"><font face="Times New Roman">Ca farm, steinbeck (cotton strike dubious battle woman and ppl of color but --> wht men)</font></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4"><font face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12.5px; box-sizing: border-box;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">What are the origins of modern conservatism?&nbsp; The failed Goldwater campaign?&nbsp; Or the Cold War era discontent of midwestern small capitalists?&nbsp; Historian Kathryn Olmstead argues that it should be located even earlier, in the intense and massive labor unrest that took place in the fields of California in the 1930s.&nbsp; The response by growers and other elites pioneered methods that have become familiar today, from deploying populist rhetoric in the interests of big business to funding ostensibly grassroots organizations. (Encore presentation.)</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12.5px; box-sizing: border-box;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Resources:</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12.5px; box-sizing: border-box;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Kathryn Olmstead,&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><a href="http://thenewpress.com/books/right-out-of-california" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: border-box;">Right Out of California: The Big Business Roots of Modern Conservatism</a></span>&nbsp;The New Press, 2015</font></font></font></p></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4"><font face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></font></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/donald-trump-is-the-perfect-republican-a-party-built-on-lies-has-found-a-liar-to-lead-them/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/donald-trump-is-the-perfect-republican-a-party-built-on-lies-has-found-a-liar-to-lead-them/</a></font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">wow, story/inventory</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/how-trump-killed-off-reaganism-and-changed-the-face-of-the-us-right/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/how-trump-killed-off-reaganism-and-changed-the-face-of-the-us-right/</a></font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Di<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">d you feel it? Southern California is no stranger to earthquakes, but a seismic political shift went largely unnoticed during last year’s US mid-term elections – as all six of Orange County’s congressional districts&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/19/democrats-take-orange-county-district-to-cap-midterm-rout-of-republicans" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">turned Democrat blue</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. Three decades after the end of his presidency, Ronald Reagan’s long hold on the Republican Party is finally over. History has been made.</span></font></font></font></div><div class="p0_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The “blue wave” well and truly washed over Orange County’s golden shores. It will now ripple across the nation and be felt in the hallways of Capitol Hill and the White House, with profound consequences for the 2020 presidential race. It means that for Republicans to stay in power, something must change.</font></font></font></p><div class="p1_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Yes, Hillary Clinton&nbsp;<a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-me-oc-clinton-20161109-story.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">won Orange County in the 2016 presidential election</a>, the first time the county had gone blue during a White House race since 1936. Indeed, her win was 20th time lucky for the Democrats. But Clinton’s victory was somewhat diminished by the fact that the Republican Party still controlled four of the six congressional seats. In the 2018 mid-terms, however, the electorate sent a far less ambiguous message.</font></font></font></p><div class="p2_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Orange County is – or rather was – the bastion of modern conservatism. Home to the “<a href="https://bostonreview.net/politics-us-books-ideas/todd-gitlin-why-right-wins" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">suburban warriors</a>” – Western libertarians, anti-communists, pro-life evangelicals – it was the electoral heartland of the modern Republican Party. Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan – they were all favourite sons of the wealthy, white, middle-class suburbanites who live there.</font></font></font></p><div class="p3_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This legacy is even etched onto the physical landscape. Nixon’s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">presidential library</a>&nbsp;sits in the heart of the county, while Reagan’s home in Simi Valley is only a short drive away. Pepperdine University, one of the nation’s most conservative, is situated in neighbouring Malibu. But California’s long history with conservatism is now just that, history.</font></font></font></p><div class="p4_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The end of conservatism?</font></strong></font></font></p><div class="p5_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Though few commentators have focused too much on Orange County, politicos across the spectrum have been&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-time-to-say-last-rites-over-american-conservatism/2018/02/25/3d472ac0-18ca-11e8-92c9-376b4fe57ff7_story.html?utm_term=.7462d29a01a3" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">quick to sound</a>&nbsp;the broader death knell of&nbsp;<a href="https://theweek.com/articles/739147/conservatism-dead" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">American conservatism</a>. That, however, is premature. Conservatism in the US isn’t dying, it’s changing.</font></font></font></p><div class="p6_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After all, less than three years ago, Reagan’s conservative coalition still had the power to carry Trump into the White House. It was telling even then, however, that from an original field of 17 Republican presidential hopefuls, the candidate least ideologically aligned to Reagan won. Trump wanted to do things his own way, even if he followed Reagan’s rust belt path to the presidency.</font></font></font></p><div class="p7_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If Reagan, once a conservative icon, were to run in the primary today, he would fail miserably. Think I’m wrong? Consider how Scott Walker – who was most closely aligned politically to Reagan – did in 2016.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/21/scott-walker-2016-presidential-campaign-crisis-polls" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">His campaign tanked</a>. Not so long ago, conservatives, led by Reagan, argued that capitalism and the economy were dependent on immigration and free trade. Trump, by comparison, wants to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/15/trump-mexico-border-wall-status-migrants" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">build walls</a>&nbsp;and fight&nbsp;<a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-43512098" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">protectionist trade wars</a>.</font></font></font></p><div class="p8_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump rules</font></strong></font></font></p><div class="p9_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It is time to start calling the “New Right” of Reagan, the “Old Right”. Reaganism, an outlook based on the power of the individual and fervent anti-communism, is dead. The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2016/03/28/never-trump/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">#NeverTrump Republicans</a>, those conservatives still inspired by the Reagan era, were defeated when he took the White House, while&nbsp;<a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/14/media/weekly-standard-end/index.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">The Weekly Standard</a>, a magazine supporting “compassionate conservatism”, closed its doors in December 2018. Reaganism has been replaced by a nationalist, protectionist, isolationist government, closer to the policies of the 1920s.</font></font></font></p><div class="p10_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump’s winning message, returning America to the 1920s, should not surprise us. Conservatism is, after all, conservative. It often harks back to a “better” past. What people have ignored, or rather prefer to ignore, is that “Trumpism” is conservatism. It just takes a different, older, less global form to that of Reagan. [vid]</font></font></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There was conservatism before Reagan, and we are now witnessing conservativism after Reagan. It is cruder and more visceral, it lacks Reagan’s enduring smile and “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c32G868tor0" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">shining city upon a hill</a>” optimism, but it remains conservatism.</font></font></font></p><div class="p13_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This transformation happened because Reaganism was tired. John McCain and Mitt Romney both ran on traditional Reagan platforms in 2008 and 2012. Both lost. But, if nothing else, the conservative movement has learnt the art of winning. A swath of think tanks, trade associations and, most importantly, media outlets provide the infrastructure to support the conservative message. To keep winning, conservatism had to reinvent itself. Trump is the manifestation of that mantra.</font></font></font></p><div class="p14_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But if conservative history teaches us anything, it is that overtly visceral politics is unsustainable. In his final major public address, at the 1992 Republican Convention,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents/ronald-wilson-reagan/speech-of-the-former-president-at-the-1992-republican-convention.php" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Reagan declared</a>:</font></font></font></p><div class="p15_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 10px 20px 10px 24px; position: relative; font-style: italic; line-height: 1.7; overflow: hidden; background: rgb(245, 245, 245); border: none !important;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.7;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Whatever else history may say about me when I’m gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears, to your confidence rather than your doubts.</font></font></font></p><div class="p16_18" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;" /></blockquote><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump’s rhetoric, like that of Barry Goldwater before him, flies in the face of this sentiment. In 1964, Goldwater lost his attempt to secure a presidential term. And if Orange County is anything to go by, so will Trump in 2020. This is the fate that conservatism must now contend with. It is time for another reinvention.</font></font></font></p><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">an 119 hhn psych</font></font></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Whether we want to or not, for the sake of America, we must try to understand the Donald Trump phenomenon, as it has completely swept the nation and also fiercely divided it. What is most baffling about it all is Trump’s apparent political invincibility.</font></font></font></p><div class="p0_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As he&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/index.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">himself said</a>&nbsp;even before he won the presidential election, “I could stand in the middle of 5th&nbsp;Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” Unfortunately for the American people, this wild-sounding claim appears to be truer than not, at least for the majority of his supporters, and that is something that should disturb us. It should also motivate us to explore the science underlying such peculiar human behavior, so we can learn from it, and potentially inoculate against it.</font></font></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In all fairness, we should recognize that lying is sadly not uncommon for politicians on both sides of the political aisle, but the frequency and magnitude of the current president’s lies should have us all wondering why they haven’t destroyed his political career, and instead perhaps strengthened it. Similarly, we should be asking why his inflammatory rhetoric and numerous scandals haven’t sunk him.</font></font></font></p><div class="p2_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We are talking about a man who was caught on tape saying, “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy.” Politically surviving that video is not normal, or anything close to it, and we can be sure that such a revelation would have been the end of Barack Obama or George Bush had it surfaced weeks before the election.</font></font></font></p><div class="p3_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The psychological phenomena described below mostly pertain to those supporters who would follow Trump off a cliff. These are the people who will stand by his side no matter what scandals come to light, or what sort of evidence for immoral and illegal behavior surfaces.</font></font></font></p><div class="p7_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Practicality Trumps Morality</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For some wealthy people, it’s simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not matter if he’s a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.</font></font></font></p><div class="p8_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Brain’s Attention System Is More Strongly Engaged by Trump</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/06/23/whom-are-you-voting-for-this-guy-can-read-your-mind/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">study</a>&nbsp;that monitored brain activity while participants watched 40 minutes of political ads and debate clips from the presidential candidates, Donald Trump is unique in his ability to keep the brain engaged. While Hillary Clinton could only hold attention for so long, Trump kept both attention and emotional arousal high throughout the viewing session. This pattern of activity was seen even when Trump made remarks that individuals didn’t necessarily agree with. His showmanship and simple language clearly resonate with some at a visceral level.</font></font></font></p><div class="p9_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="3" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">America’s Obsession with Entertainment and Celebrities</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Essentially, the loyalty of Trump supporters may in part be explained by America’s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/addiction" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">addiction</a>&nbsp;with entertainment and reality TV. To some, it doesn’t matter what Trump actually says because he’s so amusing to watch. With the Donald, you are always left wondering what outrageous thing he is going to say or do next. He keeps us on the edge of our seat, and for that reason, some Trump supporters will&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/forgiveness" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">forgive</a>&nbsp;anything he says. They are happy as long as they are kept entertained.</font></font></font></p><div class="p10_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="4" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Some Men Just Want to Watch the World Burn.”</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Some intelligent people who know better are supporting Trump simply to be rebellious or to introduce chaos into the political system. They may have such distaste for the establishment and democrats like Hillary Clinton that their support for Trump is a symbolic middle finger directed at Washington. These people do not have their priorities straight, and perhaps have other issues, like an innate&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">desire to troll others</a>, or a deranged obsession with&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">schadenfreude</a>.</font></font></font></p><div class="p11_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="5" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Fear-Factor: Conservatives Are More Sensitive to Threat</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Science has unequivocally shown that the conservative&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/neuroscience" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">brain</a>&nbsp;has an exaggerated&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/fear" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">fear</a>&nbsp;response when faced with stimuli that may be perceived as threatening. A&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18801995" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">2008&nbsp;study</a>&nbsp;in the journal Science&nbsp;found that conservatives have a stronger physiological reaction to startling noises and graphic images compared to liberals. A&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">brain-imaging study</a>&nbsp;published in&nbsp;Current Biology&nbsp;revealed that those who lean right politically tend to have a larger amygdala — a structure that is electrically active during states of fear and anxiety. And a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2814%2901213-5" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">2014 fMRI study</a>&nbsp;found that it is possible to predict whether someone is a liberal or conservative simply by looking at their brain activity while they view threatening or disgusting images, such as mutilated bodies. Specifically, the brains of self-identified conservatives generated more activity overall in response to the disturbing images.</font></font></font></p><div class="p12_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These brain responses are automatic, and not influenced by logic or reason. As long as Trump continues his fear mongering by constantly portraying Muslims and Hispanic immigrants as imminent dangers, many conservative brains will involuntarily light up like light bulbs being controlled by a switch. Fear keeps his followers energized and focused on safety. And when you think you’ve found your protector, you become less concerned with offensive and divisive remarks.</font></font></font></p><div class="p13_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="6" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Power of Mortality Reminders and Perceived Existential Threat</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A well-supported theory from social psychology, known as&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/terror-management-theory" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Terror Management Theory</a>, explains why Trump’s fear mongering is doubly effective. The theory is based on the fact that humans have a unique awareness of their own mortality. The inevitably of one’s death creates existential terror and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/anxiety" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">anxiety&nbsp;</a>that is always residing below the surface. In order to manage this terror, humans adopt cultural worldviews — like religions, political ideologies, and national identities — that act as a buffer by instilling life with meaning and value.</font></font></font></p><div class="p14_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Terror Management Theory predicts that when people are reminded of their own mortality, which happens with fear mongering, they will more strongly defend those who share their worldviews and national or ethnic&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/identity" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">identity</a>, and act out more aggressively towards those who do not. Hundreds of studies have confirmed this hypothesis, and some have specifically shown that triggering thoughts of death tends to shift people towards the right.