Today in Digusting People: Getting Blatant

I actually ran across this one yesterday afternoon, but I'd had enough disgusting people for one day. This is our Attorney General, the country's top law enforcement official, speaking to a gathering of police:

Speaking to a roomful of police officers and prosecutors on Tuesday, Attorney General William P. Barr drew a parallel between protests against soldiers during the Vietnam War and demonstrations against law enforcement today. But this time, he suggested, those who don’t show “respect” to authority could lose access to police services.

“Today, the American people have to focus on something else, which is the sacrifice and the service that is given by our law enforcement officers. And they have to start showing, more than they do, the respect and support that law enforcement deserves,” Barr said in pointed remarks delivered at a Justice Department ceremony to honor police officers.

Barr added that “if communities don’t give that support and respect, they might find themselves without the police protection they need.”

It doesn't take much imagination to get the meaning: "Nice community you got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it."

Alternate reading: "Shut up and do what you're told. Or else."

It's getting more and more obvious that we're dealing with a bunch of fascists making a power grab -- and I'm not just name-calling: Trump and his cronies and cultists really are fascists, and true to form, they've put together an unholy alliance of business, churches, and political figures.

Sound familiar?

But our fascists can't even make the trains run on time.

Meanwhile, Across the Pond

Britain's answer to the wannabe king in our White House isn't having such an easy time of it:

Boris Johnson’s bid to trigger a general election next month has been blocked by MPs following a string of heavy defeats for the government in both houses of parliament.

The prime minister was thwarted three times in the House of Commons: an attempt by opposition parties and Tory rebels to block a no-deal Brexit easily cleared its second and third readings, and Johnson later failed in his attempt to force a snap general election.

This is one of those times I wish we had a parliamentary government, with the head of state and the head of government being different offices. I could wish that Congress would somehow develop a spine -- which is not likely when #MoscowMitch is running the senate to suit himself and Nancy Pelosi seems intent on not rocking the boat -- but we're hampered by the separation of powers, which normally works fairly well -- until the president turns out to be a sociopath with severe ego deficiency who's in it for the money. Johnson can't even hold his own party in line, while our GOP, which has become a nest of racist grifters, falls right into line with whatever Trump wants.

As for the parallels between Johnson and Trump, this was enlightening:

This is Parliamentary Sketch Writer John Crace's take on Johnson's first Prime Minister's Question Time

Practice makes imperfect. There was an air of expectancy on the Tory benches as Boris Johnson prepared to face his first prime minister’s questions. Surely the previous day’s car crash could only have been an aberration. This time their clown prince would prove to be the headline act they had been promised. Bring them sunshine, make them smile. Give them a reason to feel good about their tawdry, shabby lives. Some hope.

Johnson has breezed through life, flailing effortlessly upwards while happily trashing the lives of all those with whom he comes in contact. For him, being the prime minister is merely a position of entitlement rather than of responsibility. The ideal job for someone predisposed to laziness and arrogance. Someone for whom the idea of preparation is an unthinkable admission of failure.

It goes on, describing the train wreck in detail. One can't help but wonder what would happen if Trump had to address Congress directly on major issues. Something very similar, I expect.

Maybe the Brits can pull themselves back from the brink.

Via Joe.My.God.

Oops!

This one's gone viral, but I have to post it here.

A crowd at Modesto’s City Council erupted into laughter when Don Grundmann, the co-organizer of a Straight Pride event planned for that California city in late August, slipped while arguing to the assembled chamber and councilmen.

“We’re a totally peaceful racist group,” proclaimed Grundmann, defending his cause and inspiring a facepalm from one councilwoman and gales of laughter and cheers from the crowd.

And the crowd went wild.

Today's Must-Read: Rebooting America

Starting with the states. It's become painfully obvious that, under the Republican-controlled White House and Senate, the Supreme Court has become a political agency, no matter how we try to pretend that the process is non-partisan. Now the Iowa legislature is going one step farther:

In 2009, Iowa became one of the first states to permit same-sex marriage when its Supreme Court issued a ruling that a ban on marriage equality was unconstitutional. It was a unanimous ruling and a thrilling victory for civil rights.

