Skip to content

Month: September 2017

No country for old white men by @BloggersRUs

No country for old white men
by Tom Sullivan


Still from Fargo.

An emotionally damaged president, a West Wing run by Batman henchmen, the Russian government, the Russian mafia (same thing?), money laundering, armed militia in body armor, “free speech” white nationalists waving Nazi and Confederate flags. It feels as if we are all extras in the next Joel and Ethan Coen film. We know somebody’s going into the wood chipper. It’s just a question of who and when. Maybe the country?

The script still needs some doctoring, though. There’s the still-open question of whether the president will or won’t deport 800,000 undocumented DREAM kids, upending lives and families to satisfy the demands of his MAGA red hats. DREAMERS might go in first … in six months. Meaning the Attention Junkie-In-Chief will have 5-1/2 months to puff out his chest about the deportations at rallies and then change his mind if he thinks that works better for him when the deadline approaches.

Then there is the matter of building The Wall now that there is Hurricane Harvey to cleanup after and Irma on the way. UNLESS. Unless, he can get THE MEXICANS to pay for it. Is Javier Bardem available? He might accomplish what the president cannot. He too had the creepy hair thing going.

Republican strategist Rick Wilson has some ideas on the president’s character arc:

First, the basic, fundamental problem is President Short Attention Span himself. Trump’s inability to focus for longer than the duration of a tweet will make his troubles in the coming months much, much worse. Consider last Sunday as an example. At first, he greeted the day with a few on-point messages of support for the people hit hard by Harvey. Then things went off the rails, with a logrolling promotion of Sheriff David Clarke’s book, some bleating about Mexico paying for the imaginary Wall, and a swipe at Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri. While FEMA, the State of Texas, and tens of thousands of volunteers buckled down for recovery operations, Donald Trump was engaged in his usual Twitter logorrhea.

If you thought that Trump would improve once Steve Bannon, Seb Gorka and a few of the other hangers-on were fired, think again. Trump is always Trump, and never, ever improves. Even the scripted statements and speeches where he reads from the teleprompter are done through gritted teeth, and you can practically see the mania building as he plots his next attention-whoring outrage. John Kelly’s thankless task won’t get easier. The prisoner never loves his warden, even if he obeys the rules from time to time. The White House staff will need to keep the shock collar charged in the next 10 days, as the scope of the deaths and destruction becomes clear.

Second, Donald Trump’s disaster on race isn’t over, no matter how many variations of the staff-driven cleanup speeches and remarks he reads. The cat was out of the bag the moment the “both sides” speech lowered the bar on presidential moral character, and it’s cracked the loyalty of his Cabinet and deeply embarrassed an already shamed and disgusted Republican Congress.

For the climax? Sally Bradshaw, once a top adviser to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, suggested to Buzzfeed a Reckoning:

“Donald Trump is anti-woman, anti-Hispanic, anti-black, anti-anything that would bring the country together,” she responded when pressed further. “The only thing he is for is himself. Those in Republican leadership who have enabled his behavior by standing silent or making excuses for him deserve the reckoning that will eventually come …

Joel? Ethan? In case you need a parade rather than a toe to advance the plot, we’ve got a location scouted. Seriously, they filmed a gay pride parade here for My Fellow Americans. But you’ll want something a little different. A retired businesswoman posted this Monday on Facebook:

Not In That Parade – Not This Black Woman Who Knows History: This is what I was suppose to look like in today’s Labor Day Parade in Canton in support of the Western Region Coalition of Raising Wages NC as a representative of Asheville Buncombe County NAACP (but I would’ve had a smile). In our effort to put Labor (workers) back into Labor Day, we were all coming dressed as workers – me as a woman in business.

To our dismay, when Bruce and I entered the float lineup location at 9:07am, the first thing we saw was two trucks with very large confederate flags (the battle flag of North Virginia led Robert E. Lee and later adopted by southerns as a symbol of their heritage which included hate of black people, terrorism visited upon black people and murder of black people, and some whites of good will, too.). With a knot in my chest, we proceeded forward to our spot, #33, where we sat for a few minutes. We decided to head back to the entry just to see what was up…then there were 3 trucks. Without missing a beat, we decided to leave.

Whether those three trucks marked with HATE were officially in the parade or not, I cannot say. But I do know they had to pass through a check point manned by Canton Police. Why did they not turn them away?

We stopped for breakfast in South Asheville. Those flags were a trigger…all through breakfast I kept having flashes of the HATE filled images of white people waving confederate flags screaming at black children integrating schools, signs that read Negroes go back to Africa, Keep Our Schools White, white child with KKK uniform. The images of people being trampled on Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma on what became known as Bloody Sunday because it ended in Alabama state police and volunteers tearing through a column of black non-violent demonstrators with tear gas, nightsticks and whips, beating the protesters.That HATEFUL flag has been waved, cheered for and rallied around by whites with rage and hate in their eyes, hearts AND actions. The link between the confederate flag and a legacy of racial HATRED is inextricable.

Heritage yes…heritage that had it as the battle flag of a treasonous group of people who fought to keep black people enslaved. Heritage that taught and supported denigration of black people all during Jim Crow until today. A heritage that terrorized and killed black people with their KKK hoods on and without.

Now they wave it and march with Nazis and the so called Alt-Right and our president has normalized it. It’s just plain HATEFUL…sickening.

There are plenty of people around this country who believe they no longer receive the deference to which people of their hue were once entitled. Besides being a futile and stupid gesture of defiance, perhaps they embrace the Lost Cause because subconsciously they see their futures as just that. Still, nothing says Loser quite like the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. Maybe irony isn’t dead after all.

It is easy enough around here to muster extras who can supply their own Confederate flags. But for filmmakers they are a little harder to direct [NSFW; Dalton, GA]:

“God don’t like ugly.”