</font></font></font></p><div class="p15_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Not only do death reminders&nbsp;<a href="https://psp.sagepub.com/content/23/8/884.short" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">increase nationalism</a>, they influence actual&nbsp;<a href="https://psp.sagepub.com/content/30/9/1136.abstract" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">voting habits</a>&nbsp;in favor of more conservative presidential candidates. And more disturbingly, in a study with American students, scientists found that making mortality salient increased support for&nbsp;<a href="https://psp.sagepub.com/content/32/4/525.abstract" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">extreme military interventions</a>&nbsp;by American forces that could kill thousands of civilians overseas. Interestingly, the effect was present only in conservatives, which can likely be attributed to their heightened fear response.</font></font></font></p><div class="p16_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By constantly emphasizing existential threat, Trump creates a psychological condition that makes the brain respond positively rather than negatively to bigoted statements and divisive rhetoric. Liberals and Independents who have been puzzled over why Trump hasn’t lost supporters after such highly offensive comments need look no further than Terror Management Theory.</font></font></font></p><div class="p17_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="7" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Dunning-Kruger Effect: Humans Often Overestimate Their Political Expertise</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Some support Donald Trump do so out of ignorance — basically they are under-informed or misinformed about the issues at hand. When Trump tells them that&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/law-and-crime" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">crime&nbsp;</a>is skyrocketing in the United States, or that the economy is the worst it’s ever been, they simply take his word for it.</font></font></font></p><div class="p18_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed, which creates a double burden.</font></font></font></p><div class="p19_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123855220000056" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Studies</a>&nbsp;have shown that people who lack expertise in some area of knowledge often have a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/cognition" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">cognitive</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/bias" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">bias</a>&nbsp;that prevents them from realizing that they lack expertise. As psychologist David Dunning puts it in an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-supporters-dunning-kruger-effect-213904" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">op-ed</a>&nbsp;for Politico, “The knowledge and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/intelligence" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">intelligence</a>&nbsp;that are required to be good at a task are often the same qualities needed to recognize that one is&nbsp;not&nbsp;good at that task — and if one lacks such knowledge and intelligence, one remains ignorant that one is not good at the task. This includes political judgment.” These people cannot be reached because they mistakenly believe they are the ones who should be reaching others.</font></font></font></p><div class="p20_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="8" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Relative Deprivation — A Misguided Sense of Entitlement</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Relative deprivation refers to the experience of being deprived of something to which one believes they are entitled. It is the discontent felt when one compares their position in life to others who they feel are equal or inferior but have unfairly had more success than them.</font></font></font></p><div class="p21_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Common explanations for Trump’s popularity among non-bigoted voters involve economics. There is no doubt that some Trump supporters are simply angry that American jobs are being lost to Mexico and China, which is certainly understandable, although these loyalists often ignore the fact that some of these careers are actually being lost due to the accelerating pace of automation.</font></font></font></p><div class="p22_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These Trump supporters are experiencing relative deprivation, and are common among the swing states like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. This kind of deprivation is specifically referred to as “relative,” as opposed to “absolute,” because the feeling is often based on a skewed perception of what one is entitled to.</font></font></font></p><div class="p23_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Lack of Exposure to Dissimilar Others</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.in-mind.org/article/intergroup-contact-theory-past-present-and-future" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Intergroup contact</a>&nbsp;refers to contact with members of groups that are outside one’s own, which has been experimentally&nbsp;shown to&nbsp;<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.504/full" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">reduce prejudice.</a>&nbsp;As such, it’s important to note that there is growing evidence that Trump’s white supporters have experienced significantly less contact with minorities than other Americans. For example, a&nbsp;<a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2822059" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">2016 study</a>&nbsp;found that “…the racial and ethnic isolation of Whites at the zip-code level is one of the strongest predictors of Trump support.” This correlation persisted while controlling for dozens of other variables. In agreement with this finding, the same researchers found that support for Trump increased with the voters’ physical distance from the Mexican border. These racial biases might be more implicit than explicit, the latter which is addressed in #14.</font></font></font></p><div class="p24_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="10" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump’s Conspiracy Theories Target the Mentally Vulnerable</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While the conspiracy theory crowd — who predominantly support Donald Trump and crackpot allies like Alex Jones and the shadowy&nbsp;<a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/qanon-4chan-the-storm-conspiracy-explained.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">QAnon</a>&nbsp;— may appear to just be an odd quirk of modern society, the truth is that many of them suffer from psychological illnesses that involve paranoia and delusions, such as schizophrenia, or are at least vulnerable to them, like those with&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizotypy" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">schizotypy personalities</a>.</font></font></font></p><div class="p25_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psypost.org/2017/10/study-links-facets-schizotypy-belief-conspiracy-theories-50027" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">link</a>&nbsp;between schizotypy and belief in conspiracy theories is well-established, and a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165178117312301" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">recent study</a>&nbsp;published in the journal&nbsp;Psychiatry Research&nbsp;has demonstrated that it is still very prevalent in the population. The researchers found that those who were more likely to believe in outlandish conspiracy theories, such as the idea that the U.S. government created the AIDs epidemic, consistently scored high on measures of “odd beliefs and magical thinking.” One feature of magical thinking is a tendency to make connections between things that are actually unrelated in reality.</font></font></font></p><div class="p26_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Donald Trump and his media allies&nbsp;<a href="https://www.rawstory.com/2018/08/neuroscientist-explains-trump-media-allies-stir-paranoid-delusions-vulnerable-people/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">target these people directly.</a>&nbsp;All one has to do is visit alt-right websites and discussion boards to see the evidence for such manipulation.</font></font></font></p><div class="p27_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="11" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump Taps into the Nation’s Collective Narcissism</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Collective narcissism is an unrealistic shared belief in the greatness of one’s national group. It often occurs when a group who believes it represents the ‘true identity’ of a nation — the ‘ingroup,’ in this case White Americans — perceives itself as being disadvantaged compared to outgroups who are getting ahead of them ‘unrightfully.’ This psychological phenomenon is related to relative deprivation (#6).</font></font></font></p><div class="p28_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A&nbsp;<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550617732393" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">study</a>&nbsp;published last year in the journal&nbsp;Social Psychological and Personality Science&nbsp;found a direct link between national collective narcissism and support for Donald Trump. This correlation was discovered by researchers at the University of Warsaw, who surveyed over 400 Americans with a series of questionnaires about political and social beliefs. Where individual narcissism causes aggressiveness toward other individuals, collective narcissism involves negative attitudes and aggression toward ‘outsider’ groups (outgroups), who are perceived as threats.</font></font></font></p><div class="p29_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Donald Trump exacerbates collective narcissism with his anti-immigrant, anti-elitist, and strongly nationalistic rhetoric. By referring to his supporters, an overwhelmingly&nbsp;white group, as being “true patriots” or “real Americans,” he promotes a brand of populism that is the epitome of “identity politics,” a term that is usually associated with the political left. Left-wing identity politics, as misguided as they may sometimes be, are generally aimed at achieving equality, while the right-wing brand is based on a belief that one nationality and race is superior or entitled to success and wealth for no other reason than identity.</font></font></font></p><div class="p30_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="12" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Desire to Want to Dominate Others</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Social dominance orientation (SDO) — which is distinct but related to authoritarian personality syndrome (#13) — refers to people who have a preference for the societal hierarchy of groups, specifically with a structure in which the high-status groups have dominance over the low-status ones. Those with SDO are typically dominant, tough-minded, and driven by self-interest.</font></font></font></p><div class="p31_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In Trump’s speeches, he appeals to those with SDO by repeatedly making a clear distinction between groups that have a generally higher status in society (White), and those groups that are typically thought of as belonging to a lower status (immigrants and minorities). A&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886916310911" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">2016 survey study</a>&nbsp;of 406 American adults published last year in the journal&nbsp;Personality and Individual Differences&nbsp;found that those who scored high on both SDO and authoritarianism were those who intended to vote for Trump in the election.</font></font></font></p><div class="p32_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="13" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Authoritarian&nbsp;Personality&nbsp;Syndrome</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Authoritarianism refers to the advocacy or enforcement of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom, and is commonly associated with a lack of concern for the opinions or needs of others.&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarian_personality" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Authoritarian personality syndrome</a>&nbsp;—&nbsp;&nbsp;a well-studied and globally-prevalent condition — is a state of mind that is characterized by belief in total and complete obedience to one’s authority. Those with the syndrome often display aggression toward outgroup members, submissiveness to authority, resistance to new experiences, and a rigid hierarchical view of society. The syndrome is often triggered by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/fear" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">fear</a>, making it easy for leaders who exaggerate threat or fear monger to gain their allegiance.</font></font></font></p><div class="p33_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Although authoritarian personality is found among liberals, it is&nbsp;<a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4613-9180-7_3" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">more common among the right-wing&nbsp;</a>around the world. President Trump’s speeches, which are laced with absolutist terms like “losers” and “complete disasters,” are naturally appealing to those with the syndrome.</font></font></font></p><div class="p34_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While research showed that Republican voters in the U.S. scored higher than Democrats on measures of authoritarianism before Trump emerged on the political scene, a 2016&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Politico survey</a>&nbsp;found that high authoritarians greatly favored then-candidate Trump, which led to a correct prediction that he would win the election, despite the polls saying otherwise</font></font></font></p><div class="p35_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ol start="14" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 50px; list-style: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; list-style: decimal;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Racism and Bigotry</font></font></font></li></ol><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It would be grossly unfair and inaccurate to say that every one of Trump’s supporters have prejudice against ethnic and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/religion" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">religious</a>&nbsp;minorities, but it would be equally inaccurate to say that many do not. It is a well-known fact that the Republican party, going at least as far back to Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy,” used tactics that appealed to bigotry, such as lacing speeches with “dog whistles” — code words that signaled prejudice toward minorities that were designed to be heard by racists but no one else.</font></font></font></p><div class="p36_38" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While the dog whistles of the past were subtler, Trump’s signaling is sometimes shockingly direct. There’s no denying that he routinely appeals to racist and bigoted supporters when he calls Muslims “dangerous” and Mexican immigrants “rapists” and “murderers,” often in a blanketed fashion. Perhaps unsurprisingly, a recent study has shown that&nbsp;<a href="https://jspp.psychopen.eu/article/view/750" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">support for Trump is correlated with a standard scale of modern racism.</a></font></font></font></p></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div style=""><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/the-gops-most-successful-scam-is-about-to-reboot-itself/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/the-gops-most-successful-scam-is-about-to-reboot-itself/</a></font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></font></font></div><div style=""><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Get ready to see it on your TV. The GOP is about to kick back into <b>Two Santa Clauses </b>mode and restart the scam they’ve been running since Reagan.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p0_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’ll predictably begin in the first week or two of January, probably first on “Meet the Press” and other Sunday shows that feature “serious thinkers” and only rarely challenge Republicans. It’ll simultaneously roll out on Fox, on right-wing hate radio, and in the conservative media.</font></span></font></font></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">And there are more than a few&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-let-progressives-fool-you-moderate-democrats-can-win/2018/11/07/37648218-e2b1-11e8-ab2c-b31dcd53ca6b_story.html?utm_term=.40dbb59b7433" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">“Third Way” Democrats</a><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">&nbsp;eager to go along with it.</span></font></font></font></p><div class="p2_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At its core, the strategy is simple and elegant: When Republicans are in power, run up as much debt as possible, mostly by borrowing and giving that cash to the Republican donor class through tax cuts and corporate subsidies; when Democrats have political power, Republicans suddenly become hysterical about the debt and demand that Dems keep taxes low while cutting social spending.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p3_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If successful, not only will Republicans (and corporate-funded Dems) block any genuinely progressive spending legislation in 2019 or 2020, but they’ll prevent any possibility of debt-free college, Medicare for All, or a Green New Deal in the entire next presidential term, clear through 2024 or beyond...Odds are you’ve never heard of Jude, but without him Reagan never would have become a “successful” president, Republicans only rarely would have taken control of the House or Senate, and neither George Bush would have been president.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p6_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It all began in 1964, when Barry Goldwater went down to ignominious and massive defeat. Most Republicans felt doomed, among them the then-28-year-old Wanniski. They had to come up with a new message, he knew, instead of just “drugs are bad,” “school segregation is good,” and “Democrats are communists.”</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p7_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But what? The GOP seemed totally out of ideas. They floated a series of initiatives through the ’60s, mostly previewing Nixon’s “War on Drugs” and their anti-Soviet rhetoric, but nothing caught fire.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p8_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Then came 1974, as Nixon went down in flames even harder than Goldwater had, and Ford would soon follow: Jude Wanniski decided he’d had enough.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p9_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s the Gift Economy, Stupid</font></b></font></font></p><div class="p10_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Wanniski concluded that if the GOP was to have a new message, it would have to be all about the economy.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p11_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The problem for the GOP was that the Democrats, since FDR, had gotten to play Santa Claus when they passed out Social Security and Unemployment checks—both programs of the New Deal—as well as when their “big government” projects like roads, bridges, and highways were built, giving a healthy union paycheck to construction workers.</font></span></font></font></p><div class="p12_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">From the 1930s to the time Wanniski wrote his&nbsp;</span><i style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">opus magnum</i><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">&nbsp;in the&nbsp;</span><a href="https://wallstreetpit.com/26546-jude-wanniski-taxes-and-a-two-santa-theory/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Wall Street Journal</a><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">, Democrats—who almost continuously controlled the House of Representatives where all taxing and spending must originate—kept high taxes on businesses and rich people to pay for things. This kept the national debt in decline, and kept working people happy (working-class wages were steadily going up, in fact faster than the wages of CEOs).