But this was Iowa, and marriage equality hadn’t yet found support from a majority of Americans. Three of the seven judges were up for re-election in 2010… and all three were booted from their seats after a concerted effort by conservative Christians.

It's taken them ten years, but the GOP-controlled legislature, perhaps emboldened by the brazenness of the national party, are "fixing" the system:

Republicans in the Iowa legislature have proposed two bills, HF 503 and SSB 1101, that would cut short his time in power. Specifically, the bills say the “term of the chief justice serving on the effective date of this Act shall expire on January 15, 2021.” (Cady’s term isn’t supposed to expire until December 31, 2024.)

The bills would also change the way justices are chosen, giving much more power to the party in control… and you’ll never believe this: The party currently controlling all branches of government in Iowa happens to be the GOP.

Republicans are busily remaking the country in their own image -- and if that doesn't scare you, nothing will.

Read the post -- it's fairly short but very instructive.

Today in Disgusting People, Part II: Rewriting History Edition

Robert Jeffress is perhaps one of the most shameless "Christian" hucksters out there. Today he's come out (again) in support of our own fascist dictator wannabe, citing the rise of Hitler:

“We cannot afford to be like German Christians who, in the rise of the evil reign of Adolf Hitler, just remained neutered. They remained silent. And you saw what happened there,” Jeffress said. “I think there’s a similar wave of godlessness that is rising in our country right now and we must push back against that tide.”

What Jeffress refuses to note, of course, is that Hitler rose to power with the support of the German churches. In fact, he made a big deal about how his movement was all about religious freedom:

"We demand the freedom of all religious confessions in the state, insofar as they do not jeopardize the state's existence or conflict with the manners and moral sentiments of the Germanic race. The Party as such upholds the point of view of a positive Christianity without tying itself confessionally to any one confession. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit at home and abroad and is convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only be achieved from within on the basis of the common good before individual good."

Sound familiar?

Can You See Where This Is Headed?

Candace Owen is apparently another of the right-wing's token black "conservatives" who seems to have even less on the ball than most of them. Speaking to a group of UK conservatives:

I actually don’t have any problems at all with the word nationalism. I think that it gets — the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism. Globalism is what I don’t want. So, when you think about whenever we say nationalism, the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. He was a national socialist, but if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine.

“The problem is that he wanted — he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everybody to be German, everybody to be speaking German, everybody to look a different way. That’s not — to me, that’s not nationalism. So, in thinking about how we could go bad down the line, I don’t really have an issue with nationalism. I really don’t. I think that it’s okay.

“It’s important to retain your country’s identity and to make sure that what’s happening here, which I think is incredibly worrisome in terms of just the decrease in the birth rate that we’re seeing in the U.K., is what you kind of want to avoid. So I’m not — I have no problems with nationalism. It’s globalism that I try to avoid.

Keep in mind that "globalist" is Nazi-speak for "vast Jewish conspiracy."

The reality is that we live in a global society already. It starts with economics -- there's a lot of trade between and among the countries of the world, facilitated by an international banking system and a multitude of treaties. There is also, and has been for centuries, is not longer, an interchange of ideas. People, at least some people, seem to have this idea of all these little societies existing in their own little vacuums and having no contact with each other. Horsepucky. We've seen over and over again how technology, religion, even languages get spread around among different groups. As time has gone by, it's just gotten bigger and more complex.

Bottom line: Globalism is here to stay, barring the complete collapse of human civilization.

Given Owen's admiration for Hitler, perhaps this should come as no surprise:

U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) urged Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker early Friday afternoon to investigate career Dept. of Justice employees to ensure they are loyal to President Donald Trump. . . .

"I would hope that wisdom in you as Attorney General," Congressman Gohmert told Whitaker at the Judiciary Committee hearing, "would be to look at the backgrounds, look at the people who are political hacks, and figure out, 'Oh, they're giving me advice on this? This is not for my well-being, this is to hurt the President of the United States.'"