* * * * * * * *

Request a copy of For The Win, my county-level election mechanics primer, at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

They want their mass deportations and they want them now

They want their mass deportations and they want them now

by digby

If you think a congressional DACA fix is going to be easy, read this from the right wing firebrand Kurt Schlicter at Townhall:

After two years of lectures about “principles” and “the Rule of law” by the establishment-loving hacks furious that normal Americans rejected them and elected Donald Trump, their performance last week demonstrated that their high-minded dedication to conservatism is all a fraud. It’s not about “principles” or “the Rule of Law.” It’s only about holding on to power – theirs.

Let’s take the latest in a seemingly endless series of #fails from that smarmy dope Paul Ryan, King of the Fredocons. First, he rushed to help out the liberals with their ridiculous narrative about how Donald Trump is a “Nazi” (Wait, I thought the narrative memo had him being a Russian fifth columnist – damn, our president sure is versatile!). You couldn’t keep Ryan from eagerly jumping in with his usual more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger-about-Trump thing to help the left push its latest meme. Antifa though? Not so fast! Ryan, the poodle that he is, obediently waited until Nancy Pelosi led the way and offered some tepid words about these commie blackshirts and their thirst for blood before Brave Sir Ryan ran out and offered some tepid words about these commie blackshirts and their thirst for blood.

Paul Ryan is a guy who can’t even take his own side in a fight – or, more to the point, our side in a fight. Now, a quick quiz: When Donald Trump proposed to keep his promise to the Republican voters who elected him and end the unconstitutional DACA program that the Obama administration enacted to ignore duly-enacted immigration laws, what did Passive Paul do?

A. Ryan immediately offered his support for the president undoing this Rule of Law abomination that Ryan expressly called “unconstitutional” on Fox back in October 2014.

B. Ryan immediately demanded the president not undo this Rule of Law abomination that Ryan expressly called “unconstitutional” on Fox back in October 2014.

C. Ryan immediately asked someone to explain what the phrase “keep his promise to the Republican voters who elected him” means.

D. B and C

So, for the benefit of us suckers, basically Ryan was against DACA when it couldn’t be undone, but is now panicking when it can be undone because it might actually be undone – unless President Trump lets Ryan roll him, in which case he deserves to be laughed at in exactly the way his Never Trump enemies will laugh at him.

Gosh, this DACA two-step kind of reminds me of Obamacare and how gung-ho the True Conservatives were to repeal it when they couldn’t repeal it and how suddenly they turned ungung-ho when they actually could. Weird. If I was cynical, I’d say that it seems like the establishment GOP has been lying to our faces for years and years, but that couldn’t be true because our establishment betters have principles and stuff.

Of course, it’s not just the Wisconsin Wimp shifting into conservagimp mode. Soon-to-be-former Senator Jeff Flake, that braying doofus, naturally joined the cave-in chorus. Ben Sasse, Flake’s braying doofus doppelgänger, probably joined in, but I refuse to spend valuable time looking at his tedious Twitter feed to find out. And since it involved betraying Republicans, you have got to assume John “Blue Falcon” McCain is in on it too.

Yeah, because “principles” and stuff. Because enforcing the law is the most important thing there is, except for doing what the rich guys who fund the establishment want. That’s really the most important thing.

Yeah, so after nearly two years of tiresome finger-wagging about “the Rule of Law” and how we need to put our “principles” above our desire for “winning,” the whole sordid scam we always knew it always was is revealed for the world to see. They can’t hide it anymore and they aren’t even trying. Their glorious “conservative principles” aren’t principles at all but a skeevy ploy designed to tie our hands and keep us from pursuing policy goals our establishment coalition partners disfavor. They want open borders. They want illegals. They want cheap foreign labor that doesn’t get uppity to man their donors’ corporations so the Captains of Crony Capitalism don’t have to fuss with American workers who won’t tolerate being treated like chattel. Yeah, “we’re better than that” all right – if you mean that we are better than enforcing the laws the American people passed through a constitutional process if the ruling class decides it doesn’t like them.

“The Rule of Law” is for us, not for them. “The Rule of Law” was supposed to be a shield to protect us from the ravages of the powerful, but our Truer-Than-You Cons use it as a sword to cut our legs out from under us and keep us from defending our own interests.

Oh, you can’t possibly exercise the power against our leftist enemies that they always exercise against you. Because principles.

Oh, you can’t possibly be uncouth and actually fight back against our enemies. Because principles.

Oh, a principle is getting in the way of something the establishment wants? What’s a principle?

So now, suddenly, Congress is moving to try and keep DACA alive through – gasp! – legislation, though that’s probably not going to happen since most GOP legislators understand that amnesty is ballot box poison. See, that’s why they loved DACA – they can’t pass it as a law, so they simply feigned outrage for the benefit of us rubes when Obama did exactly what they wanted with his pen.

And in the most Congressional GOP move of all possible Congressional GOP moves, they now want to try to pass a proposed DACA fix using Democrat votes and so their proposed deal to the Democrats – who really, really want 800,000 future voters – is to trade it for…wait for it…still waiting…nothing. The GOP isn’t asking for anything. No new limits on immigrants, no reform of chain immigration, certainly no wall. Nothing. I hope the dealer tries out this innovative new negotiation strategy on me the next time I bargain to lease a fine German sports sedan.

Actually, the GOP does get something – shafted, as usual. Yeah, their deal is we give you Democrats what you want and, in exchange, you call us racists when Elizabeth Warren proposes to declare all these middle-aged Dreamer kids US citizens. Because, you know, they had dreams and stuff.

Pathetic. You know, it’s becoming clearer and clearer that the real reason the Republicans don’t want to end the filibuster to allow them to pass legislation is that they would then be expected to pass legislation that their voters want and the GOP establishment doesn’t.