</span></font></font></font></p><div class="p13_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The net effect of these entirely reasonable policies was that the Democrats seem like a party of Robin Hoods, taking from the rich to fund programs for poor and working-class voters. Or, as Wanniski noted,<b> Santa Clauses.</b></font></span></font></font></p><div class="p14_81" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Americans loved it, Wanniski knew. And every time Republicans railed against these programs, calling for cuts to Social Security, blocking infrastructure or cutting aid to education, they lost elections.</font></span></font></font></p></div></div><div style=""><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;=</font></font></font></p><p class="yiv4262256041headline3" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color" style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="https://rawstory.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=80b42ecc21f29763320aceb90&id=0d805f0ef0&e=4da1f92934" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><b>Trump isn’t an aberration': Paul Krugman reveals how the GOP's 'moral rot' laid the groundwork for Trumpism</b></font></a></font></font></p><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" font-style="font-style" italic="italic" color="color" rgb="rgb" style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By Cody Fenwick,&nbsp;AlterNet</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He's the embodiment of the worst parts of the party.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="https://rawstory.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=80b42ecc21f29763320aceb90&id=8184014389&e=4da1f92934" class="yiv4262256041readmore" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; letter-spacing: 0.1em;">READ MORE»</a></font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">With the death of President George H.W. Bush, many conservatives and former Republicans are nostalgic for the old days of the party and bemoan the dark turn the GOP has taken under President Donald Trump. But as economist&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/03/opinion/climate-denial-trump-gop.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Paul Krugman</a>&nbsp;argued Monday, the groundwork for Trumpism had been laid long before his rise.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Trump's habit of denying reality and spinning baseless conspiracy theories that fit his preferred vision of the world is a direct outgrowth of the GOP's denial of climate change science, according to Krugman.</b></font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"Donald Trump isn’t an aberration, he’s the culmination of where his party has been going for years," he wrote.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Bush the elder does, though, come off relatively well in Krugman's recounting of events.&nbsp;</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"The G.O.P. wasn’t always an anti-environment, anti-science party. George H.W. Bush introduced the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.edf.org/media/environmental-legacy-president-george-hw-bush" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">cap-and-trade program</a>&nbsp;that largely controlled the problem of acid rain," he wrote. "As late as 2008, John McCain&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/us/politics/13mccain.html?module=inline" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">called for a similar program</a>&nbsp;to limit emissions of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming."</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He continued:</font></font></font></p><blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But McCain’s party was already well along in the process of becoming what it is today — a party that is not only&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/just-a-lot-of-alarmism-trumps-skepticism-of-climate-science-is-echoed-across-gop/2018/12/02/f6ee9ca6-f4de-11e8-bc79-68604ed88993_story.html?utm_term=.9dd4e234ca17" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">completely dominated</a>&nbsp;by climate deniers, but is hostile to science in general, that demonizes and tries to destroy scientists who challenge its dogma.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Trump fits right in with this mind-set. In fact, when you review the history of Republican climate denial, it looks a lot like Trumpism. Climate denial, you might say, was the crucible in which the essential elements of Trumpism were formed.</font></font></font></p></blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Because so much of the media tries to play the part of a neutral arbiter in politics, the parties get painted as mirror images in many respects. This is true even while much of mainstream media acknowledges, at least at times, that it's the Democratic Party's views that accurately reflect the reality of climate change, and that Trump really does spread misinformation constantly.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But they'll still refer to the problems of "partisanship" as if its a problem of equal weight for both parties. It's just not true, though.&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Both parties&nbsp;and every faction of the American political debate&nbsp;have their problems. But it's the Republican Party and the conservative movement that have&nbsp;deeply buried their heads in the sand with regard to climate change in a way that no other major party across the globe has done. The left-wing has its biases, but the right-wing has a unique problem with the truth.</span></font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>And then there's the problem of industry-funded corruption.</b></font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"The truth is that most&nbsp;<a href="https://www.beforetheflood.com/explore/the-deniers/top-10-climate-deniers/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">prominent climate deniers</a>&nbsp;are basically paid to take that position, receiving large amounts of money from fossil-fuel companies," Krugman wrote. "But after the release of the recent National Climate Assessment detailing the damage we can expect from global warming, a parade of Republicans&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/us/politics/climate-report-fact-check.html?module=inline" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">went on TV</a>&nbsp;to declare that scientists were only saying these things “for the money.” Projection much?"</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">A related point was made separately by ex-<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/12/03/i-left-republican-ideological-bubble-i-dont-want-join-another/?utm_term=.48e07a68de4c" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Republican</a>&nbsp;Max Boot in a column for the Washington Post on Monday.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Industry lobbying, he observed, "influences ordinary conservatives who fall for the shoddy 'studies' and shallow op-eds designed to minimize the threat of climate change. I ran some of those articles myself years ago when I was the op-ed editor at the Wall Street Journal."</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><interaction data-token="5b96855f8198b4e625350260" data-context="true" data-tags="" data-fallback="true" /></font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It's a deep point about the Republican Party, but the country has yet to grapple with the basic point: The GOP is fundamentally opposed to fundamental facts, and it's not going to get better on its own.</font></font></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></p></div><div style=""><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</font></font></font></div><div><ul style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 20px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"><li class="hidden-xs" style="text-align: left; box-sizing: border-box; list-style-type: none; padding: 0px 0px 23px; line-height: 1.33;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a data-ga-action="Home Headlines: Headline" href="https://www.democracynow.org/2018/11/8/headlines/gop_congressmembers_facing_indictments_re_elected" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none; border: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="caps" style="box-sizing: border-box;">GOP</span>&nbsp;Congressmembers Facing Indictments Re-elected</b></font></a></font></font></li></ul></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></font></font></font></div></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/political-science-professor-explains-why-cheap-talk-race-and-xenophobia-keeps-americans-confronting">https://www.alternet.org/political-science-professor-explains-why-cheap-talk-race-and-xenophobia-keeps-americans-confronting</a></font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...Lynne&nbsp;P: Thomas Ferguson, Ben Page, and their colleagues have just published a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/the-economic-and-social-roots-of-populist-rebellion-support-for-donald-trump-in-2016" style="text-decoration-line: none;">study</a>for the Institute for New Economic Thinking revealing the intertwining social and economic factors that drove Trump voters in the Rust Belt, including those who switched from Obama to Trump. They find that long-term anguish over trends like globalization, imports, and slow growth were strong motivating factors that Trump was able to exploit by drumming up, for example, fear of immigrants. Yet many seem unwilling to confront this complexity. Why is that?</font></font></font></div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">AR: My concern, and I’ve gotten more emphatic about it over time, is that if this argument is fundamentally an argument about the strategic direction that progressives and/or the Democratic Party should follow, then it’s really a debate about whether we try to mobilize around a politics that challenges the economic inequalities that are reproduced and intensified under capitalism, and especially neoliberal capitalism, or we pursue a response that accepts the logic of those inequalities and seeks to mobilize around a notion of fairness within that regime of fundamental inequality.</font></font></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">From that perspective, the notion that the fault line in left-of-center politics now is between people who take a class perspective and those who take an identity-based perspective miscasts the actual tension. The identity position is itself a class position. It’s just a position of a different class from the working class.</font></font></font></p><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></font></div><div style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Noam Chomsky Explains How 'Criminally Insane' Republicans Quietly Filed 'The Most Evil Document In History'</b></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><b>The Republican philosophy seems to be "let’s rob while the planet burns, putting poor Nero in the shadows."</b></div><div>By Martin Cizmar / Raw Story November 3, 2018, 2:00 PM GMT</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Progressive intellectual Noam Chomsky famously called the Republican party the “the most dangerous organization in world history" after the election of Trump.</div><div>
</div><div>In a new interview with Scientific American, Chomsky expounded on those thoughts, and gave some disturbing examples of how Trump-era Republicans now qualify as "criminally insane."</div><div>
</div><div>One example is Trump's legal filing to build a wall on his gold course in Ireland for the stated purpose of battling the threat of global warming, "while at the same time he withdrew from international efforts to address the grim threat and is using every means at his disposal to accelerate it."</div><div>
</div><div>He also points to Republicans who seemed to recognize the danger of Trump in the 2016 primaries only to kiss the ring upon his ascention to the top of the party's ticket and then the White House.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>"Without exception, they either denied that what is happening is happening—though any ignorance is self-induced—or said maybe it is but we shouldn’t do anything about it," he said. "The moral depths were reached by the respected 'adult in the room,' Ohio governor John Kasich, who agreed that it is happening but added that 'we are going to burn [coal] in Ohio and we are not going to apologize for it.'"</div><div>
</div><div>Chomsky pointed out that the Trump administration filed paperwork to get rid of auto emissions standards arguing that we are headed "over the cliff," and auto emissions are a minor part.</div><div>
</div><div>Chomsky described that filing as "the most evil document in history."</div><div>
</div><div>The Republican philosophy seems to be "let’s rob while the planet burns, putting poor Nero in the shadows," he said.</div><div>
</div><div>Read the interview here.</div></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">man who broke politics on newt npe fresh aire</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">GOP Chair Goes Down in Flames After CNN's Jake Tapper Corners Her on Trump’s Racist Video: ‘I Know You Want to Change the Subject’</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>“Regardless, we don’t want him in the country!” McDaniel shouted.</div><div>By David Edwards / Raw Story November 4, 2018, 7:07 AM GMT</div><div>55</div><div>Print</div><div>4 COMMENTS</div><div>
</div><div>Image via screengrab</div><div>
</div><div>Republican National Committee Chair Ronna Romney McDaniel was confronted by CNN host Jake Tapper on Sunday after she falsely insisted that Democrats had not tried to work with the President Donald Trump to pass a comprehensive immigration bill.</div><div>
</div><div>“[T]he president’s closing argument in the midterms is focused on fears of undocumented immigrants,” Tapper told McDaniel, noting that Trump had promoted a racist advertisement that is “factually, it’s not true.”</div><div>
</div><div>“Do you have any concerns at all about this web video?” Tapper asked.</div><div>
</div><div>“We don’t want people being deported and being criminals and then coming back into this country,” the GOP chair replied. “We know good people are trying to get into this country too. They see the prosperity, they see the economic growth.”</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>“We need to find a way to fix our immigration system” she continued. “Democrats won’t work with us.”</div><div>
</div><div>“You don’t have any issues at all [about the video]?” Tapper tried to say — but McDaniel spoke over him.</div><div>
</div><div>“To say [the president] is only focusing on one thing is false,” McDaniel opined.</div><div>
</div><div>“It’s factually inaccurate and it’s racially incendiary,” Tapper said of the video. “You don’t have any issue with that?”</div><div>
</div><div>“I have an issue with our immigration system that’s not being fixed,” McDaniel shot back. “And the Democrats won’t work with the president and we have caravans coming. In eight years, asylum claims are up 700 percent. By the way, what about the 12,000 kids that have come here unaccompanied?”</div><div>
</div><div>“You know what?” Tapper interrupted. “I completely agree with you that there needs to be a big immigration reform bill and Democrats and Republicans need to come together. President Trump is inaccurately blaming [Democrats] for putting a cop killer, for letting him into the country — for letting him into the country! The last time he came into the country was under George W. Bush!”</div><div>
</div><div>“Regardless, we don’t want him in the country!” McDaniel shouted. “This is exactly why our immigration system is failing.”</div><div>
</div><div>“Is it the Democrats fault?” Tapper queried.</div><div>
</div><div>“It’s a systemic failure,” McDaniel admitted.</div><div>
</div><div>“Yes!” Tapper exclaimed. “That’s true! It’s a systemic failure! That’s my point! It’s a systemic failure. Democrats and Republicans. That’s the failure but [Trump] blamed it all on Democrats.”</div><div>
</div><div>“But who is the party saying, let’s fix it, Jake?” McDaniel said. “Who’s the party solving every problem right now?”</div><div>
</div><div>The GOP chair then attempted to deflect attention to the economy.</div><div>
</div><div>“I know you want to change the subject,” Tapper smiled. “Republicans control the House, the Senate and the White House.”</div><div>
</div><div>“They should be fixing the immigration problem,” McDaniel ranted.</div><div>
</div><div>“Democrats — the minority party — should be fixing the immigration problem?” Tapper asked.</div><div>
</div><div>“We only have 51 senators,” McDaniel complained.</div><div>
</div><div>“It’s not the Senate,” Tapper observed. “You couldn’t get legislation through the House.”</div><div>
</div><div>“I do not see a single Democrat saying let’s bring this country together,” McDaniel griped, ignoring Tapper’s point. “They can’t even tout how good our country is doing right now.”</div><div>
</div><div>Watch the video below from CNN.</div></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/should-progressives-demonize-ignore-or-attempt-find-common-ground-60-million">https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/should-progressives-demonize-ignore-or-attempt-find-common-ground-60-million</a></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...T<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">his us-versus-them narrative may be convenient, but it undermines the best of the progressive tradition and simply fails to account for the validity of white working-class Americans’ experience with real, rock-hard economic truths. When we buy into it as the whole story, we allow the minority of white nationalists in the Trump coalition to blind us to the truths about the cross-section of Americans who pulled the lever for him in 2016. Far too many liberals act as if the economic realities of the white working class was at best all in Trump voters’ heads, and at worst simply a fig leaf, rather than a material reality.</span></font></div><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Prominent writer and thoughtful analyst Mehdi Hasan, who has spent a lot of time on these matters, recently shared his considered view on this topic. It is valuable to consider his insights. After marshaling survey data and the analysis of other researchers, Hasan&nbsp;<a href="https://theintercept.com/2018/09/18/2016-election-race-class-trump/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">wrote in the Intercept</a>&nbsp;that “it’s time to slay this zombie of ‘economic anxiety’ once and for all.” Without dismissing Hasan’s argument out of hand, I would urge us to consider the fundamental truths that uphold the notion that economic experience is a primary driver of people’s voting habits.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The numbers and conclusions that Hasan summoned certainly tell an important story, but if taken as the whole story, they can serve as a particularly convenient “out” for anyone who finds comfort in asserting that conservative or right-wing voters not only made a bad choice, but are, themselves, bad people.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We can then reason that their bad choice was motivated by bad values, and that we are right to stand against them and their bad motivations. It’s a simple story of us-versus-them, good-versus-evil. “Convenient” isn’t a synonym for “accurate,” however. And Hasan himself quietly acknowledges that his conclusions don’t mean “that economic grievances are irrelevant.” But these grievances are more than relevant—they are crucial for understanding our fellow Americans.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For instance, shortly after the 2016 election, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/business/economy/jobs-economy-voters.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">New York Times reported</a>&nbsp;that there were “almost 9 million more jobs than there... [had been a decade earlier], just before the economy tumbled into recession. But the gains... [were not] evenly distributed.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">White Americans, “who&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/business/economy/jobs-economy-voters.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">account for 78 percent</a>&nbsp;of the labor force,” actually “<em>lost</em>[emphasis added] more than 700,000 net jobs” between 2009 and 2016. Hispanic Americans, who make up less than 15 percent of the labor force, gained more than 50 percent of the jobs. Employment gains among black and Asian Americans were also disproportionate to their numbers in the workforce.