He then urged the Acting AG to ensure career DOJ officials are loyal to the President and the Attorney General.

Granted, Gohmert is the stupidest member of Congress (although he has lots of competition for the title), but this is beyond the Pale, even for him.

Government officials take an oath of loyalty to the Constitution and the country, not to some fat dictator wannabe.

This is what the Republican party has come to.

Slouching Toward Dictatorship

Declaring a "national emergency" is a tried and true method of consolidating power:

President Donald Trump said Frday he is considering declaring a national emergency to help pay for his long-desired border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The president, when asked by ABC News' senior national correspondent Terry Moran during a press conference, acknowledged that he would consider declaring a national emergency to help get funds to build the wall "for the security of our country."

Trump did not elaborate on the details of such a process.

That's because he doesn't know the details.

Fortunately, the Democrats are finally showing some evidence of having developed a spine:

"If President Trump tries to use such thin legal authority to build his wall, Democrats will challenge him in court," said Evan Hollander, a spokesman for House Appropriations chairwoman Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y. "The president's authority in this area is intended for wars and genuine national emergencies. Asserting this authority to build a wasteful wall is legally dubious and would likely invite a court challenge."

Does anyone think that the "national emergency" will end with a wall (which, by the way, in this scenario would cover less than 5% of the border)? I'm waiting for someone to burn down the Reichstag -- um, I mean "Capitol".

If you think I'm overstating the case, get this:

In a recent Arizona Republican Party newsletter, Chairman Jonathan Lines issued marching orders for elected Republican officials in clear, concise, mildly threatening terms:

Lines declared that office holders must "stand with” President Donald Trump. And that it is "non-negotiable."

This is the part that gets hysterical. Unplug your irony meter:

“One of the things I’ve always loved about our party is that we are a big tent. We have room for everyone. That’s why, as your Chairman, I’ve done my best to welcome as many different viewpoints and coalitions as possible into our party… However, while we are accepting of different viewpoints, it is essential that we stay true to our conservative values. And it is non-negotiable that we stand with our President.”

It appears that dissent is not a conservative value.

Both via Joe.My.God.

Addendum: This is truly the right-wing vision for America:

LOESCH on proposal to arm teachers: "Perimeter fences should be locked. Doors should be locked & monitored. You should have video security. If every layer fails, as a last line of defense, a teacher who is trained & capable of acting when needed to defend themselves & students." pic.twitter.com/3qcgbAZhIb

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 4, 2019

Today in Trump's America

This headline should stop you cold:

Poll: More than half of Republicans would support postponing 2020 election

The details:

A poll found that 52% of people who identify as or lean Republican said they would support postponing the 2020 election to ensure that only eligible citizens could vote if it was proposed by President Trump.

The survey, conducted by two academics and published in the Washington Post on Thursday, interviewed a sample of 1,325 Americans from June 5-20 and focused on the 650 people who said they were or leaned toward the GOP.

The poll also found that 56% said they would support such action — which would be taken to stop alleged voter fraud — if it was supported by both Trump and Republican members of Congress.

Ah, yes, "voter fraud." Like the three to five million fraudulent votes for Clinton in 2016. It's more properly termed "election fraud," and guess who's committing it:

Add in the highly questionable gubernatorial results in Georgia, and attempts by Republican legislatures to hamstring incoming Democratic governors and other officials in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan (states, by the way, that went for Trump in 2016), and we begin to see a pattern.

But back to the American Fascist Party, a/k/a Republicans:

Still, it's important to note that no Republican politician, including the president, has actually suggested this. The academics behind the poll, Ariel Malka of Yeshiva University and Yphtach Lelkes of the University of Pennsylvania, said:

Our survey is only measuring reactions to a hypothetical situation. Were Trump to seriously propose postponing the election, there would be a torrent of opposition, which would likely include prominent Republicans. Financial markets would presumably react negatively to the potential for political instability. And this is to say nothing of the various legal and constitutional complications that would immediately become clear. Citizens would almost certainly form their opinions amid such tumult, which does not at all resemble the context in which our survey was conducted.