Here’s the thing. There are two parties in America, one to the right and one to the left. The left/right spectrum used to be the only axis that mattered, and the coalitions within the parties fit pretty well, if not perfectly. But the bipartisan establishment, the meritless meritocracy that rules us, grew more arrogant even as it grew more inept. It ignored problems and troubling trends even as it cashed-in for itself over the decades. I remember working in Congress back in Washington in 1986, and the region was not rich and it was not fancy. But now it’s fantastically rich and fantastically fancy. But the establishment ignored the normals out in America as it gorged on the fruits of the normals’ labor, and that’s why a second axis arose and intersected with the American politician spectrum. This new axis measures pro- or con- regarding the status quo and the ruling class. So now there are really four political parties stuffed into two political party infrastructures:

Right, pro-establishment (The RINOs)

Right, anti-establishment (The Trump voters)

Left, pro-establishment (Hillary’s snobby urban corporatist jerk corps)

Left, anti-establishment (The Bernie/Warren/Stalin Axis of Venezuela)

This explains why we see the DC establishment unifying to protect its power and privilege – and holding us normals in utter contempt. Most Democrat senators and Republican senators have much more in common with each other than with us – to the GOP establishment, Trump’s clearly the bigger threat than a counterpart across the aisle. It also explains why you hear about Bernie supporters who went for Trump instead of Felonia von Pantsuit. That’s the fault line – the desire to keep or destroy this monstrous status quo. This new axis will reshape the political parties as their uncomfortable coalitions jockey for control of their respective party’s infrastructure (Yeah, the Dems have big problems too). Hell, it may reshape – violently – our whole country if we aren’t careful.

The fact is that the establishment doesn’t care about “the Rule of Law” or “principles” – it cares about its own power and maintaining the status quo. So keep that in mind the next time you hear some establishment snob lecturing you on how you are morally obligated not to do anything to advance you own interests because of “principles.”

It’s all just another lie

Trump loves executive orders. The idea that he’s suddenly concerned about this one’s “constitutionality” is a joke. And the so-called “deadline” from the GOP Attorneys General is bullshit. It’s arbitrary and could easily be ignored. In fact, he could just let it take its course through the courts without defending it if he wanted to. If this six months thing is true then he’s punting to congress so he can extract something from Democrats. This rant shows that it’s not going to be easy.

His cultists are febrile and agitated.They want their mass deportations and they want them now. It is something that gives them deep, deep pleasure. They’re not going to give them up without a fight.

.

Trump loves the Saudi bling

Trump loves the Saudi bling

by digby


Of course he does:

During the presidential campaign, Donald Trump attacked Hillary Clinton for accepting money from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, complaining during one of the debates, “These are people that kill women and treat women horribly and yet you take their money.”

That was, of course, before he made his first foreign visit as president to Saudi Arabia—and accepted dozens of gifts from the kingdom. In fact, during Trump’s visit, the White House accepted at least 83 separate gifts from Saudi Arabia, according to a document The Daily Beast has obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request to the State Department. 


The gifts range from the regal (“Artwork featuring picture of President Trump”) to the martial (multiple swords, daggers, leather ammo holders and holsters), to the baroque (tiger and cheetah fur robes, and a dagger made of pure silver with a mother of pearl sheath). Now when the president is contemplating the state of Saudi women’s rights, he can do so before a “large canvas artwork depicting [a] Saudi woman.”

Amusing as the gifts may be, they are emblematic of a more serious issue: Trump’s embrace of the Saudi regime, a stark reversal from his campaign rhetoric. During the campaign, Trump accused the regime of everything from being responsible for 9/11 to failing to “reimburse us the way we should be reimbursed,” going so far as to threaten to stop buying their oil if they didn’t shape up.

Trump’s decision to make his first foreign visit to Saudi Arabia was a singular one, breaking with a long-standing presidential tradition of first visiting Mexico or Canada.

“Trump’s decision to visit Saudi first clearly signaled his top prioritization of America’s most profitable relationship with its number one weapons client in the world,” Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division, told The Daily Beast.

No less noteworthy than the visit itself was the administration’s conduct during it. During the visit, the Trump administration announced a $110 billion arms deal with the Saudis, totaling $350 billion over 10 years. This represented a decisive reversal of the Obama administration’s 2016 policy of blocking certain arms sales to the regime because of civilian deaths in Yemen.

As Whitson put it, “The Trump administration has gone well beyond any prior U.S. administration in its embrace of Saudi Arabia, not only with its vastly expanded, unrestricted arms sales to Saudi, but in a deliberate refusal to criticize the country’s atrocious domestic rights record and reckless, catastrophic, military campaign in Yemen.”

But hes an isoltionist so we don’t have to think about all that ickiness anymore. Actually, no:

Kristine Beckerle, a researcher at Human Rights Watch specializing in gulf countries, echoed Whitson’s concerns, telling The Daily Beast, “Since Trump has become president, you see this real escalation in terms of what the U.S. is doing in Yemen.”

Beckerlie cites the dramatic rise in drone strikes and U.S. ground operations in Yemen as evidence of the administration’s increased involvement in the conflict. Meanwhile, Yemen, the poorest country in the region, is being ravaged by a cholera epidemic that Oxfam recently called the “largest ever recorded.”

“There’s… no doubt that the Saudis feel they have total leeway to get away with whatever they want a recipe for further abuse, extremism and destabilization in the region,” Whitson said.

I’m very glad we didn’t elect a warmonger. That would have been bad.

You can see the whole list of the Trump administration’s haul of beautiful bling over at the Daily Beast.

.

America is suicidal

America is suicidal

by digby

I honestly don’t understand this. Sure, national Republicans clearly believe that suppressing the vote works for them. But they also seem to think that foreign countries deciding our elections is just fine. Apparently they believe it will always be to their benefit —  which is interesting.