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;" /><div alt="" class="media-image" height="1095" width="590" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); height: 500px; width: 269px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><img alt="" class="media-image" height="1095" width="590" typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.alternet.org/sites/default/files/nyt_12-13-16.png" style="border: none; height: 500px; width: 269px;" /></font></div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><em><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Image source:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/business/economy/jobs-economy-voters.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">New York Times, December 13, 2016</a></font></em></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While we can explain that these job gains were an overdue corrective to a long history of employment and structural disadvantages for communities of color, the fact is that the economy didn’t right itself evenly, and those left behind are still reeling from the economic implosion of 2008 and struggling to make sense of it. Is it racist to identify the racial component of the distribution of the recovery? Are voters who feel this very real economic pain in their everyday lives racist for resenting it?</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If post-recession opportunities are shrinking for the white working class, these voters are going to want to fight to change a system that’s creating not more but less opportunity for them and their families. We can’t ignore this experience and hope that, in some super-human way, these voters will transcend it. Progressives may not agree with the meaning that some working-class whites are making of these numbers, but we need a strategy to engage them, and, from my experience, summing them up as racists is unlikely to change how they vote or motivate them to think differently about the issues facing the nation.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More recently, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/upshot/mini-recession-2016-little-known-big-impact.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Times</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/upshot/mini-recession-2016-little-known-big-impact.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">reported</a>&nbsp;that 2016 saw a sharp slowdown in business investment in very narrow sectors of the economy; that, in fact, part of America lived through another recession in the run-up to the presidential election, though most of us didn’t notice it: “Overall economic growth slowed but remained in positive territory. The national unemployment rate kept falling. Anyone who didn’t work in energy, agriculture or manufacturing could be forgiven for not noticing it at all.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;" /><div alt="" class="media-image" height="802" width="975" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); width: 608px; height: 500px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><img alt="" class="media-image" height="802" width="975" typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.alternet.org/sites/default/files/nyt_09-28-18.png" style="border: none; width: 608px; height: 500px;" /></font></div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><em><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Image source:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/upshot/mini-recession-2016-little-known-big-impact.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">New York Times, September 29, 2018</a></font></em></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Here’s another rock-hard economic truth ignored by too many liberals: The industries hit hardest by those negative numbers correlate very closely to the parts of the country where Trump won key votes.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Two things are striking: The economic reality facing these white working-class voters—not their “anxiety,” but the real hardship they were and are enduring—shaped their experience heading into the 2016 election. And, in more diverse and prosperous urban areas that serve as Democratic strongholds, we didn’t even notice that hardship. The Times might say we can be “forgiven” for not noticing this, but our failure to acknowledge the truth of white working-class voters’ experiences, in favor of instead seeking to explain their vote through our experiences, has contributed to the huge divides we are seeing today.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The bottom line is, unless we change our attitude and stop spending time trying to sum up these voters in far too simple ways but instead take seriously the economic defeat that shapes the mindsets of those whose lives are very different from ours, it’ll be hard to change the country’s direction.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While we have been focused on attributing their votes as completely as possible to attitudes about race, we have been unwilling to allow an alternative image of them into our awareness. In one of the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.prri.org/research/white-working-class-attitudes-economy-trade-immigration-election-donald-trump/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">same studies</a>&nbsp;that Hasan cites as he paints a picture of racially motivated voters, we can also find a profile of a community that is in trouble. We should seek to understand this community and its grievances, not explain them away. Here is a snapshot of how the country looks to this group, taken from a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.prri.org/research/white-working-class-attitudes-economy-trade-immigration-election-donald-trump/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">study by PRRI/The Atlantic</a>:</font></p><blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>America’s Best Days.</strong>&nbsp;Americans are almost evenly split about whether America’s best days are in the past or future: half (50 percent) say America’s best days are behind us, while nearly as many (48 percent) say the country’s best days are ahead of us. The white working class is decidedly more pessimistic. More than six in ten (61 percent) white working-class Americans say America’s best days are in the past, while fewer than four in ten (37 percent) say they are yet to come.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>The American Dream.</strong>&nbsp;Fewer than half (46 percent) of white working-class Americans believe the American Dream—if you work hard, you can get ahead—still holds true, while roughly as many (48 percent) say it was once but is no longer true. … These views stand in sharp contrast to white college-educated Americans, among whom about six in ten (62 percent) say the American Dream still holds true. Among the general public, half (50 percent) say the American Dream still holds true, while roughly four in ten (41 percent) say this dream once held true but does not anymore...</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>Drugs, Alcohol and Depression.</strong>&nbsp;Notably, white working-class Americans are twice as likely as white college-educated Americans to say someone in their family has struggled with substance abuse. Similar numbers of white working-class Americans report a family member has struggled with either alcoholism (12 percent) or drug addiction (8 percent). ... Nearly four in ten (38 percent) white working-class Americans, compared to 26 percent of white college-educated Americans, say they or someone in their household has experienced depression in the last 12 months.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>Educational Investment.</strong>&nbsp;Americans overall are significantly more likely to say that a college education is a smart investment (55 percent) than to say it is more of a gamble that might not ultimately pay off (43 percent). White working-class Americans, however, are far more skeptical. A majority (54 percent) of the white working class view getting a college education as a risky gamble, while 44 percent say it is a smart investment. This puts them at odds with both white college-educated Americans and with black and Hispanic Americans, who have much more faith in the education system. Majorities of white college-educated Americans (63 percent), Hispanics (68 percent), and blacks (56 percent) believe a college education is a wise investment in the future.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong>Economic fatalism.</strong>&nbsp;White working-class voters who said that college education is a gamble were almost twice as likely to express a preference for Trump as those who said it was an important investment in the future.</font></p></blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This picture of the white working class can help us see them more fully and consider their views more thoughtfully. The good news is that progressivism has traditionally felt empathy when confronted with people’s pain and has a longstanding commitment to inclusivity. These habits should serve us well here. We can look proudly back on a history of building ever-expanding circles of diversity into American life—of showing compassion for those struggling to get ahead or even get by.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Today, we should know how to address the blind spot we’ve developed around this part of the American population, because we’ve done it before. Rather than explaining away their electoral choices, writing them out of our electoral equation, and pretending they won’t continue to be a dominant force in local, state and national elections for decades to come, it’s worth considering other options. We can denounce racism and still take seriously the economic realities in white working-class communities.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When the dust settles after November 6, there will once again be endless speculation about the outcome. Most of the political lines will no doubt be drawn exactly as they have been in the recent past.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If we want to learn from that past, though—if we want to truly move forward and not only improve electoral outcomes but also move the whole country in a direction that serves all Americans—we’ll have to learn to listen to those voices we have come to demonize, even though we may disagree on a range of things. If we want what’s best for our country, we’ll have to do so, whether it’s convenient or not.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This article was produced by the&nbsp;<a href="https://independentmediainstitute.org/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Independent Media Institute</a>.</font></p><div style=""><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;=</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">AN</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>new report from the&nbsp;<a href="https://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none;">United Nations</a>&nbsp;detailing the looming threat of global warming should be all anyone can talk about this month, but instead, it has been largely ignored in the American political debate.</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The reason is simple: Almost no one believes there's much chance the United States has the political will to do anything substantial to combat climate change. Because as long as the Republican Party holds any bit of power in Washington, D.C., it will do whatever it can to thwart efforts to wind down greenhouse gas emissions</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In a new&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/opinion/trump-climate-change-deniers-republican.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><em>New York Times</em></a>&nbsp;op-ed, economist Paul Krugman argued that the shifting responses Republicans — including now President Donald Trump — give in response to questions about climate change reveal that they are not reacting to the issue in good faith. They'll go from denying that climate change is happening, to denying that humans contribute to it, to denying that there's anything to be done about the issue — all without altering their fundamental assumption that there's no reason to impose any costs on the fossil fuel industry.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Details aside, the very multiplicity of climate-denial arguments — the deniers’ story keeps changing, but the bottom line that we should do nothing remains the same — is a sign that the<b>&nbsp;opponents of climate action are arguing in bad faith," Krugman wrote. "They aren’t seriously trying to engage with the reality of climate change or the economics of reduced emissions; their goal is to keep polluters free to pollute as long as possible, and they’ll grab onto anything serving that goal."</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">He added: "</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">[We're] now ruled by people who are willing to endanger civilization for the sake of political expediency, not to mention increased profits for their fossil-fuel friends." // noam</span></b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The complete vacuity of their position has been clear for literally decades. Krugman continued:</font></p><blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">These days, climate deniers seem to have temporarily backed down a bit on claims that nothing is happening. The old dodge of comparing temperatures to an unusually warm year in 1998 to deny that the planet is getting warmer — which is like comparing days in early July with a warm day in May, and denying that there’s such a thing as summer — has been undermined by a string of&nbsp;<a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">new temperature records</a>. And massive tropical storms fed by a warming ocean have made the consequences of climate change increasingly visible to the public.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>So the new strategy is to downplay what has happened. Climate change models “have not been very successful,” declared&nbsp;<a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/411308-kudlow-on-un-study-climate-change-modeling-has-not-been-successful" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Larry Kudlow</a>, the top White House economic adviser.</b>&nbsp;Actually,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/06/30-years-after-hansens-testimony/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">they have</a>: Global warming to date is well in line with past projections. “Something’s changing and it’ll change back again,”&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-interview-60-minutes-full-transcript-lesley-stahl-jamal-khashoggi-james-mattis-brett-kavanaugh-vladimir-putin-2018-10-14/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">asserted Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;on “60 Minutes,” based upon, well, nothing.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Having grudgingly conceded that maybe the planet is indeed getting a bit warmer, the climate deniers claim to be unconvinced that greenhouse gases are responsible.&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“I don’t know that it’s man-made,” said Trump. And while he has sort-of-kind-of backed down on his earlier claims that climate change is a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/03/hillary-clinton/yes-donald-trump-did-call-climate-change-chinese-h/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" title="" style="text-decoration-line: none;">hoax concocted by the Chinese</a>, he’s still seeing vast conspiracies on the part of climate&nbsp;<b>scientists, who he says “have a very big political agenda.”</b></span></font></p></blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Amazingly, even after the Republican&nbsp;Party has been proven wrong again and again on this issue, it has felt no need to reexamine its fundamental assumptions about the issue or admit error.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">And in addition to the corrupt motive of seeking to please their fossil fuel industry donors, Krugman suggests another reason for ignoring the reality of climate change. As the party has continued to devolve&nbsp;and lost any stable values, it clings to the<b>&nbsp;unifying joy of "owning the libs." As long as liberals think combatting climate change is an important issue, Republicans will be happy to ignore it.</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But politics is&nbsp;not just a game, despite the cartoonish arguments that have become so common on the right wing. The right's terrible policy choices have real consequences.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"We have good reason to believe that Trump and his associates are selling out America for the sake of personal gain," concluded Krugman. "When it comes to climate, however, they aren’t just selling out America; they’re selling out the whole world."</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></p></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/capitalisms-final-solution-nothing-less-complete-ecological-collapse" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.alternet.org/capitalisms-final-solution-nothing-less-complete-ecological-collapse</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Capitalism’s Final Solution Is Nothing Less than Complete Ecological Collapse</b></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></font></font></div><div>This is the nightmare logic of scarcity capitalism.</div><div>By Ed Simon / History News Network October 12, 2018, 1:58 AM GMT</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Four centuries ago, somebody starving in the drought afflicted Elbe region in what is today the Czech Republic, anonymously chiseled onto the stone of the receding river bank a warning. Here, along the river where one day American and Soviet troops would meet on their duel approach to Berlin, a graffito made by unknown hand marks 1616 as the oldest year recorded on one particular “Hunger Stone”, and on that surface there is a memento mori which reads “Wenn du mich sicht, dann weine.” This summer, among the hottest recorded, and the Elbe once again receded to the point where observers could read that ominous missive: “If you see me, weep.”</div><div>
</div><div>Something to tattoo on the brain with the Monday release of the United Nations Intergovernmental Report on Climate Change. Authored by 91 scientists, representing 40 countries and based on over 6,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies, the conclusions of the commission are horrifying. According to Coral Davenport at the New York Times the climatologists discovered that if “greenhouse gas emissions continue at the current rate, the atmosphere will warm up by as much as 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit” by 2040, radically earlier than had been thought, meaning that most readers of this article will bear witness to “inundating coastlines and intensifying droughts and poverty.”&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>A child born today will have just turned the drinking age in a world where close to all of the coral reefs will be extinct and where massive storms like Hurricane Florence or Hurricane Maria, which has nearly destroyed a Puerto Rico abandoned by the government of the United States, will be common. Where the social, cultural, and economic affects of climate change will be recorded not on revealed hunger stones, but in pandemics, wars, famines, and genocides exacerbated by the effects of higher temperatures. Brandon Miller and Jay Croft at CNN write that we’ll see in starker detail the horrific results of industrial man-made global warming earlier than in two decades, with the report concluding that humanity has “only till 2030 to stem catastrophic climate change.”</div><div>
</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Alterations to human behavior which might hasten the worst effects of climate change are technically possible, though the study’s authors doubt such change is politically feasible, as it would require direct action on the part of the industrial economies of the world, something with “no documented historic precedent.” Myles Allen of Oxford University explained that “we need to reverse emissions trends and turn the world economy on a dime” if we’re to stave off an ecological apocalypse which we now understand isn’t centuries in the future, but rather mere decades, if not years.</div><div>