However, the results shouldn't be simply dismissed, the academics said, because they indicated that there was a high number of Republicans who were willing to buck democratic norms.

"Buck democratic norms"? No, it's called destroying democracy. What's the first thing you do when you want to install an authoritarian regime? You "postpone" elections.

The fact that 52% of Republicans would consider postponing an election for any other reason than actual war on American soil is simply unacceptable.

Thanks to commenter pch1013 at Joe.My.God., at a post that's actually about how delighted the Russians are that Mattis is gone, Key quote:

State TV host Olga Skabeeva surmised that Americans are “losers, since Putin has defeated them in every way.” With a theatrical sigh, her co-host, Evgeny Popov, added: “Trump is ours again — what are you going to do?”

Today in Disgusting People: Aryan Barbie Edition

Who else but Ann Coulter?

Many on the left believe Ann Coulter has become irrelevant, but she still holds sway on the right. The 57-year old may have morphed from conservative pundit to far right wing extremist, but she still has the ability to draw crowds. Coulter has 2.1 million followers on Twitter, over 675,000 followers on Facebook, and is a New York Times bestselling author. And she still influences voters, especially when she goes on Fox News. . . .

Tuesday night on Fox News' "Ingraham Angle," hosted by another extremist, Laura Ingraham, Coulter unleashed what some see as racism and bigotry so extreme it must be countered.

And of course it was on a show hosted by another Aryan Barbie. Here's what caused the outrage:

On Ingraham's Fox News show, Ann Coulter describes her version of the Dem party

"I mean you have the Muslims and the Jews and the various exotic sexual groups and the black church ladies with the college queers ... you must hate white men. It's the one thing they have in common" pic.twitter.com/xGWe0wH2uP

— Andrew Lawrence (@ndrew_lawrence) December 12, 2018

Actually, for Coulter that's not so extreme. And yes, of course she's a racist. It's part of the definition of "conservative."

Let's face it, she's just a loudmouth who will say whatever gets her some attention -- or whatever someone will pay her to say -- and if it's offensive to a majority of Americans, so much the better.

And Keep Cheating

A follow-up to this post from yesterday. The thing to remember about Republicans is, they don't give up:

The North Carolina GOP right now is trying to force a bill through the state legislature that would require all county election boards to be chaired only by Republicans during election years.

While the text of the bill cannot specifically state "all county election boards must be chaired only by Republicans during election years," they've done the next best thing.

""In the even-numbered year, the chair shall be a member of the political party with the second highest number of registered affiliates," the bill states.

Statewide elections are only held in even-numbered years. North Carolina actually has 2.7 million registered Democrats, and 2.1 million registered Republicans.

I have a new slogan for the GOP:

"Vote Republican -- Kiss America Good-Bye."

If You Can't Win, Cheat

The Republican party, which hasn't been real enthusiastic about real democracy for a while, is pulling out all the stops. First, North Carolina:

The strange tale of election-rigging in North Carolina's 9th Congressional District gets stranger. Courtesy of Judd Legum's newsletter, "Popular Information," the state Board's decision to put on hold certification of the race in which Republican Mark Harris leads Democrat Dan McCready by 905 votes just got stranger:

The decision comes after substantial evidence of improprieties involving absentee ballots. A series of affidavits submitted suggests that a man named Leslie McCrae Dowless, who was hired by the Harris campaign through a contractor, systematically falsified, manipulated, and potentially destroyed absentee ballots -- particularly in Bladen County. Harris won Bladen County by 1,557 votes, more than his margin statewide. [districtwide, TS]

In fact, requests for absentee ballots in Bladen ran at 7.5 percent, while elsewhere in the district it was under 3 percent. Furthermore, the high percentage of the requests that went unreturned in Bladen and Robeson Counties — as many as 3,400 — suggests ballots collected by contractors working with Dowless were falsified or destroyed. Of voters in Bladen requesting absentee ballots, 19 percent were Republicans, yet Harris received 61 percent of the absentee vote.