And on the state level, both parties are blase about foreign interference and other forms of election hacking:

The U.S. needs hundreds of millions of dollars to protect future elections from hackers — but neither the states nor Congress is rushing to fill the gap.

Instead, a nation still squabbling over the role Russian cyberattacks played in the 2016 presidential campaign is fractured about how to pay for the steps needed to prevent repeats in 2018 and 2020, according to interviews with dozens of state election officials, federal lawmakers, current and former Department of Homeland Security staffers and leading election security experts.

These people agree that digital meddlers threaten the public’s confidence in America’s democratic process. And nearly everyone believes that the danger calls for collective action — from replacing the voting equipment at tens of thousands of polling places to strengthening state voter databases, training election workers and systematically conducting post-election audits.

But those steps would require major spending, and only a handful of states’ legislatures are boosting their election security budgets, according to a POLITICO survey of state election agencies. And leaders in Congress are showing no eagerness to help them out.

“States ought to get their own money up,” said Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), who chairs the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, which oversees federal elections. “We’re borrowing money. We got a big debt limit coming up.”

In fact, some in the Capitol are trying to defund the 15-year-old federal agency that helps states and counties administer elections. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, which has three full-time staffers examining elections, would also see budget cuts in the pending congressional spending bills.

“We just don’t fund elections,” said Lawrence Norden, deputy director of the Democracy Program at New York University Law School’s Brennan Center for Justice, who co-wrote a recent report on digitally securing America’s elections. “Nobody’s really sure who’s responsible for this.”

Our leaders are actually creating an existential threat to our democracy.

.

The very definition of a whitewash

The very definition of a whitewash

by digby

There’s a lot of talk these days about “fake news” and propaganda. It’s a big problem. But one of the unfortunate side-effects is that more sophisticated racists who aren’t waving swastikas or wearing hoods are seen as less threatening.

Here’s an example of a verified hate group being mainstreamed because they don’t sound like Milo or Richard Spencer:

In the wake of reports that President Trump will repeal DACA, the executive order that protects 800,000 undocumented immigrants who were brought to the country as children, CNN hosted a debate on Monday morning.

The participants were Democratic strategist Maria Cordona and Dan Stein, who was identified as the president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

CNN did not mention FAIR’s deep roots in white supremacy, eugenics, and white nationalism. The organization was founded by John Tanton, who founded FAIR to keep America “a majority-white population.”

“As Whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night? Or will there be an explosion?,” Tanton said in 1986.

In 1993, Tanton said “I’ve come to the point of view that for European-American society and culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a clear one at that.”

Stein himself, who has worked at the organization since 1982, said he believes America’s immigration laws, which he regards as too permissive, are an effort “to retaliate against Anglo-Saxon dominance.” He said that the current generation of immigrants is engaged in “competitive breeding” and that “[m]any of them hate America, hate everything the United States stands for.”

Stein was also involved in the publication of The Social Contract, a journal published by Tanton, that featured white nationalist authors.

Stein recently suggested that, if America does not crack down on immigration, it will lead to an insurrection. “The immigration issue is going to be dealt with one way or the other. Now, it’s either going to be dealt with responsibly and reasonably, or it will be decided in the streets, because the public is going to get so frustrated with total inaction,” Stein said in July.

Remembering Katrina

Remembering Katrina

by digby

Ten years ago I wrote about Katrina. I thought I’d put it up again as we deal with an unreconstructed racist president who got his picture taken in Houston and told us all that everyone was very happy.

I took a lot of heat for this piece at the time, which was posted at the Campaign for America’s Future. Many people assured me that racism was on its way out and my view of the response was a relic of the past. That was before the Obama backlash and before Trump proved that was an optimistic view.

[Many of the links are dead, unfortunately.]

Katrina: “It’s The Blacks”

September 4, 2005 BATON ROUGE, La. — They locked down the entrance doors Thursday at the Baton Rouge hotel where I’m staying alongside hundreds of New Orleans residents driven from their homes by Hurricane Katrina.

“Because of the riots,” the hotel managers explained. Armed Gunmen from New Orleans were headed this way, they had heard. 


“It’s the blacks,” whispered one white woman in the elevator. “We always worried this would happen.”

When the New Orleans levees broke in those awful early days after Hurricane Katrina, the country was riveted to its TV’s watching a slow moving disaster unfold before our eyes. As the flood waters rose and we started to see people walking waist deep through fetid water and scramble to their rooftops in hope of rescue a narrative began to take shape that would seriously affect the response: the city was under seige, wild gangs were terrorizing people in their homes and the police had completely abandoned their posts.

It started with looting,the most prosaic and common crime in any natural disaster, sometimes perpetrated out of opportunism and often out of necessity. It was immediately characterized in the press as criminal and dangerous. At least where some people were concerned.

Snopes.com captured this famous photographic juxtaposition of Katrina victims on Tuesday August 30th. In the first, the African American is characterized as walking through water after having “looted a grocery store” while in the other, the white victims were said to have “found” bread and water. It was the beginning of several days of ever rising hysteria, particularly on the right, about “looters,” which would cause the authorities to make some terrible decisions.

Perhaps most memorable example of the right wing frenzy was a column by Peggy Noonan in which she stated quite blandly:

As for the tragic piggism that is taking place on the streets of New Orleans, it is not unbelievable but it is unforgivable, and I hope the looters are shot. A hurricane cannot rob a great city of its spirit, but a vicious citizenry can.

 The blog Is That Legal quoted AEI fellow Ted Frank writing this:

I think shooting looters is a compassionate way to protect the safety and well-being of law-abiding citizens. Time after time it has been shown that the way to prevent deadly anarchic riots is to take firm decisive action to prevent matters from getting to a tipping point.