</div><div>We already see the effects in the increasing ferocity of storms, the droughts that mark not just the developing world, but increasingly North America and Europe, and in the wildfires, which have burnt their way across the west. As the world’s temperature rises we see an equivalent political slow burn, nations increasingly moving toward the delusional reactionary nationalisms as a means of punishing refugee populations often affected either directly by climate change or by the civil strife made possible by it, for as Mark Fishcetti describes the Syrian civil war in Scientific American, “Human-induced drying in many societies can push tensions over a threshold that provokes violent conflict” – a reality that if the Trump administration pretends to deny, has long been acknowledged by the Pentagon.&nbsp;</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Climate change has resulted in civilizational catastrophe before. Historian John Kelly notes in The Great Mortality, his book on the Black Death of fourteenth-century Europe, that pestilence was furthered by “climactic and ecological instability,” the bubonic plague encouraged by weakened immune systems brought on by drought and famine.</span>&nbsp;Polymathic anthropologist Jared Diamond has considered how climate change brought collapse in cultures as varied as the Anasazi and Maya or the medieval Norse settlements of Greenland, writing that the “collapse of industrial civilization… could assume various forms, such as the worldwide spread of diseases or else of wars, triggered ultimately by scarcity of environmental resources.” Arguably the civilizations of ancient Mesopotamia and the Indus River Valley were felled by climate change, and one wonders if the peasants of Sumer were as despondent as that German speaker on the Elbe who asked future generations to weep, or if they were rather as myopic as we are, saying of such changes that “This too shall pass” while what expires is civilization itself?&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>Humans are unable to imagine the actual passing of their way of life. A sense that history changes has been novel for most cultures, even apocalyptic minded ones, as medieval paintings which depict Christ as a Flemish peasant or ancient Judeans as Florentine nobleman can attest. The idea that the past was radically different from the present and that tomorrow will be distant from today is an innovation of Renaissance humanism and then modernity. Rather, it’s always been easier to imagine that your world will literally pass into oblivion than that the values your civilization holds dear might disappear (or need to disappear). During those lean times on the Indus River, on the Euphrates, or the Elbe, women and men may have dreamt of the end of days, but they couldn’t have quite dreamt of us. The myths that structured their world precluded it.&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div><b>Lest we be too arrogant, ours is not so different a perspective, for as the literary theorist Frederic Jameson famously noted, it is “easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism.</b>” Similar for the hungry penitent in the temple to all the gods of Sumer, or to the starving medieval pilgrim who could envision the return of Christ, but not that he might look different from those who populated his world. Limited perspective is the wage of any totalizing ideology, and all eras are structured by such paradigms. As a priest in Moloch’s temple or a monk in a medieval monastery had their religions, so have we ours, but the cracked gods of our world differ in one important respect – only capitalism’s Mammon has the capability of bringing about the apocalypse.&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div><b>Only capitalism was able to inaugurate a new geological epoch in the Anthropocene;</b>&nbsp;unique is our dominant ideology’s status in being able to obliterate all of humanity. IPCC Co-Chair Debra Roberts said that the report is a “line in the sand and what it says to our species is that this is the moment and we must act now,” but what should disturb us most is the authors’ accurate alarm at the lack of political will to avert catastrophe. In the United States the coal, oil, and gas industries’ obfuscate, high percentages of Americans believe the lie that climate change is a hoax (while record heat affects the Midwest this October), and the Trump administration trashes the Paris Accords.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Noam Chomsky has said that the Republican “party is dedicated to racing as rapidly as possible to destruction of organized human life. There is no historical precedent for such a stand,” with modern fascism directly correlated to the increasing chaos of climate change itself.&nbsp;</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Roy Scranton in We’re Doomed. Now What? writes that as the “gap between the future we’re entering and the future we once imagined grows ever wider, nihilism takes root in the shadow of our fear…. [Y]ou can see it in the pull to nationalism, sectarianism, war, and racial hatred. We see it in the election of Donald Trump.”</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">What must be reckoned with is how this situation was directly engendered by industrial capitalism, and in particular by the partisans of its most extreme ideological manifestations of libertarianism and neoliberalism who have provided cover for policies that have enflamed the crisis.<b>&nbsp;Past centuries were circumscribed by their worldviews, be it medieval Catholicism, or classical Roman Augustan paganism, or the varied gods of Sumer in ancient Mesopotamia</b>. Even the most visionary of individual perspectives must be limited by a culture’s dominant way of thinking, but while our adherence to the market is as all-encompassing as a Babylonian’s loyalty to Marduk, it is only our dark religion which actually threatens Armageddon.</span></div><div>
</div><div>Unfettered, unregulated, capricious, vampiric capitalism has brought us to the brink, and the mass inability to comprehend this fact evidences how ingrained said ideology is. Our blinders are such that human tragedy that is attributable directly to our economic system is often naturalized as simply being “The way that things are,” thus precluding even the possibility of different ways of arranging our world.<b>&nbsp;Death due to differing ideologies is always interpreted as conscious and preventable, but capitalist tragedy is simply understood as how life operates.&nbsp;</b></div><div>
</div><div>Consideration of those who have died because of capitalism (and those who will, which may yet include us all) doesn’t require a cover-up. So inured are we to seeing capitalism as its own imposed ideology that we fail to understand its death toll. Franco-Bulgarian philosopher Tzvetan Todorovwrote that “remembrance of our own woes prevents us from seeing the suffering of others,” and while true, the converse is also accurate. While admitting that capitalism provided for unprecedented class mobility and technological innovation, an honest consideration of its death toll in any hypothetical Black Book of Capitalism would have to include not just the obvious fatalities of those who died in industrial accidents or whose lives were shortened by their labor, but indeed the victims of colonialism, the trans-Atlantic slave trade, and of fascismo corporativo, which is simply capitalism driven to its horrifying end&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Invisibility of such atrocities through normalization is a species of what the philosopher Louis Althusser termed “interpellation,” that is to say that we’re all molded subjects of the ideology that governs our world so that we mostly hold uncritical assumptions about capitalism’s normativity.&nbsp;</span>Writer William T. Vollmann addresses future generations in his new tome on climate change Carbon Ideologies, explaining that “We all lived for money, and that is what we died for.” As 2040 approaches our ignorance is a form of collective suicide.&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div><b>The Editorial Board of the Washington Post writes that future “Historians will look in absolute astonishment” that not only did our governments and corporate elite fail to halt climate change, but that our policy makers “actually pushed in the wrong direction.</b>”&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">That’s assuming that there will even be any historians left after the climate change horseman of pestilence, famine, war, and death gallop across the scorched and burning world, their riders named “Deregulation,” “Bottom Line,” “Market,” and “Profit.”</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">An August environmental impact statement prepared by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concedes that far from being a “Chinese hoax” as Trump has alleged, the average temperature will rise seven degrees by century’s end.</span>&nbsp;Quite a wide gulf between what the Trump administration knows to be true and what his deluded believers will swallow. Juliet Eilperin, Brady Dennis, and Chris Mooney at the Washington Post write that the Trump “administration did not offer this dire forecast … as part of an effort to combat climate change,” for their “analysis assumes the planet’s fate is already sealed.” Why prevent collapse when Trump concludes that there is still so much money to be made in not averting disaster?&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>This is the nightmare logic of scarcity capitalism, the macabre calculus which is content to let millions of people starve in the third world and that will ultimately exterminate refugees who dare to escape a parched landscape, all so that the economic status quo can be maintained before the process kills us all. The puritanism of corporate eco-individualism which configures environmental protection as simply a matter of driving a Prius or taking short showers is moral contrition or personal branding rather than policy, a quasi-theological sacrifice before the altar of the dying Earth. What’s actually required is a massive, international, eco-socialist mobilization of governments and industries that are responsible for this calamity. Because right now capitalism’s final solution is nothing less than complete ecological collapse. In his 1888 autobiographical Ecce Homo, the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche eerily predicted that the 20th century would witness “wars as have never happened on earth.” With chaos brought about by the scarcity resulting from climate change, we may reevaluate how prescient Nietzsche was about the last century, realizing that he was perhaps actually off by a hundred years.</div><div>
</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Ed Simon is the editor-at-large for The Marginalia Review of Books, a channel of The Los Angeles Review of Books. A frequent contributor at several sites, his collection&nbsp;<u>America and Other Fictions: On Radical Faith and Post Religion</u>&nbsp;will be released by Zero Books in November 2018.</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div style=""><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">mod officially dead?</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p class="yiv8737580732headline3" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color" style="margin: 10px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); padding: 0px;"><a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="https://rawstory.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=80b42ecc21f29763320aceb90&id=580502455e&e=4da1f92934" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Here's Why Susan Collins' Kavanaugh Vote Was the Republican Party's Final Surrender to Trump</font></a></p><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" font-style="font-style" italic="italic" color="color" rgb="rgb" style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By Heather Digby Parton,&nbsp;Salon</font></p><p style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Idolized by both sides, Maine’s “moderate” Republican reveals herself to be just a partisan flunky after all.&nbsp;<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="https://rawstory.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=80b42ecc21f29763320aceb90&id=300f376069&e=4da1f92934" class="yiv8737580732readmore" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; letter-spacing: 0.1em;">READ MORE»</a></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></p></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.axios.com/climate-change-is-finally-getting-political-cred-821fab52-254a-4620-b84d-c303b7b22c27.html">https://www.axios.com/climate-change-is-finally-getting-political-cred-821fab52-254a-4620-b84d-c303b7b22c27.html</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Climate change is starting to become a political worry for some Republicans.</font></div><div style="box-sizing: inherit;"><p class="StoryBody__paragraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">The big picture</span>: For years, Republicans could ignore the issue or outright question mainstream climate science without political worry. That’s starting to change. Some congressional Republicans are beginning to find it in their political interest to at least acknowledge climate change and oppose efforts to weaken existing policies...

The subtle but significant shift is fueled by disparate factors, including a stronger economy and President Trump’s dismissive policies on climate.</font></p><div class="Quoteroot--fHvPf Quoteplain--kY7a" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.75; margin: 25px 50px;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>“Moderate Republicans running this cycle are going to look for places to distance themselves in some places and appeal somehow to the middle, and [climate] is a fairly safe issue to do so.”</b></font></span></div><div class="QuoteAttributionroot--vrUkY" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.45; margin: 0px 50px 30px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">— Adrian Gray, Republican pollster</font></div><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Unlike the backlash Republicans face for disagreeing with Trump on many issues, Gray says his polling shows that most Republican voters don’t penalize their lawmakers for acknowledging climate change is real and a problem, even though Trump&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="https://www.axios.com/trump-mocks-global-warming-in-tweet-1515110895-36aaedf6-0f4a-4de5-ae3f-38ed325fe555.html" class="InternalLoadLinkroot--17C4m StoryBodylink--10w8x 36aaedf6-0f4a-4de5-ae3f-38ed325fe555-821fab52-254a-4620-b84d-c303b7b22c27" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: linear-gradient(rgb(0, 141, 200), rgb(0, 141, 200)); background-position: 0px 95%; background-size: 1px 1px; background-repeat: repeat-x; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; touch-action: manipulation; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px 0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px -0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.15em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.15em 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; border-radius: 0px; line-height: 1.25; cursor: pointer;">openly mocks it</a></span>.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This distinction comes despite the fact polling shows climate change remains a low priority for most voters, said Gray, who has done work for environmental groups.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo embodies&nbsp;</span>the moderate GOP mold considered key to Republicans keeping control of the House<span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">.</span>&nbsp;He represents the tip of Florida, a swing district whose residents regularly experience rising sea levels, one of the clearest and most present impacts of climate change.</font></p><ul style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px;"><li class="StoryBodyitem--1cHYD" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.75; margin-bottom: 1rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Climate change is a top priority for Curbelo, who has regularly criticized Trump on several issues.</font></li><li class="StoryBodyitem--1cHYD" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.75; margin-bottom: 1rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">He’s introducing legislation today that taxes carbon emissions, with at least one fellow Republican, Curbelo said.</font></li><li class="StoryBodyitem--1cHYD" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.75; margin-bottom: 1rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">He’s a co-founder of a bipartisan House caucus that acknowledges climate change.</font></li></ul><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">The other side(s):&nbsp;</span>Curbelo’s Democratic challenger, Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, is&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="https://twitter.com/DebbieforFL/status/1020327228406665216" class="StoryBodylink--10w8x" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: linear-gradient(rgb(0, 141, 200), rgb(0, 141, 200)); background-position: 0px 95%; background-size: 1px 1px; background-repeat: repeat-x; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; touch-action: manipulation; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px 0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px -0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.15em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.15em 0px;">accusing the congressman</a></span>&nbsp;of being ineffective and disingenuous with his work addressing climate change. Meanwhile,&nbsp;<b>Americans for Tax Reform,</b>&nbsp;a conservative group influential with Republicans, is holding an event today highlighting its opposition to what it’s calling the “giant job-crushing carbon tax” bill Curbelo is introducing.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Those cross-pressures highlight the political danger Curbelo faces in the midterm elections.<span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">&nbsp;</span>His district is a top target for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and voters there overwhelmingly supported Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential contest.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The 38-year-old Curbelo, first elected to Congress in 2014, is unusually nonchalant about this criticism and the potential for it to ultimately boot him from Washington.</font></p><div class="Quoteroot--fHvPf Quoteplain--kY7a" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.75; margin: 25px 50px;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I don’t worry about those kinds of things. I didn’t go to college to serve in Congress. I’m going to be as effective as possible while I’m here. The day I’m not here, I’ll be perfectly fine.”</font></span></div><div class="QuoteAttributionroot--vrUkY" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.45; margin: 0px 50px 30px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">— Curbelo</font></div><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">The bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus&nbsp;</span>Curbelo helped found two years ago with fellow Florida Rep. Ted Deutch, a Democrat, faces accusations from some environmentalists that it’s mostly an empty effort giving political cover to Republicans. Its record does show its limits:</font></p><ul style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px;"><li class="StoryBodyitem--1cHYD" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.75; margin-bottom: 1rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The caucus hasn’t put forth any substantive policies.</font></li><li class="StoryBodyitem--1cHYD" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.75; margin-bottom: 1rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Most GOP members of the caucus supported a non-binding but symbolically important resolution last week&nbsp;<a href="https://www.axios.com/house-votes-to-condemn-a-carbon-tax-6fcc27ad-c4d0-4c89-a066-474660834f2e.html" class="InternalLoadLinkroot--17C4m StoryBodylink--10w8x 6fcc27ad-c4d0-4c89-a066-474660834f2e-821fab52-254a-4620-b84d-c303b7b22c27" style="background-image: linear-gradient(rgb(0, 141, 200), rgb(0, 141, 200)); background-position: 0px 95%; background-size: 1px 1px; background-repeat: repeat-x; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; touch-action: manipulation; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px 0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px -0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.15em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.15em 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; border-radius: 0px; line-height: 1.25; cursor: pointer;">opposing a carbon tax</a>.