Can you say "election fraud"?

If that doesn't work, cheat harder:

Following a script written in North Carolina two years ago, Wisconsin's Republican-controlled legislature in a lame-duck session on Friday introduced a package of legislation sharply curtailing the authorities of incoming Democrats elected statewide. During a hearing Monday, state Rep. Katrina Shankland (D) called the effort “a slap in the face of every voter who voted in record turnout in the midterms.”

On November 6, Democrat Tony Evers won the governorship, turning out Republican Scott Walker after two terms. Democrat Josh Kaul defeated Brad Schimel, Wisconsin's incumbent attorney general.

Republicans proposed moving the 2020 presidential primary date in an effort to advantage a conservative state Supreme Court justice. Other proposals would weaken the governor's power to appoint members to the Group Insurance Board and Walker’s scandal-wracked Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation Evers has pledged to dissolve. The attorney general's office is also the focus of legislation to minimize its powers by shifting them to the legislature still dominated by the GOP.

The GOP has given up any pretense of wanting to govern. Like their mainstays in the "religious" right, they are only interested in gaining and keeping power, by whatever means necessary. Trump is only the most obvious symptom.

Digby has some historical background.

The King's Jester Has Spoken

Although I don't know of another jester in history whose word became a policy decision. There's just no end to the nonsense. This is from Sean Hannity's radio show on November 30:

CALLER: I haven't heard an idea that I have, and I don't know if it's feasible or not. With the corruption in the Department of Justice, the people that are demanded to appear, they don't appear, they appear, they lie, everything that's going on with all the corruption -- what about -- does President Trump have the authority to do -- have the JAG in the military do a tribunal, and investigate the Department of Justice that way? Where Congress --

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): He actually does have that authority.

CALLER: -- apparently cannot do its job.

HANNITY: Well, it's the -- again, that would be within the realm of the executive branch of the government, which he is the head of. Yeah, he would. And look, I think the president has been -- look, he could have fired Mueller, he could -- and he could do it legally, Alan Dershowitz said it yesterday. He could fire Rosenstein, he could have done that at any point, he didn't.

How magnanimous of him.

Via Dispatches from the Culture Wars, where Ed Brayton points out:

The only time military tribunals can be used for civilians — and even this is highly questionable — is when they are accused of war crimes or participated in a military action against the United States. They cannot be used for civilians under any other circumstances. The Supreme Court ruled this in 1866.

The Founders (and the courts) were very keen on limiting the military's power -- that's why it's under civilian control.

They were equally keen on limiting the president's power -- see Article II of the Constitution, where those powers are laid out.

Of course, now that Hannity's said it, Trump will take it as Holy Writ. I'm sure he'll at least threaten to unleash the military justice system on the DoJ. At which point any military judge with any integrity would resign. Yeah, well -- one can hope.

Today's Must-Read: "By Any Means Necessary"

Tom Sullivan has a piece up at Hullabaloo that underscores what I've been saying for a while about Republicans and their disdain for American-style democracy:

When in January David Frum typed, "If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy," was he writing as a prophet or a historian?

Sullivan follows up with a few examples from this week's elections. Read it.

Today in Right-Wing Civility

Junior on the attack:

Donald Trump Jr. blasted Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) at a boisterous rally in his home state on Friday, calling him a “piece of garbage” for sinking Navy Rear Adm. Ronny Jackson’s nomination to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs earlier this year.

Trump Jr., who headlined a rally for Tester's GOP Senate rival Matt Rosendale and Rep. Greg Gianforte (R), slammed Tester over Jackson's failed VA nomination, saying the Democratic senator had “ruined this guy’s life" after a bitter confirmation process.

President Trump's eldest son accused Tester, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, of putting out “all sorts of baseless accusations” on the orders of Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.).

Do I really need to say anything?

Via Joe.My.God.