It’s important to remember that at this time the “piggish” footage everyone saw featured slow, calm scenes of people inside Big Box stores and Footlockers taking goods, often in the presence of police, and then wading through water holding the bags above their heads. It wasn’t anything like the frenzied scenes of Baghdad after the invasion, (when the right was far less agitated at the sight of massive, unrestrained looting under the noses of the US military. If I recall correctly, they characterized it as “stuff happens.”)

There were rampant rumors of violence, but no pictures of it despite the fact that photographers and film crews were all over the city. Still, the idea took hold and reports of running street battles and armed gangs were rampant.

On August 31st, the world woke up to see a sight that nobody ever expected to see in the United States — hundreds of Americans abandoned at the New Orleans convention center with no water, no food, begging the only person they recognized, entertainer Harry Connick Jr, (who had made his way down there on his own) to please help them. Hour after hour we watched the shocking scenes of mostly elderly and mothers with young children — the most vulnerable residents of the city who hadn’t been able to evacuate abandoned. The sun was shining. The camera crews were everywhere. There were pictures of national guard trucks driving by little old ladies in wheelchairs as people screamed for help. All over the country, people wondered,’where is the government, where is the Red Cross?”

We found out a few days later that the Red Cross was told not to go into the city by the authorities (which ones remains under dispute) because it was too unsafe. The government wanted to quell the violence first — violence we continued to hear a lot about, but never actually saw. Rumors of gang rapes and shoot outs and even necrophilia in the convention center and the Superdome continued to be reported all day in the media as we watched the dehydrated elderly and crying babies waiting for rescue.

“This place is going to look like Little Somalia,” Brig. Gen. Gary Jones, commander of the Louisiana National Guard’s Joint Task Force told Army Times Friday as hundreds of armed troops under his charge prepared to launch a massive citywide security mission from a staging area outside the Louisiana Superdome.

 Here was a typical right wing blog post during this period:

Security has become a major concern now, because the NOPD is ineffective and the looters terrorists are roaming the streets. Word is now that they’re lighting buildings on fire, but I can’t confirm that. Anyway, we have to run guard shifts and patrol and it limits our downtime. 

It is a zoo out there though, make no mistake. It’s the wild kingdom. It’s Lord of the Flies. That doesn’t mean there’s murder on every street corner. But what it does mean is that the rule of law has collapsed, that there is no order, and that property rights cannot and are not being enforced. Anyone who is on the streets is in immediate danger of being robbed and killed. It’s that bad.

There were two incidents on bridges that perfectly captured this racist paranoia. (Bridges certainly seem to have a special place in American racial iconography, don’t they?) The first was a shooting at the Danziger bridge on September 4th, which was widely reported as a sniper attack on contractors trying to fix the bridge. Blogger Michele Malkin commented:

It’s outrageous that there are idiots shooting at contractors trying to repair structural damage in New Orleans. Thank God the police are fighting back.

(As it turned out, the police were indicted on murder charges. According to the prosecutors, the men they shot were unarmed and innocent.)

On a different night, at a different bridge, another side of the same story unfolded. Abandoned at the convention center, without water, fed up with promises of imminent rescue, some of the residents decided to try leave the city on foot. They were stopped by men with guns:

The officers fired warning shots into the air and then leveled their weapons at members of the crowd, Bradshaw said. He approached, hands in the air, displaying his paramedic’s badge.

“They told us that there would be no Superdomes in their city,” the couple wrote. “These were code words that if you are poor and black, you are not crossing the Mississippi River — and you weren’t getting out of New Orleans.”

And when exhausted hurricane victims set up temporary shelters on the highway, Gretna police came back a few hours later, fired shots into the air again, told people to “get the f — off the bridge” and used a helicopter to blow down all the makeshift shelters, the paramedics said.

When the officers had pushed the crowd back far enough, one of them took the group’s food and water, dropped it in the trunk of a patrol car and drove away

.

The Gretna police chief told the UPI:

“If we had opened the bridge, our city would have looked like New Orleans does now: looted, burned and pillaged.”

The LA Times went back and looked at some of the stories and dryly noted:

Journalists and officials who have reviewed the Katrina disaster blamed the inaccurate reporting in large measure on the breakdown of telephone service, which prevented dissemination of accurate reports to those most in need of the information. Race may have also played a factor.

May have?

It was obvious that much of the delay in the rescue at the convention center and elsewhere was a direct result of the racist paranoia that made Peggy Noonan immediately call for shooting tennis shoe looters on sight and for the head of the National Guard to make comparisons between New Orleans and Somalia. And yet, despite cameras being everywhere, for all the breathless reporting of murders and atrocities and gang rapes, there was never any evidence of these things at the time.

But then, this is an old story in American life. The Big Con’s own Rick Perlstein picked up the historical parallels right away and wrote an op-ed that was rejected by every paper he sent it to. Nobody wanted to hear that these rumors of wanton violence had been routine during the 60’s urban riots, and caused much of the overreactions that led to the deaths of innocent people.

He ended up publishing it in the blogosphere, on Eschaton:

A white friend who’s volunteering in refugee shelters on the Gulf Coast tells me the kind of things he’s hearing around the small city where he’s working.

A pastor is obsessed that “local” women not be allowed near the shelters: “At a community meeting they said these were the last evacuees, the poorest of the poor”–the most criminal, being his implication, the most likely to rape.

My friend says: “There were rumors that there were basically gangs of blacks walking up and down the main drag in town harassing business owners.” The current line is that “some of them weren’t even evacuees, they were just fake evacuees trying to stir up trouble and riot, because we all know that’s what they want to do.”

He talked to local police, who report no problems: just lost, confused families, in desperate need of help.

Yet “one of the most ridiculous rumors that has gone around is that ‘the Civic Center is nothing but inmates. It’s where they put all the criminals.'”

I immediately got that uncanny feeling: where had I heard things like this before?