</font></li></ul><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But the fact that some Republicans&nbsp;see a need to join an effort acknowledging climate change represents a political turning point, considering that the party as a whole has dismissed or denied outright mainstream climate science for most of the past decade.&nbsp;<b>Of the 42 Republican members of the caucus, 35 have joined since Trump’s election.</b></font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">Leading up to last week’s vote on the anti-carbon tax resolution</span>, some Republicans felt “angst” about it, according to a senior GOP aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid about inner party workings.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">After the vote, the aide expressed surprise at the number of Republicans who opposed the resolution: six, including five who are running for reelection. While objectively small, it’s still a notable change from the unanimous GOP backing in a near identical vote two years ago.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Increasingly, Republicans<span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">&nbsp;</span>are voting<span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">&nbsp;</span>against opposing moves on climate policy — a political double negative. Last July, dozens of House Republicans&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="https://www.axios.com/dozens-of-republicans-side-with-dems-on-climate-vote-1513304190-ad7909a3-b9ba-45f5-8914-d92da8330a6d.html" class="InternalLoadLinkroot--17C4m StoryBodylink--10w8x ad7909a3-b9ba-45f5-8914-d92da8330a6d-821fab52-254a-4620-b84d-c303b7b22c27" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: linear-gradient(rgb(0, 141, 200), rgb(0, 141, 200)) 0px 95% / 1px 1px repeat-x; text-decoration-line: none; touch-action: manipulation; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px 0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px -0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.15em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.15em 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; border-radius: 0px; line-height: 1.25; cursor: pointer;">voted to defeat</a></span>&nbsp;an amendment that would have blocked a Defense Department study of climate change.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">This political shift is by no means universal,&nbsp;</span>and it isn't leading to broad support for policies. It's one thing to acknowledge climate change is real, but it's another, big step to put forward policies, and so far Curbelo is an outlier.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">GOP Reps. Steve Scalise of Louisiana and David McKinley of West Virginia sponsored last week’s anti-carbon tax resolution for compelling reasons: they represent fossil-fuel constituents&nbsp;who would get hit hardest by a tax on carbon emitted from oil, natural gas and coal.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia running for reelection this year, told me last week he would still support today an advertisement&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIJORBRpOPM" class="StoryBodylink--10w8x" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-image: linear-gradient(rgb(0, 141, 200), rgb(0, 141, 200)); background-position: 0px 95%; background-size: 1px 1px; background-repeat: repeat-x; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; touch-action: manipulation; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.03em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px 0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px -0.03em, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.06em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.09em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.12em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0.15em 0px, rgb(255, 255, 255) -0.15em 0px;">he ran in 2010</a></span>&nbsp;shooting climate-change legislation with a gun.</font></p><p class="StoryBodyparagraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; font-weight: bolder;">One former congressional Republican</span>&nbsp;who got voted out largely for his vote in support of that bill — Bob Inglis of South Carolina — says times are changing, albeit slowly.</font></p><p class="StoryBody__paragraph--2-Doz" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; line-height: 1.75;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“That was the darkest days of the recession, the reddest district in the reddest state in the nation," Inglis said. "So things are turning, but they haven’t turned completely yet.”</font></p></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">defectrs djt:</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-c4895b9c-7fff-5582-6267-cbb6397470f5" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">a new article for Axios.com, journalists Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen assert that in the Trump era, the Republican Party is suffering an acute “<a href="https://www.axios.com/republicans-growing-identity-crisis-2018-midterms-37485bd4-eeec-46de-8154-0a205eea505d.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">identity crisis</a>”—one in which the GOP has become, in effect, “the Trump Party” and “traditional conservatives” are feeling increasingly out of place. And VandeHei and Allen cite plenty of examples, from the recent defections of big-time GOP donors like hedge fund manager Seth Klarman and L Brands founder/CEO Les Wexner to the vehement anti-Trump stands of prominent right-wingers like Steve Schmidt (a campaign advisor/strategist for Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential run), MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough (a former Florida congressman), columnist George Will and neocon journalist Max Boot.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Certainly, a political party can take a big tent approach; President Ronald Reagan, in the 1980s, famously said that he considered someone who supported him 70% of the time to be a 70% ally and not a 30% enemy. But under Donald Trump’s presidency, Republicans are expected to be faithful, obedient servants who bow down to him 100% of the time.&nbsp;&nbsp;</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Here are five long-time Republicans who are feeling very uncomfortable in the GOP in the Trump era.</font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-bottom: 20px;"><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>1. Christine Todd Whitman</b></font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The late Rev. Jerry Falwell, Sr. was furious when President George W. Bush added Lt. General Colin Powell, former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge and former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman to his administration. The Moral Majority founder and far-right fundamentalist theocrat insisted that Republicans who were pro-choice on the abortion issue had no place in the GOP—and in 2005, Whitman decried the way religious extremists had&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/books/review/its-my-party-too-a-bigger-tent.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=04766A8493B39E25FCE3EEE5A1D81CD1&gwt=pay" style="text-decoration-line: none;">hijacked her party</a>&nbsp;in the book “<a href="https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-1-59420-040-3" style="text-decoration-line: none;">It’s My Party Too</a>: The Battle for the Heart of America and the Future of the GOP.” These days, Whitman is a staunch NeverTrump conservative, and the former EPA head and New Jersey governor voiced her&nbsp;<a href="https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-whitman-trump-helsinki-gop-response-20180722-story.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">disdain for Trump’s presidency</a>&nbsp;and the 2018 GOP in a blistering July 22 article for the Los Angeles Times. Lambasting Trump for everything from foreign policy to his response to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia-related investigation, Whitman declared that Trump is “not fit to remain in office.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2. Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Right-wing Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse has admitted that he “regularly” considers&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator-ben-sasse-says-he-regularly-considers-leaving-the-republican-party/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">leaving the GOP</a>, stressing that ideas are more important to him than party affiliation. And much of Sasse’s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/09/politics/ben-sasse-thinks-of-leaving-republican-party-cnntv/index.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">discomfort with Trump</a>&nbsp;has to do with foreign policy. In July, Sasse was highly critical of the way Trump handled his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Finland, stressing, “Right now, the president isn’t leading. We negotiated from a position of weakness yesterday, and Vladimir Putin walked away from Helsinki with a win. It’s a disaster.” And Sasse has asserted that “this White House is a reality-show,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ben-sasse-leaving-republican-party_us_5b9455eee4b0cf7b00406b39" style="text-decoration-line: none;">soap-opera presidency</a>.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">3. House Speaker Paul Ryan</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Paul Ryan, speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and worshipper of Ayn Rand, sent shock waves through the GOP when, in April, he announced that he would&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/07/magazine/paul-ryan-speakership-end-trump.html" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">not be seeking reelection</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;in the 2018 midterms. The reason Ryan gave was that he wanted to spend more time with his family, but that’s nonsense—if Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio or Carly Fiorina were president, Ryan would no doubt be more than happy to seek another term and stay on as House speaker.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> Ryan has been reluctant to criticize Trump publicly—so reluctant, in fact, that MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace (a frustrated NeverTrump Republican) has denounced him as&nbsp;<a href="https://www.rawstory.com/2018/01/his-spine-has-been-removed-watch-nicolle-wallace-blast-incredible-shrinking-man-paul-ryan/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">spineless and gutless</a>. But actions speak louder than words. Ryan wasn’t happy about Trump’s nomination in 2016, and his decision to resign from the House shows how&nbsp;<a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/4/11/17224240/paul-ryan-leaving-primary-reelection" style="text-decoration-line: none;">uncomfortable</a>&nbsp;he’s become with Trumpism.</span></font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4. Florida Rep.<b> Ileana Ros-Lehtinen</b></font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Like Ryan, 66-year-old Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen shocked long-time Republicans when she announced her decision to leave the U.S. House of Representatives and not seek a second term.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Ros-Lehtinen’s departure is a bombshell: the Havana, Cuba-born congresswoman has been in the House since 1989 and is a fixture in right-wing Florida politics. But unlike Ryan, Ros-Lehtinen isn’t expressing the lame I-want-to-spend-more-time-with-my-family nonsense. Ros-Lehtinen has been an outspoken NeverTrump Republican and hasn’t been shy about&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article182895146.html" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">calling out</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;the president’s overt racism, and she has made it crystal clear that she’s leaving the House because she is&nbsp;</span><a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/382028-retiring-gop-lawmakers-cut-loose-on-trump" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">fed up with Trumpism</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">.</span></font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5. Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Most of the Republican establishment has become incredibly passive and submissive where Trump is concerned. But Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, on the other hand, is a hard-right Republican who candidly states that he is retiring from the Senate because of&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/24/flake-retiring-after-2018-244114" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Trump’s effect on the GOP</a>. When he announced his retirement on the Senate floor in 2017, Flake candidly declared, “Reckless, outrageous and undignified behavior has become excused as telling it like it is when it is actually just reckless, outrageous and undignified. And when such behavior emanates from the top of our government, it is something else. It is&nbsp;<a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/382028-retiring-gop-lawmakers-cut-loose-on-trump" style="text-decoration-line: none;">dangerous to a democracy</a>.”</font></p></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/heres-why-republican-party-has-abandoned-reality">https://www.alternet.org/heres-why-republican-party-has-abandoned-reality</a></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx vid</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><b>Here's Why the Republican Party Has Abandoned Reality</b></div><div><b>It's Trump's GOP now.</b></div><div>By David Akadjian / Daily Kos September 16, 2018, 7:58 AM GMT</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This year, the Republican candidate for governor in Georgia was decided in a special runoff election between Brian Kemp and Casey Cagle, the top two finishers in the Republican primary. Before the runoff election, Casey Cagle was secretly recorded talking about the craziness of the Georgia Republican primary. He said:</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The problem is in a primary—and you and I are just talking off-the-record frank—they don’t give a shit about those things. Okay. In the general election, they care about it. Okay. But they don’t care about it in a primary. This primary felt like it was who had the biggest gun, who had the biggest truck, and who could be the craziest.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Kemp quickly pounced on these remarks and used them to win the runoff by 40 points—which, ironically, validated Cagle’s remarks.</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Here in Ohio, I saw the same thing in our race for governor. The entire race was about&nbsp; who was the most conservative. Mary Taylor called Mike DeWine a “liberal” and DeWine said Taylor was a criminal, so “lock her up.</span>”</div><div>
</div><div>You’ve probably seen something similar in a race where you live. Conspiracy theorists are falling out of trees in Republican primaries.</div><div>
</div><div>So why is this going, on and what can we learn from it?&nbsp;&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>Politicians are cowards</div><div>
</div><div>Almost a year before the 2016 election, Devin Nunes spoke with The New Yorker about then-House Speaker John Boehner’s ouster.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Nunes told the author that one of the biggest changes he’s seen since his arrival in 2002 is the <b>rise of online media outlets and for-profit groups that spread bad or even false information:</b></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>I used to spend ninety per cent of my constituent response time on people who call, e-mail, or send a letter, such as, ‘I really like this bill, H.R. 123,</b>’ and they really believe in it because they heard about it through one of the groups that they belong to, but their view was based on actual legislation.<b> Ten per cent were about ‘Chemtrails from airplanes are poisoning me’ to every other conspiracy theory that’s out there. And that has essentially flipped on its head.</b></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Today, the calls and emails are 90 percent about the bad information and conspiracy theories, and only a small percentage are about things that are actually true.</span></div><div>
</div><div>Of course today, we know Nunes as the point man from the House Intelligence Committee who keeps trying to push the lie that it was Hillary Clinton who actually colluded with Russia. Nunes is also a global warming denier even as Fresno, the largest city in his California district, experienced a record consecutive days with highs that topped 100 degrees.</div><div>
</div><div>Nunes is now one of the leaders in disinformation.</div><div>
</div><div>Why?</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Because Fox News and other right-wing conspiracy media outlets have made him famous. His fame has brought in $7.4 million in campaign donations, the most of any California Republican. This is also three to seven times any previous amount he’s raised.</span></div><div>
</div><div>So … conspiracy away!</div><div>
</div><div>In three years Nunes went from Freedom Party critic to one of the lead conspiracy theorists in Congress. Along the way, he threw out every principle he once might have had.</div><div>
</div><div>He’s not a leader. He’s a Fox News puppet.</div><div>
</div><div>[vid]</div><div>
</div><div><b>Devin Nunes calls his own paper, The Sacramento Bee, ‘fake news’&nbsp;</b></div><div>
</div><div>It’s important to understand that this is not just true for Nunes, but for most politicians</div><div>
</div><div>It’s easy for liberals to see this with Devin Nunes because he’s a lying conspiracy theorist Republican.</div><div>
</div><div><b>The mistake we often make, however, is seeing Democratic politicians differently. They’re not conspiracy theorists like Nunes. But they also don’t tend to be leaders like we want them to be. They have to get elected, too. So they will do what it takes to get elected. </b>They will champion causes that are hot-button issues in the media. They will talk about what they think they can talk about in order to win. If an issue is going to hurt them politically, they may avoid it.</div><div>
</div><div><b>The simple model for what they’re doing looks like this:</b></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>Social change -> political change -> policy change</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Social change is cultural change. </span>It is what is popular in the public mind. Political change is winning elections. And policy change is when politicians write legislation.</div><div>
</div><div>Politicians will do what those who get them elected want.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">If we look at someone saying this on the Democratic side, it looks like Barack Obama in 2009 talking about health care. Obama took a page out of President Franklin Roosevelt’s playbook. <b>FDR</b> once met with a group of activists who wanted support for new, bold legislation. After listening to their arguments, he then said, “You’ve convinced me<b>. Now go out and make me do it.”</b></span></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>What he meant by “make me do it” was to accomplish the social change necessary to keep representatives in power long enough to effect the policy change.</b></div><div>
</div><div>If you want something done in our country, you have to have representatives in government to do it. To accomplish this, you have to change social norms.</div><div>
</div><div>This process is the same whether you want to get the money out of politics or whether you believe in some big government conspiracy.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Why the Republican Party has abandoned reality</b></div><div>