"Mob Rule"

That's what Lindsey Graham and the Republicans think of American democracy:

"I'm going to let everybody in these states know what happens if you put the Democratic Party in charge of this country," he said. "You're rewarding mob rule. You're undercutting the rule of law. Don't give these people power."

Says the newest shill for the most corrupt, lawless administration in American history. Remember, he's now supporting a president who thinks he can rule by executive order.

But never fear: The Republicans are going to save the country (This is a must-read):

Our representative democracy is under attack. There is no gunfire, no explosions. But under attack nonetheless. The FBI has implicated Russian agents in manipulating the 2016 elections, potentially with the cooperation of the Donald Trump campaign. But the 2018 elections are under attack today in Georgia, in North Dakota, and elsewhere by U.S. "crisis actors."

Trump, now president, made himself fraudster-in-chief in warning American voters against voting. “All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING," Trump tweeted Saturday night. "Cheat at your own peril. Violators will be subject to maximum penalties, both civil and criminal!”. . .

Trump might well have posted police in armbands outside the polls in minority neighborhoods. Let's not mince words. We know what he and Republican agents across the country are doing. They are openly attempting to steal elections by disenfranchising minority voters. They are trying to intimidate them into staying away from the polls.

Trump is already setting the stage for rejecting the results of the election if it doesn't go his way:

Donald trump took to his "bully pulpit" on Twitter to speak out about voter fraud.

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

All levels of government and Law Enforcement are watching carefully for VOTER FRAUD, including during EARLY VOTING. Cheat at your own peril. Violators will be subject to maximum penalties, both civil and criminal!
7:36 PM - Oct 20, 2018

• 130K

• 86.2K people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacyThis echoes statements made by the president prior to the 2016 election, and is stoking fears that he is attempting to pave the way to declare the elections in question if they do not go his way.

After the 2016 race, Trump claimed that voter fraud affected the outcome, stating that he actually won the popular vote, "if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally."

And Paul Krugman paints a grim picture of what Trump will do if the Democrats take the House.

In the first tweet, Krugman wrote, “If Democrats don’t at least take the House, God help us. But even if they do, we’ll be facing a nightmarish political scene. Republicans will claim that the election was stolen, and deny the majority’s legitimacy.”

He then noted that Trump appointee, VA Secretary Robert Wilkie, is refusing to turn over documents to Congress with Trump’s blessing, adding Wilkie’s defiance is a preview of what is to come.

I keep thinking it can't happen here -- while I'm watching it happen.

Blatant

Looks like they're not even trying to be subtle about vote suppression any more -- at least, in Georgia:

So, someone from the Leisure Senior Center told LaTosha Brown, founder of Black Voters Matter, that the roughly 40 seniors would need to get off the bus that was about to take them to the polls. Black Voters Matter, if you haven't guessed, is a grassroots outreach program whose goal is to help Black people "expand voter engagement." Can't have that in 2018, now can we?

Apparently someone from the Senior Center said they'd received a call about a complaint either to or from (these details are fuzzy) the County Commissioner's office about the Black Voters Matter bus, and whether or not it should be allowed to transport the seniors to the polling place. Now, keep in mind, there is no law against any bus, from transporting people to the polls in Georgia. But not wanting to make trouble in the small town, they complied.

So, the bus they'd organized, for which they'd gotten permission ahead of time to bring, already boarded with senior citizens, was unloaded. Even worse, the Senior Center had their own bus they'd arranged to transport the seniors to the polls, but they cancelled that bus in the midst of everything, too. So there was no voting for these senior citizens yesterday.

The horrible part is that the people who organized the bus were so cooperative. I suspect, if I were in that situation, whoever wanted me to take the seniors off the bus would have gotten a big "F You" for their trouble.