The answer is: in my historical research about racial tensions forty years ago. I’m writing a book against the backlash against liberalism and civil rights in the 1960s. One of the things I’ve studied is race riots. John Schmidhauser, a former congressman from rural Iowa, told me about the time, in the summer of 1966, he held a question and answer session with constituents. Violence had broken out in the Chicago ghetto, and one of the farmers asked his congressman about an insistent rumor:

“Are they going to come out here on motorcycles?”

It’s a funny image, a farmer quaking at the vision of black looters invading the cornfields of Iowa. But it’s also awfully serious. The key word here is “they.” It’s a fact of life: in times of social stress when solid information is scarce, rumors fill the vacuum. Rumors are evidence of panic. The rumors only fuel further panic. The result, especially when the rumors involved are racial, can be a deadly stew of paranoia.

In the chaotic riot in Detroit in 1967, National Guardsman hopped up on exaggerated rumors of cop killers would descend upon a block and shoot out the streetlights to hide themselves from snipers. Guardsmen on the next block would hear the shots and think they were under attack by snipers. They would shoot at anything that moved. That was how, in Detroit, dozens of innocent people were shot. In one case, a firefighter was the one who died.

[…]

One of the most riveting early accounts of conditions in New Orleans was an email sent around by Dr. Greg Henderson. “We hear gunshots frequently,” he wrote. It wasn’t long before that got transformed, in the dissemination, into: doctors get shot at frequently. An Army Times article reported that desperate evacuees at the Superdome, terrified that losing their place in line might mean losing their life, “defecated where they stood.” Now, it’s easy, if you take a moment to think about it, to understand that happening to people, perhaps elderly and sick, under unendurable conditions of duress. As circulated on the Internet, however, another interpretation takes shape: these people are not like us. Them. Savages that, if they come to your town, might just be capable of anything. Even if they are just lost, confused people, in desperate need of help.

We can do better. We must do better.

(Read the whole thing, here.)

Similarly, I was reminded that going back to the beginning of our nation, there was a wide-spread fear of slave revolts that led to a sort of primal reaction among those of racist bent to too many blacks in one place without adequate police presence. This is a knee jerk reaction among certain people, a reflex of the racist American id. It’s not purely a white against black thing. After all, from the slave revolts to the urban riots, there were always African Americans who raised the alarms themselves. Chaos and anarchy are scary things and people don’t always trust one another in a crisis. But the fact remains that whenever a crisis occurs in the African American communities, many of the authorities who know better (and would be far more prudent if a different community were involved) are too willing to believe wild, unbelievable rumors they would never believe of others — and they overreact.

The instructions to the Red Cross to stay away because of the violence, the cops gunning down innocent people on the rumor of snipers, the police chief of a white suburb keeping stranded, desperate citizens from crossing into his territory at the point of a gun are all symptoms of racist paranoia. Indeed, that paranoia seemed to even become more acute as the pictures of dying old people and crying children dominated the TV screens, even though it was obvious that we were witnessing a desperate situation — that wasn’t violent. As Perlstein wrote, it was the impulse to see these people as “not like us.”

It’s true that the government dithered and was unprepared. Bush’s crony Brownie would have probably done a terrible job no matter which city disaster had struck. It may also be true that they were uncaring due to who was involved and their lack of political clout among those who were making decisions. But there is no doubt that one of the reasons for the delayed response was this long standing primal fear of a violent, angry black mob —- that didn’t actually exist.

I wonder if anyone’s taken the time to think about the implications of that or if we will just lurch to the next crisis in urban black America and let loose the hounds of racist paranoia once again.

The article I linked at the beginning of this post concludes:

By Thursday, local TV and radio stations in Baton Rouge—the only ones in the metro area still able to broadcast—were breezily passing along reports of cars being hijacked at gunpoint by New Orleans refugees, riots breaking out in the shelters set up in Baton Rouge to house the displaced, and guns and knives being seized.

Scarcely any of it was true—the police, for example, confiscated a single knife from a refugee in one Baton Rouge shelter. There were no riots in Baton Rouge. There were no armed hordes.

But all of it played directly into the darkest prejudices long held against the hundreds of thousands of impoverished blacks who live “down there,” in New Orleans, that other world regarded by many white suburbanites—indeed, many people across the rest of the state—as a dangerous urban no-go area.

Now the floods were pushing tens of thousands of those inner-city residents deep into Baton Rouge and beyond. The TV pictures showed vast throngs of black people who had been trapped in downtown New Orleans disgorging out of rescue trucks and helicopters to be ushered onto buses headed west on Interstate Highway 10. The nervousness among many of the white evacuees in my hotel was palpable.

Racial and ethnic hate is now an openly mainstream Republican position

Racial and ethnic hate is now an openly mainstream Republican position

by digby

I know people don’t want to hear this but it must be said again: the GOP is the part of white racial resentment. And Donald Trump has mainstreamed it in its ugliest form.

Jamelle Bouie:

Seven months into his presidency, Donald Trump is deeply unpopular. In Gallup’s latest poll of presidential job approval, he’s down to 34 percent, a level unseen by most presidents outside of an economic disaster or foreign policy blunder. In FiveThirtyEight’s adjusted average of all approval polling, he stands at 37 percent. And yet, few Republican lawmakers of consequence are willing to buck him or his agenda, in large part because their voters still support the president by huge margins. What we have clearer evidence of now is why. From polling and the behavior of individual politicians, it’s become harder to deny that people support the president not just for being president, but for his core message of white resentment and grievance—the only area where he has been consistent and unyielding.

You see broad Republican allegiance to Trump in the polling. Nearly 70 percent of Republicans say they agree with Trump on the issues. And 78 percent of Republicans say they approve of the president’s overall job performance. Republicans who have bucked or criticized Trump, like Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, have jeopardized their political futures as a result.