</div><div><b>The things corporate special interests want are not popular in America.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">They want to</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Pay people less and get them to work more</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Eliminate benefits like health care</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Keep all the profits for themselves<b> (privatize the profit)</b></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Shift any of the costs and risks onto everyone else <b>(socialize the risks)</b></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">They don’t care at all about whether or not people lead decent lives. All that matters are the returns they can deliver in quarterly reports.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">If they have to buy government to do this, so be it.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">If what they want isn’t popular, they’re going to look for ways to get politicians elected without having to talk about these issues. Toward this end, they have purchased media bullhorns and they’ve developed a story about good and evil to tell people.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">We all know this story.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">If you are a conservative, you are a good defender of capitalism. If you are a liberal, you are an evil socialist who is trying to destroy the country.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Whether or not this is true does not matter to them. What matters is whether they can get politicians elected.</span></div><div>
</div><div>This is why the Republican Party has detached from reality. Corporate special interest legislation is not popular with people, so corporate special interests have to create a different reality: one in which corruption is good (today we call it “business friendly” or “free” markets) and one in which democracy is bad (people should not interfere with corruption).</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div><b>What this means for your conversations</b></div><div>
</div><div>Many people I know don’t like to hear that politicians are cowards. They want politicians to be activists who are leading the push for change.</div><div>
</div><div>I find it comforting to understand politicians because if we understand politicians, we have a better chance of actually creating change.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">If we expect politicians to be activists, we will always be disappointed. Why? Because by and large they can’t lead the activist charge. If they do, they get unelected.</span></div><div>
</div><div>Keep in mind, this doesn’t mean we don’t need activists. We absolutely need people creating social change. We need to make it possible for politicians to support something and stay elected.</div><div>
</div><div>We need both movements and politicians.</div><div>
</div><div>If you do this right, you can even get politicians to support conspiracy theories</div><div>
</div><div>That’s a joke. I don’t want them to support conspiracy theories.</div><div>
</div><div>The point I’m trying to make is that if people get involved and push and vote, things will change.</div><div>
</div><div>It will happen.</div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>What this means practically</b></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">It means that you and I have to do certain things repeatedly.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">When elections aren’t happening, we must:</span></div><div>
</div><div>Work to change our culture</div><div>Push for better ideas</div><div>Put as much pressure as you can on your elected politicians (no matter what party they’re in)</div><div>Get involved with an activist group&nbsp;</div><div>Reach out to people, especially people who might be different from you, and find out what interests them</div><div>Make as many connections as possible—build your networks&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div><b>During primaries:</b></div><div>
</div><div>Vote for the most liberal politician who can win (this might not be who makes you feel good)</div><div>Support candidates</div><div>Contribute to their campaigns</div><div>Get involved in party politics</div><div>Encourage others to vote and get involved</div><div>Do this up and down the ticket</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Help people understand how politics works and how change happens</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><b>During general elections</b></div><div>
</div><div>Repeat the same steps as for the primaries</div><div>Corporate special interests are going to try to convince you that change isn’t possible. They will try to discourage you. They will spread fear and they will do whatever they can to keep people from voting.</div><div>
</div><div>Demographics are changing in favor of the Democratic Party. On issue after issue, the Democratic Party is on the side of the American people.</div><div>
</div><div><b>All we have to do is make enough politicians pay the price for abandoning reality.</b></div></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“How long until he’s impeached?”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Canadian observers of the political dumpster fire down south are right to pose this question, for the list of scandals and offences is long and growing.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">One week, we learn about potential pay-offs to Trump’s other women&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/nyregion/michael-cohen-plea-deal-trump.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">in plain violation of America’s remaining electoral laws</a>; another week, we see&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/border-children-parents-separation-trump-1.4710055" style="text-decoration-line: none;">little kids taken from their parents</a>&nbsp;and held in dark sites along the border, a clear breach of “cruel and unnecessary” standards of punishment, not to mention basic humanity. Now we hear that members of his own administration&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/trump-white-house-anonymous-resistance.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">are trying to thwart him.</a>&nbsp;Yet he endures.</font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 5px; text-align: center;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">SPONSORED</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-bottom: 20px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Explanations for this staying power range from the man’s skills as a conman to the fecklessness of old-guard Democrats and the cowardice of congressional Republicans.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">From a historical perspective, however, the reason Trump remains is simple: He occupies the best political ground, namely the meeting point of three reactionary forces in American life.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The tycoons</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The first are business elites. They’ve been around since the late 1800s, when they turned the Republican Party into the political tool of Robber Baron capitalists. They define liberty as the pursuit of wealth and rage against any restraints upon it.&nbsp;<a href="https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780809058280" style="text-decoration-line: none;">They oppose taxes, regulations, and unions.</a></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Over the last 50 years, such interests have&nbsp;<a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.ca/books/93662/the-shock-doctrine-by-naomi-klein/9780676978018" style="text-decoration-line: none;">united against the social protections that emerged from the Great Depression and the Second World War.</a>&nbsp;Now&nbsp;<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/22/koch-brothers-social-security" style="text-decoration-line: none;">they target</a>&nbsp;Medicaid, Medicare and, one day soon, Social Security.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><b><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">'Blood and soil'&nbsp;</font></b></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The second force of the American right are white nationalists</b>, whose&nbsp;<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-100-year-old-rallying-cry-of-white-genocide-98378" style="text-decoration-line: none;">origins trace back to the early 1800s</a>. They believe that white families make up the real “nation” within the wider and more diverse United States.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They, too, have become more organized and angry over the past 50 years, first in reaction to the Civil Rights revolution and then to immigration from Mexico. They also hate the media.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Such ideas are often associated with Americans of lesser means and education, with cut-off jeans and non-ironic moustaches. But “blood and soil” prejudices against non-white people also thrive on leafy college campuses and exclusive country clubs.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rather than a specific ideology, white nationalism is a cluster of feelings and beliefs that often lay dormant before&nbsp;<a href="https://www.simonandschuster.co.uk/books/Nixonland/Rick-Perlstein/9781451606263" style="text-decoration-line: none;">called to action by various dog whistles: “Hard-working Americans” and the “silent majority” versus “welfare queens” and “illegals,"</a></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The chosen people</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The last and most important dimension of the modern right is religious,&nbsp;<a href="https://theconversation.com/trumps-lies-are-white-nationalist-gospel-90089" style="text-decoration-line: none;">especially as practised by white evangelical Protestants</a>. Although they only entered Republican politics in the 1970s and 1980s, their roots stretch back to the colonial period,&nbsp;<a href="https://books.wwnorton.com/books/Our-Savage-Neighbors/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">when Puritans from southeastern England and Presbyterians from northern Ireland conquered parts of North America from Indigenous people they saw as “heathen.”</a></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ever since, one of the most powerful themes in American culture has been that of the godly settler in a fallen world, beset by demonic foes and blessed by a terrible yet perfect deity. In this narrative,&nbsp;<a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/avenging-the-people-9780199751709?cc=ca&lang=en&" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Americans are the “chosen people” who must purge themselves and the world of evil.</a></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These groups—the tycoons, the white nationalists, and the evangelicals—all yearn for a harsh world in which they have someone to kick around. But they don’t have the same kicking order in mind, leading to a number of policy disagreements.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The real estate mogul unites the right</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The business right usually wants free trade, while white nationalists demand protectionism. The latter are increasingly anti-Semitic, whereas evangelical Protestants would sooner vote for Benjamin Netanyahu than Hillary Clinton. None of them can decide if the U.S. should ignore or bully the rest of the world.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Individually, these groups cannot win elections. They put up also-ran or second-tier candidates like Mitt Romney (business), David Duke (white nationalist) or Mike Huckabee (evangelical). George W. Bush briefly unified the first and third categories but could never excite the second; his brother Jeb couldn’t excite anyone.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It was Trump, the “blue-collar billionaire” who couldn’t bear the sight of Barack Obama in the White House, who united these forces of the right in 2016. He believes in them all, if only because they all believe in him.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And he’s delivered: Massive de-regulation and tax cuts; Muslim bans and protective tariffs; federal judges and now Supreme Court candidates who are hostile to abortion, gay rights and a secular public sphere.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Put another way, the real estate mogul now holds the best location of all, the centre of a Venn diagram whose circles cover a huge swath of the American political landscape.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Moving him won’t be easy. And he won’t leave quietly.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><em><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/j-m-opal-435731" style="text-decoration-line: none;">J.M. Opal</a>, Associate Professor of History,&nbsp;<a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/mcgill-university-827" style="text-decoration-line: none;">McGill University</a></font></em></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><em><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This article is republished from&nbsp;<a href="https://theconversation.com/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">The Conversation</a>&nbsp;under a Creative Commons license. Read the&nbsp;<a href="https://theconversation.com/location-location-location-trump-has-the-best-spot-in-american-politics-102880" style="text-decoration-line: none;">original article</a>.</font></em></p></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">kill soc sec</font></div><div style=""><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></strong></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/right-wing/donald-trump-and-republicans-work-every-day-destroy-social-security-medicare-and-medicaid" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.alternet.org/right-wing/donald-trump-and-republicans-work-every-day-destroy-social-security-medicare-and-medicaid</a></font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>during..</b>Trump’s campaign for president, he promised&nbsp;<a href="https://medium.com/senator-bernie-sanders/14-times-donald-trump-promised-not-to-cut-social-security-medicare-and-medicaid-99beefa9f584" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">over and over again</a>&nbsp;to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Now, in the lead-up to the midterm elections, Trump is&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1037407341816283137" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">claiming</a>&nbsp;to have kept that promise. Completely in character for a president who doesn’t let a day go by without lying, he recently falsely claimed, “We’re saving Social Security, the Democrats will destroy Social Security. We’re saving Medicare. The Dems, you look at what they’re doing. They want to destroy Medicare.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It’s time to set the record straight. Far from keeping his word, Trump and his administration have spent every day since taking power working to destroy Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Here are 10 of the Trump administration’s worst attacks on the American people’s Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid:</b></font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-bottom: 20px;"><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>1. Trump nominated Congressman Mick Mulvaney</b>&nbsp;to be the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director. Mulvaney has a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/02/16/senators-confirm-trumps-pick-to-deal-with-the-federal-budget/?utm_term=.bb71f86660ad" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">long history</a>&nbsp;of working to destroy Social Security and Medicare. In 2011, he said, “We have to end Medicare as we know it.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Every single Republican senator&nbsp;<a href="https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=1&vote=00068" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">voted</a>&nbsp;to confirm Mulvaney, while every Democrat voted against.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>2. Trump nominated Tom Price to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees Medicare.&nbsp;</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Price&nbsp;<a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/a-vote-for-tom-price-is-a-vote-to-destroy-medicare_us_589a2c11e4b0985224db5b06" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">has stated</a>&nbsp;that “We will not rest until we make certain that government-run health care [e.g., Medicare] is ended” and decried “the federal government’s intrusion into medicine through Medicare.”</span></font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Every single Republican senator&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/10/us/politics/tom-price-confirmation-vote.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">voted</a>&nbsp;to confirm Price, while every Democrat present voted against. After less than a year on the job, Price was forced to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/us/politics/tom-price-trump-hhs.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">resign in disgrace</a>, and Trump replaced him with Alex Azar, a former pharmaceutical executive&nbsp;<a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/deadly-greed-alex-azar-must-not-be-confirmed_us_5a1c3bfbe4b0bf1467a84886" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">who tripled the price of insulin</a>.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">3. As soon as Trump took office, the Republican Party’s top priority was to take health care away from tens of millions of Americans. If “Trumpcare” had become law, it would have cut&nbsp;<a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trumpcares-880-billion-cut-to-medicaid-is-an-attack_us_58ca930be4b0537abd956e46" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">$880 billion</a>&nbsp;from Medicaid, creating a disaster for seniors who rely on Medicaid for long-term care. It would also have created a Medicare&nbsp;<a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-overlooked-trumpcare-threat-a-medicare-time-bomb_us_594d77cee4b0326c0a8d0845" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">time bomb</a>&nbsp;by starving the program of essential funding.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4. Trump’s 2018 budget proposal sought cuts of&nbsp;<a href="https://www.rollcall.com/news/policy/trump-wants-800-billion-10-year-cut-entitlement-programs" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">$800 billion</a>&nbsp;to Medicaid and Social Security Disability Insurance over 10 years. When OMB Director Mulvaney was asked if these cuts would lead to fewer people receiving their earned Social Security disability benefits, he replied, “<a href="https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mick-mulvaney-i-hope-fewer-people-social-security-disability-insurance" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">I hope so</a>.”</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5. Republicans passed a massive tax giveaway to billionaires and corporations, which they are now using as an excuse to&nbsp;<a href="https://thinkprogress.org/republicans-voted-tax-bill-cut-medicare-social-security-pay-488a9bcbba7d/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">demand cuts</a>&nbsp;to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.</font></p><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>6. Nearly every House Republican&nbsp;<a href="https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2018/roll138.xml" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none;">voted</a>&nbsp;for a so-called “Balanced Budget Amendment,<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">”</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;which would&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbpp.org/blog/why-a-balanced-budget-amendment-would-harm-social-security-and-federal-deposit-insurance" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">make it unconstitutional</a>&nbsp;for Social Security to use its own $2.9 trillion trust fund to pay promised benefits. (Fortunately, the Amendment did not attain the two-thirds majority required for passage.)....</span></font></p></div></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">fail:</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/gop-rejects-call-curb-us-funding-slaughter-yemeni-kids" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/gop-rejects-call-curb-us-funding-slaughter-yemeni-kids</font></a></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday denounced as "mind blowing" the decision to "continue to willingly participate in the slaughter of Yemeni kids" after Republicans objected to his amendment to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6157/actions" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Defense Appropriation bill</a>&nbsp;that would have put key restrictions on U.S. financial and other support for the Saudi-led bombing campaign.</font></p><blockquote data-lang="en"><p dir="ltr" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Republicans objected.