I don't know that I really need to add anything, except to note that no one at the County Commissioner's Office seems to know anything about a complaint about Black seniors voting. They did, however, come out with a statement, which in itself is a hoot:

October 15, 2018

For Immediate Release:

Jefferson County operates a Senior Center that provides meals and entertainment to senior citizens in Jefferson County three days per week. The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners has a long standing practice of not allowing political activities during normal business hours or at County sponsored activities. These senior citizens are under the complete care and supervision of Jefferson County while they are at the Senior Center. Jefferson County Administration felt uncomfortable with allowing Senior Center patrons to leave the facility in a bus with an unknown third party. Additionally, the event in question that took place at the Jefferson County Senior Center was led by the President of the Jefferson County Democratic Party and as such was considered a political event. No seniors at the Jefferson County Senior Center were denied their right to vote. In fact, Senior Center staff routinely arrange Jefferson County Public Transit to transport senior citizens to vote. Jefferson County invites and encourages all registered voters to vote from October 15-November 2 from 8 AM to 5 PM, October 27 from 9 AM to 4 PM and on election day November 6 from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

I can't even highlight the most risible parts -- there are too many.

I guess this is what we can look forward to for this election -- except I think most places will be a little bit more subtle about it.

Maybe.

And If They Can't Win Elections Fairly

They'll rig them. From Tom Sullivan at Hullabaloo. Key quote:

If they cannot win democratically, Republicans "will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy," David Frum wrote in the Atlantic. But they will hold onto the trappings of democracy so long as they lend them a modicum of public legitimacy. Until like boasting about principles and morality, they no longer care about keeping up pretenses.

Republicans control more than half of state legislatures. How fair do you think those elections are going to be?

Yes, Of Course

Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed as a Supreme Court justice. Did anyone think anything else was going to happen?

That, and the rest of the news is too depressing to comment on. If you really want a good take on how we're shuffling down the road to fascism -- and I mean that literally -- take a look at the posts at Hullabaloo over the past day or three. This one is key. It's really too intricate for a short quote, but here's the lead-in:

Please read this sobering assessment of our current moment by Christopher R. Browning,  historian of the Holocaust, Nazi Germany and Europe between the two world wars. It's important. He draws some very uncomfortable parallels and also explains some important differences which are unfortunately not at all comforting.

Particularly noteworthy is the role filled by Mitch McConnell:

If the US has someone whom historians will look back on as the gravedigger of American democracy, it is Mitch McConnell. He stoked the hyperpolarization of American politics to make the Obama presidency as dysfunctional and paralyzed as he possibly could. As with parliamentary gridlock in Weimar, congressional gridlock in the US has diminished respect for democratic norms, allowing McConnell to trample them even more. Nowhere is this vicious circle clearer than in the obliteration of traditional precedents concerning judicial appointments. Systematic obstruction of nominations in Obama’s first term provoked Democrats to scrap the filibuster for all but Supreme Court nominations. Then McConnell’s unprecedented blocking of the Merrick Garland nomination required him in turn to scrap the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations in order to complete the “steal” of Antonin Scalia’s seat and confirm Neil Gorsuch. The extreme politicization of the judicial nomination process is once again on display in the current Kavanaugh hearings.

Even more than Trump, McConnell is the embodiment of what the Republican party has become.

Tristero has an interesting post on Facebook's role in the debacle of November, 2016:

The Autocracy App, a devastating indictment of Facebook and other predatory social media by Jacob Weisberg, also should not be missed (it's behind a paywall, so buy a copy of the print edition, or subscribe). Once again, I'm struck by how incredibly stupid the digital engineers designing the 21st Century are.

Stupid? Yes, about everything that truly matters.

Mastering C++ and other computer "languages" in order to create a social network platform requires merely the ability to master rigid and fairly straightforward logical and mathematical procedures. On the other hand, creating a social network that doesn't directly lead to genocidal horrors — as Facebook's platforms did in Myanmar — now, that's really fucking hard. That takes more than programming ability. That takes a deep understanding of ethics, compassion, empathy, and a willingness to tolerate limits on one's own will to power. That takes genius.

My favorite quote:

Look, I've got nothing against STEM. Like any non-Republican, I admire and respect scientific information and reason. But a culture that worships STEM like ours? A culture where the most highly educated and financially rewarded citizens are so morally stunted they actually mistake libertarianism — a crude rationalization of narcissistic indulgence — for a philosophy?