You also see the degree to which white racial resentment is a key force among Republican voters. Most Republicans, remember, agreed with President Trump’s response to the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, where he held both sides—white supremacists and counterdemonstrators—responsible for the chaos that claimed the life of one anti-racist protester. In an analysis of recent polling, my colleague William Saletan observes that, across a number of questions gauging racial animus, Republicans generally (and Trump supporters specifically) are most likely to give answers signaling tolerance for racism and racist ideas. Forty-one percent of Republicans, for example, say that whites face more discrimination than blacks and other nonwhite groups (among strong Trump supporters, it’s 45 percent). Ten percent of Republicans and 19 percent of strong Trump supporters have a favorable impression of white nationalists, while 13 percent of the former (and 17 percent of the latter) say it’s “acceptable” to hold white supremacist views.

And, importantly, you see these ideas expressed not just in polls but on the ground, as well. In 2014, Ed Gillespie ran for Senate as a Virginia Republican in the mold of figures like John Warner and Bob McDonnell—conservative but not a bomb-thrower. The kind of Republican politician who could make ground in Northern Virginia and other Democratic-leaning parts of the state. Gillespie tried to run that campaign in this year’s Republican primary for governor, and he might have won without trouble if not for the presence of Corey Stewart, an otherwise obscure county official who backed Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election and challenged Gillespie as a Trump-like figure. Vocally standing in defense of the state’s Confederate monuments, Stewart ran as the candidate of white anger and racial resentment, and he almost won, losing by fewer than 5,000 votes.

Gillespie learned his lesson. In an August ad against his Democratic opponent Ralph Northam, he blasts “sanctuary cities.” In the past month, he’s hired a former Trump campaign aide—Jack Morgan, infamous for his warning that the country is on the brink of a second civil war—and has pledged to defend Confederate statues from local efforts to remove them. Donald Trump may have lost Virginia to Hillary Clinton, but Virginia Republicans are committed to the president and expect the same from their candidates.

It’s true that it’s rare for a president to lose anything more than a small minority of his partisan base. But Gillespie’s recent turn shows there is more than simple partisanship at play. There’s nothing about partisanship that forces a figure like Gillespie to go beyond simple Trump support to embracing the most inflammatory, racially reactionary parts of his appeal. In theory, it should be possible to maintain allegiance to Trump without pantomiming the resentment that fuels his presidency.

But this isn’t true in practice. Signaling allegiance to Trump requires embracing white identity politics, because those beliefs reflect the views of many Republican voters.

White identity politics have always been dominant in American life, one of the key forces that shape much of the nation’s political and social landscape. It’s not that Trump is new; it’s that he’s explicit, and in making his open appeal to white identity and its supposed endangerment, he has raised its salience. Before Trump, white resentment was part of Republican politics. In the age of Trump, it increasingly defines it.

It’s not nice to say this. We are supposed to be empathetic toward all the troubles these poor Republicans have seen and recognize that their vote for Trump was just a cry for economic help.

That’s not the case. This is their central issue. And while Democrats should certainly try to make their economic lives better — after all, they have children who didn’t ask to be born — I hope they realize that until and unless they also slag their own base of people of color, immigrants and feminist women they aren’t going to get their votes.

.

Not so hard to believe by @BloggersRUs

Not so hard to believe
by Tom Sullivan

It’s hard to believe. Not two weeks ago, Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta announced his department would induct former President Ronald Reagan into his department’s Hall of Honor, joining Mother Jones, Eugene Debs, and Cesar Chavez.

We pause while you recover from blowing coffee out your noses.

Acosta cited Reagan’s leadership of the Screen Actors Guild beginning in 1947. There was no mention in the press release of Reagan’s destroying the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO) when in 1981 he fired its 11,000 members and imposed a lifetime ban on rehiring the strikers.

AFSCME (the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) responded:

This is no small insult to working people. It’s a slap in the face to all those people whom the Hall of Honor is supposed to honor. Its mission is to honor people “whose distinctive contributions in the field of labor have elevated working conditions, wages, and overall quality of life of America’s working families.”

That applies to a very special group of people who put workers’ rights – and the struggle for dignity on the job – ahead of all else.

The Trump administration just elevated a union buster to the Labor Hall of Fame. Maybe it’s not so hard to believe.

Richard Wolff, emeritus professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, tells In These Times PATCO was just the beginning:

During the course of his presidency, Ronald Reagan became the most powerful union buster in the world. He stacked the National Labor Relations Board with officials who vehemently opposed unions, causing long-term damage to collective bargaining and workers’ rights in the United States.

After the air traffic controller debacle, corporations became emboldened and targeted unions with a new zeal, illegally firing workers for organizing with the knowledge that they could largely evade punishment under Reagan’s labor board.

Union membership in the workforce has dropped in this country since the from middle 1970s from 26.7 percent 13.1 percent. Reagan’s actions accelerated that decline and contributed to wage stagnation for the bottom 70 percent of American workers since his tenure.

Former treasury secretary Larry Summers calls in today’s Washington Post for a rebalancing of the employer-employee power dynamic that has tipped in favor of corporate leaders since Reagan.

William E. Forbath and Brishen Rogers argue for new kinds of labor laws to address the imbalance in an age of contract labor and Uber drivers.

“Democratic lawmakers know that their party was founded on the proposition that concentrated wealth seeks to convert its economic power into political power,” they write, “and that left to its own devices, it puts our democracy at risk.”

That’s not so hard to believe, either. Whoever has eyes, let them see.

Labor laws in place since the 1930s were designed to protect more formal employees than we see today, they argue. “Uber and Lyft drivers are misclassified as independent contractors [without] clear rights to bargain with the companies that actually set the rules.” Those imbalances need to be addressed:

A few simple but bold legal reforms would make a world of difference. First, Congress could pass laws to promote multi-employer bargaining, or even bargaining among all companies in an industry. If all hotel brands, all fast-food brands, all grocers or all local delivery companies bargained together, none would be placed at a competitive disadvantage as a result of unionization, which is often the main reason employers resist it so fiercely. Second, Congress could ensure that organized workers can bargain with the companies that actually profit from their work by expanding the legal definition of employment to cover more categories of workers.