</span>
It’s just unthinkable to me that we continue to willingly participate in the slaughter of Yemeni kids when there is zero benefit to U.S. security. Mind blowing really.&nbsp;<a href="https://t.co/p6qbrfRGoe" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://t.co/p6qbrfRGoe</a></font></p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT)&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1032298356104683521?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">August 22, 2018</a></font></blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The amendment "would cut off United States' support for the Saudi Arabia-led coalition's war in Yemen until the Secretary of Defense certified that the coalition's air campaign is not violating international law and U.S. policy related to the protection of civilians," a press&nbsp;<a href="https://www.murphy.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/murphy-amendment-cuts-off-funds-for-war-in-yemen-until-pentagon-certifies-saudi-led-coalition-is-not-violating-international-law-and-us-policy" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">statemnt</a>&nbsp;from Murphy's office states.</font></p><div style="margin-bottom: 20px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Win Without War had&nbsp;<a href="https://act.winwithoutwar.org/call/call-stop-yemen-funding/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">called</a>&nbsp;the amendment "our big chance to slam on the brakes and stop our role in enabling the suffering in Yemen." Yet Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, objected to Murphy's amendment, despite saying that "what's going on in Yemen is atrocious."</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Speaking on the Senate floor next to a photo of a Yemeni community center bombed when a funeral was underway, Murphy gave a damning assessment of the catastrophe the U.S. has helped fuel. "The United States is a key player in this bombing campaign," he noted.</b></font></p></div></div></div><div style=""><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/make-america-dumb-again-here-are-8-most-ridiculous-things-republicans-believe-now-trump-president">https://www.alternet.org/make-america-dumb-again-here-are-8-most-ridiculous-things-republicans-believe-now-trump-president</a></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">re’s a list of strange things Republicans seem to believe in the era of Donald Trump—and the horrendous policies issuing from them.&nbsp;</span><strong style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">1. Children fleeing Latin American death squads pose a dire threat to Americans’ safety</strong><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;The administration’s “zero-tolerance” policy towards migrants at the US border has created a humanitarian crisis: hundreds of kids were separated from their families and incarcerated by the federal government. &nbsp;Families that had made the dangerous trek from their home countries, through Mexico, and to the US border, were deported after swift immigration proceedings.</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As the administration (slowly) works to reunite families that have not been booted from the country, many children are showing classic symptoms of&nbsp;<a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/394462-the-impact-of-family-separation-last-a-lifetime-for-children" style="text-decoration-line: none;">PTSD</a>. It doesn’t help that some appeared to have been&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/07/31/trump-administration-must-seek-consent-before-giving-drugs-to-migrant-children-judge-rules/?utm_term=.304ec9def485" style="text-decoration-line: none;">drugged</a>&nbsp;with psychotropic medications without parental consent.</font></p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Yet Donald Trump so adeptly stoked Republicans’ fears about the&nbsp;</span><a href="https://theweek.com/articles/776008/ms13-republicans-new-willie-horton" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">threat</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;posed by MS-13, that many Republicans saw little wrong with the administration’s approach to migrants. According to a&nbsp;Quinnipiac University&nbsp;</span><a href="https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2550" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">poll</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;released in June, while two thirds of Americans opposed child separations, a small majority of Republican voters (55 percent) supported Trump’s child separation policy.</span></font><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fear-mongering about MS-13 has become so routine that it’s turned into a campaign issue in the midterms, the Washington Post&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/why-ms-13-is-a-campaign-issue-in-rep-comstocks-race-for-reelection/2018/07/27/14120692-91bb-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?utm_term=.880d9151341d" style="text-decoration-line: none;">reports</a>.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Although MS-13—whose violence is fueled in part by the US-led global war on drugs—is responsible for reprehensible acts of violence, migrants are often&nbsp;<em>fleeing</em>&nbsp;the violence and instability created by Latin American crime syndicates, not coming to America to perpetrate it.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As immigration expert Stephen Yale-Loehr previously told Raw Story, given the extensive screening that occurs at the US border, it’s highly unlikely that dangerous criminals would try to infiltrate America by applying for asylum.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2. Sanctuary cities are murder dens overrun by criminal immigrants</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“There is a Revolution going on in California. Soooo many Sanctuary areas want OUT of this ridiculous, crime infested & breeding concept,” Trump tweeted in April. “Jerry Brown is trying to back out of the National Guard at the Border, but the people of the State are not happy. Want Security & Safety NOW!”Once again, Republicans—particularly those who live in less urban and diverse parts of the country—could (almost) be forgiven for believing that sanctuary cities are dangerous. President Donald Trump has fear-mongered about cities and states that have opted for sanctuary status throughout his campaign and Presidency.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a July&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/randy-hall/2018/07/02/new-poll-most-voters-support-trump-immigration-sanctuary-cities" style="text-decoration-line: none;">poll</a>, a whopping 94 percent of Republicans answered “yes” when asked “Should cities that arrest illegal immigrants for crimes be required to notify immigration authorities they are in custody or be prohibited from notifying immigration authorities?”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But Republicans vastly overestimate how far sanctuary cities go to protect vulnerable immigrants. Just because, say, the New York Police Department isn’t allowed to actively aid Immigration and Customs Enforcement, doesn’t mean that ICE is prevented from rounding up people they suspect of being undocumented and swiftly shuffling them into an understaffed immigration court system.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">3. Abolishing ICE will lead to utter mayhem</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The same<a href="https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/randy-hall/2018/07/02/new-poll-most-voters-support-trump-immigration-sanctuary-cities" style="text-decoration-line: none;">&nbsp;poll</a>&nbsp;found that&nbsp; 78 percent of Republicans, 59 percent of Democrats and 73 percent of independents said ICE should&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;be abolished.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“You get rid of ICE, you’re going to have a country that you’re going to be afraid to walk out of your house,” Mr. Trump&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/01/us/politics/trump-interview-ice-trade-nafta.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">said</a>&nbsp;on Fox News recently.That’s no surprise and might be a problem with progressive messaging: the controversial slogan “Abolish ICE,” popularized by the Democratic Socialists of America, suggests the dissolution of law and order itself.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But that’s not speaking highly of other law enforcement agencies tasked with keeping Americans safe.</font></p><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There are multiple agencies that police immigration, from U.S. Customs and Border Patrol to the Department of Homeland Security. And ICE was established in 2003—so getting rid of&nbsp;the agency would merely take America back to the days of the Clinton, Bush, Reagan administrations, and so on—hardly the Wild West.</font></span><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Journalist Sean McElwee, who helped popularize the idea that abolishing ICE is doable and not a radical’s pipe dream, tells Raw Story that it’s ICE’s mission that’s extreme.&nbsp;“A world with ICE is far more radical than a world without one,” he says.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“A world in which civil immigration violations are met with the full force of a paramilitary force is far, far less reasonable than one in which they are treated like parking tickets.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4. Desperate refugees fleeing global proxy war, ISIS and the regime of Bashar al-Assad pose an existential threat to US safety</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The driving force behind President Donald Trump’s travel ban, which severely restricts tourism and immigration mainly from Muslim-majority countries, is fear that letting Muslim refugees (often fleeing the aftermath of wars America had a hand in)into the US will increase the likelihood of a terror attack.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That fear seems to fall along party lines:&nbsp;just&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/20/poll-syrian-refugees-united-states-237406" style="text-decoration-line: none;">23 percent</a>&nbsp;of Republicans support accepting refugees from war torn Syria, even as a slim majority of Americans support accepting Syrian refugees.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fact, people applying for asylum are so&nbsp;<a href="https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/resource/vetting-security-and-fraud-screening-asylum-process" style="text-decoration-line: none;">heavily vetted</a>&nbsp;that—much like the mythical MS-13 gang member sneaking into America disguised as a child—an aspiring terrorist could find far more efficient ways to get into the country.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Plus, many acts of terrorism have been committed by white men, a demographic President Trump and his NRA supporting-Republican fans seem eager to arm to the teeth.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5. “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun”</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At this point, the NRA’s signature slogan should be burned into the American consciousness alongside the “thoughts and prayers” Republican lawmakers offer after every mass shooting.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The idea that Americans won’t be safe from (immigrants, terrorists, MS-13, shooters, you name it) unless we’re all armed to the teeth has inspired lawmakers—including President Trump—to denounce common sense gun safety measures and instead suggest policies like arming school teacher (the school teacher’s union opposes this safety plan).</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Although there are a handful of anecdotal incidents (widely broadcast by the NRA) of armed individuals intervening to stop a mass shooting, there are similar anecdotal examples of unarmed individuals stopping a mass shooter before they could cause further carnage—most notably&nbsp;<a href="https://www.rawstory.com/2018/04/trumps-silence-waffle-house-shooting-hero-deafening-disgusting/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">James Shaw Jr.</a>, who wrestled the gun away from a mass shooter at a Nashville, Tennessee, Waffle House restaurant.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">At the 2018 NRA convention in Dallas, Texas,&nbsp;Stephen Willeford was celebrated for giving chase to a killer who’d just shot up a church. While&nbsp;Willeford was surely brave, it must be noted that he was able to intervene only after 27 had been mortally wounded.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">6. The Wall will keep danger out&nbsp;</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On Monday, President Donald Trump threatened a government shutdown if Congress doesn’t earmark more money to build a Wall (it’s not clear what happened to Trump’s doubtful claim that Mexico would pay for it–a claim regularly rebutted by Mexican lawmakers).</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Nevertheless building a wall remains popular among Republicans:&nbsp;73 percent saying they back additional border wall construction in a&nbsp;<a href="https://thehill.com/latino/393196-majorities-in-new-poll-against-border-wall-favor-pathway-to-citizenship-for-dreamers" style="text-decoration-line: none;">poll</a>&nbsp;released in June.</font></p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">But as Raw Story and others have previously&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.rawstory.com/2018/07/heres-trump-wants-throw-away-25-billion-used-save-american-lives/" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">reported</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, the Wall is not an effective way to keep drugs out of the country.&nbsp;“He’s using the drug war to pursue his war on immigrants and people of color,” Michael Collins, deputy director at the Drug Policy Alliance’s Office of National Affairs, tells Raw Story.&nbsp;The conservative CATO institute has</span><a href="https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-wall-wont-work" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;noted</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;that the wall probably wouldn’t work to stem the flow of immigrants into the US.&nbsp;“But the biggest practical problem with a wall is its opacity,” CATO wrote. “In fact, many Border Patrol agents oppose a concrete wall for precisely this reason (albeit quietly, given that they were also some of Trump’s biggest supporters during the election).</span></font><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A Border Patrol agent explained why on Fox News.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“A cinder block or rock wall, in the traditional sense, isn’t necessarily the most effective or desirable choice,” the Border Patrol agent told Fox News. “Seeing through a fence allows agents to anticipate and mobilize, prior to illegal immigrants actually climbing or cutting through the fence.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">7. The Socialists are coming and that’s silly—yet terrifying!&nbsp;</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ever since Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez swept the floor with Rep. Joe Crowley in New York’s Congressional primary, the panic on the right has been palpable (although, to be fair, quite a few establishment&nbsp;<a href="https://splinternews.com/do-not-ask-nancy-pelosi-about-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-1827209798" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Democrats</a>&nbsp;seem pretty nervous too).</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The Democratic party is falling apart,” Sean Hannity soberly<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJgeHen7cVM" style="text-decoration-line: none;">&nbsp;intoned</a>. “Her views. Her policy positions are actually downright scary.” The National Review has also discovered newfound concern for the Democratic party’s future. “The Unserious Face of an Unserious Movement,” the magazine&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-socialist-face-unserious-movement/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">warned</a>, next a picture of Ocasio-Cortez making a goofy face.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fact, Ocasio-Cortez’ very serious and not very scary political positions include universal health care and housing as a human right.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But perhaps in this case Hannity—and Republicans—have reason to be concerned. A poll showed that young people are growing increasingly disillusioned with capitalism. Meanwhile, Republicans, people who make more than $100,000 and those 65-and-older still favor capitalism.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">8. Pizzagate, et al.&nbsp;</font></strong></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That just covers views held by a majority of Republicans. It doesn’t even get to the wild conspiracy theories swirling in the fringes of Trump’s base. Allow us to present QAnon, a conspiracy theory even weirder than Pizza-gate. According to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-is-qanon-the-craziest-theory-of-the-trump-era-explained" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Daily Beast</a>, adherents of “QAnon” are convinced an anonymous administration official code-name “Q” has been posting mysterious clues about elite conspiracies involving John McCain, the Supreme Court and Hillary Clinton. Q reportedly leaves “breadcrumbs” in online forums like 8Chan.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Like Pizza-gate, an online conspiracy theory is start to bleed into real life. The Daily Beast reports that QAnon true believers have started staging protests demanding that transparency about “Q”&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-is-qanon-the-craziest-theory-of-the-trump-era-explained" style="text-decoration-line: none;">from the Justice Department.</a>&nbsp;The Beast notes that there’s no evidence that Q is anything more than an Internet huckster playing a prank on gullible conservatives, but in the Trump era, who knows?</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></font></p></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="">==</font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>