Best put-down of libertarianism I've seen in a long time. I usually just content myself with noting that it's an ideology that appeals to the morally bankrupt.

Tom Sullivan has this commentary:

"This is exactly what the Kavanaugh nomination has come to represent," writes Gail Collins in the New York Times. "A vote for the nomination became a symbolic vote for a political ethos that thinks grabbing private parts is fun and complaining about sexual assault is a threat to young manhood."

And of course, there's Fox. From Digby, quoting an article at The Daily Beast:

Charlie Sykes, a longtime conservative radio host, noted that the scandals and boycotts haven’t hurt Fox because the network understands it will stay in business by “tending to and feeding the tribe.”

“Fox followed their audience into full-on Trumpism, making themselves into a safe space for the right,” Sykes said. “The scandals don't hurt Fox for the same reasons that Trump's scandals and lies don't seem to hurt him. Fox is a reflection of this new political culture as much as they are its creator.”

“The audience/base doesn't care as long as they own the libs.”

That's all they care about -- consciously, at least: they need an enemy to validate themselves, and at this stage of our history, that enemy is you and me.

That's it. There are a couple of other posts worthy looking at, but those above are the ones I think are key to getting a clear picture of how far down the toilet this country is.

If I can manage to get past the Chicago Marathon, I'm going to go down and look at real dinosaurs.

It's Not Just Elections Any More

When they go after Star Wars, they've gone too far:

Just like the 2016 presidential election, 2017's release of "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" was marred by a massive campaign designed to further undermine American society – a campaign that included Russian trolls, according to new research from the University of Southern California. The study shows that the majority of negative tweets sent to the film's director were "politically motivated," or "not even human" – in other words, Russian bots.

A research paper by Morten Bay, "Weaponizing the haters: The Last Jedi and the strategic politicization of pop culture through social media manipulation," reveals the goal: "further propagating a narrative of widespread discord and dysfunction in American society," as The Hill reported.

Included in that goal was the support of "extreme right-wing causes and the discrimination of gender, race or sexuality."

I'd call this the shape of things to come, but it's already here. And as usual, the press didn't dig quite deep enough. In fact, I'd say the press is on board, if unwittingly: this is the sort of things that generates headlines and very serious discussions among TV pundits.

"The study finds evidence of deliberate, organized political influence measures disguised as fan arguments. The likely objective of these measures is increasing media coverage of the fandom conflict, thereby adding to and further propagating a narrative of widespread discord and dysfunction in American society. Persuading voters of this narrative remains a strategic goal for the U.S. alt-right movement, as well as the Russian Federation."

(Emphasis added.)

I wonder how the Russians have contributed to the Kavanaugh hearings.

They Won't Stop Until We Make Them

Not only does the Trump administration have no respect for the law, it has no respect for basic human decency. They're still putting children in concentration camps:

In shelters from Kansas to New York, hundreds of migrant children have been roused in the middle of the night in recent weeks and loaded onto buses with backpacks and snacks for a cross-country journey to their new home: a barren tent city on a sprawling patch of desert in West Texas.

Until now, most undocumented children being held by federal immigration authorities had been housed in private foster homes or shelters, sleeping two or three to a room. They received formal schooling and regular visits with legal representatives assigned to their immigration cases.

But in the rows of sand-colored tents in Tornillo, Tex., children in groups of 20, separated by gender, sleep lined up in bunks. There is no school: The children are given workbooks that they have no obligation to complete. Access to legal services is limited.

These midnight voyages are playing out across the country, as the federal government struggles to find room for more than 13,000 detained migrant children — the largest population ever — whose numbers have increased more than fivefold since last year.

Under American law, anyone who is on U.S. soil has the right to apply for asylum. Also under American law, anyone who needs legal counsel is entitled to have it provided.

And if we're not able to take adequate care of detained children, we really need to get our act together.

Via BarkBarkWoofWoof.