We live in a period, Shaun Richman writes at In These Times, when “‘corporate persons’ have established free speech rights [and] a union—a collection of actual persons—has no similarly recognized protections.” The 14th Amendment, in essence, has yet to ensure labor and management enjoy equal treatment under law.

Unions must reverse a half-century-long strategy of avoiding the courts and mount legal and political challenges to labor laws that infringe on workers’ speech, curtail their bargaining power and deny them the right to extend solidarity to fellow workers. This is a long-term strategy, one made longer-term by the inability to appoint progressive federal judges in the near future. But if we are ever to restore key protections for labor, we need to demand a workers’ bill of rights.

He happens to have one to propose (above).

The imbalance today is entrenched. Ahead of union votes, for example, court cases “permit employers to force workers to attend ‘vote no’ presentations or be fired,” he writes:

In a 2009 study, Cornell University’s Kate Bronfenbrenner found that employers utilized these captive audience meetings in nine out of 10 union elections. Employers threatened to cut wages and benefits in 47 percent of documented cases, and to go out of business entirely in 57 percent of cases. In one in 10 instances, bosses actually hired goons to impersonate federal agents and lie about the process. Not surprisingly, unions lose 57 percent of elections when employers run these “captive audience” meetings.

Ironically, corporations have argued for—and won—the right to hold these meetings on the grounds of their First Amendment rights as “persons.” Yet union advocates possess no equivalent right to hold their own “vote yes” meetings.

Hard to believe again.

Labor groups might start by challenging the excessive restrictions on signal picketing (efforts to embarrass unfair employers without an explicit call for a boycott). Noxious hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Westboro Baptist Church have seen their pickets vigorously defended by the courts. Unions should argue that to restrict signal picketing is to violate workers’ First and 14th Amendment rights.

Anyone who lived through the aftermath of the 2008 financial meltdown, bailouts, and non-prosecutions of Wall Street bankers knows it, feels it down deep in their guts that business interests have tipped the law, the economy, and the power in this country in their favor. If we as a nation are unable to roll back corporate personhood in the courts and restore democracy that way, unions should at least enjoy equal status as the beginning of a counterbalance.

* * * * * * * *

Request a copy of For The Win, my county-level election mechanics primer, at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

Speaking of Pence …

Speaking of Pence …

by digby

Daily Kos’s ursulafaw caught some interesting commentary on Pence’s exposure in the Russia investigation:

Law Professor Jed Shugerman was a guest on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show Friday and he explained the “original memo” written by Steven Miller which was the source of stories by both the New York Times and the Washington Post. Shugerman told O’Donnell that Mike Pence is in legal jeopardy and explained why:

“Let me explain why this timeline puts him in legal jeopardy,” Shugerman began. “So, we know that this letter was drafted on one day, and then after Steven Miller came back with that draft, it was read in a room of people, including Vice President Pence. And when that letter was read, it had, quote, The New York Times talks about a screed, and it identified all of these other connections to the Russian probe for why Trump had decided to fire Jim Comey. Then after this letter is edited, Mike Pence then tells the media that the Comey firing was not connected to the Russian probe, and he said it was due to Rod Rosenstein’s recommendation. Those statements are untrue.”

Mike Pence told an untruth. And what an untruth. An untruth that made this Fordham University School of Law Professor declare that the letter:

“implicates Mike Pence now in a combination of conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting obstruction of justice, and also a relatively less known felony called misprision of a felony, which is when someone has knowledge of a felony and then conceals and does not make it known to the legal authorities.”

Shugarman also shot out of the water the theory that Trump’s attorneys are pushing that Trump has the power to fire Comey, therefore doing so can’t be obstruction of justice. Sugarman says that’s not true.

“That basic argument is so wrong that it shows why there’s so little that the Trump lawyers have to argue,” Shugerman said. “A president has the power to order a military strike, but if the president is ordering that military strike with the intent of, let’s say, killing someone who slept with his wife, that’s still murder. A president can pardon someone, but if the president pardons someone because he received a million dollar bribe, that’s still a felony of bribery. Just because the president has the power to do something, it doesn’t mean that it excuses any exercise of that power because intent matters.”

I think it’s pretty clear by now that Mueller’s Russia investigation has been moving faster than we thought. If you look back over the summer you see that there have been unexplained spasm’s of action among the Trumpies. The president himself inexplicably went nuts on twitter in the month of July lashing out at everyone including his loyal Attorney General suggesting that something specific had alarmed him and he couldn’t contain his anger that Sessions had recused himself. In early and mid-August he was reported to have railed at congressional leaders and individual Senators for failing to “protect” him.

And last June, Mike Pence lawyered up for what appeared to be no reason:

Vice President Pence has hired outside legal counsel to help with both congressional committee inquiries and the special counsel investigation into possible collusion between President Trump’s campaign and Russia.

The vice president’s office said Thursday that Pence has retained Richard Cullen, a Richmond-based lawyer and chairman of McGuireWoods who previously served as a U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia.

Pence’s decision comes less than a month after Trump hired his own private attorney, Marc E. Kasowitz, to help navigate the investigations related to the Russia probe, and a day after The Washington Post reported that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III is widening his investigation to examine whether the president attempted to obstruct justice.

“I can confirm that the Vice President has retained Richard Cullen of McGuireWoods to assist him in responding to inquiries by the special counsel,” said Jarrod Agen, a Pence spokesman, in an emailed statement.

Now we know what those “inquiries” probably were — Pence’s involvement in obstruction of justice.

Meanwhile, get a load of how the president’s one allegedly sane, professional attorney responds to the media:

.