Skip to content

Month: June 2021

The crazy faction has always been with us

Americans have always believed in conspiracy theories, particularly when it comes to race. The “fear of the slave revolt” is deeply embedded in the racist American psyche, for obvious reasons.

As we contemplate the bizarre obsession with Critical Race Theory sweeping through the right wing like a wildfire, think about this from Joshua Zeitz, back in 2017:

Seventy-five years ago, tens of thousands of white Southerners responded with agitated concern when they learned both by word of mouth and in some regional newspapers that first lady Eleanor Roosevelt was traveling widely throughout the former Confederate states, quietly organizing black women into secret “Eleanor Clubs.” The club motto, “A white woman in the kitchen by 1943,” portended a dangerous inversion of the region’s long-standing racial patterns.

It was already widely believed in the South that black men had been brazenly stockpiling ice picks, pistols, rifles and explosives in anticipation of a larger race riot. With millions of white men now serving in the armed forces and stationed away from their families, the story went, white communities were vulnerable to an impending assault. When that day came, black women—many of whom worked in domestic service—intended to force their white employers to cook and clean for them. “Eleanor Clubs are stirring up trouble that never should have arisen,” a white North Carolinian observed with worry. “Clubs are making the Negroes discontented, making them question their status.”

Of course, not a word of this was true. But that didn’t make these race rumors less vivid in the minds of many ordinary white Southerners.

Long before the advent of conservative radio, cable news and the internet—and two generations before an especially dim bulb shot up Comet Pizza in Northwest D.C., certain he would find Hillary Clinton’s and John Podesta’s child sex slaves chained up in the basement—“fake news” pervaded the American South. We know this largely because of the work of Howard Odum, a leading sociologist who in 1942 widely canvassed the region to collect and analyze these rumors.

It wasn’t the first time Americans consumed and spread conspiratorial rumors, but it was the first time that such rumors traveled so widely and targeted a prominent member of the first family. And it’s also the historical example that echoes today’s disinformation pandemic most closely. In1942,amid wartime changes that upended traditional racial and gender hierarchies, many ordinary white Southerners proved ready to accept explanations for these changes that, from an objective standpoint, were preposterous. Today, many white Americans who are vexed by demographic and cultural shifts—particularly those at the far right of the political spectrum—seem equally susceptible to mistruths.

The example of 1942 also carries a warning. Many regions of the country were rife with rumor and “fake news” during the war years, but the South—with its weak political, civil society and educational institutions—was particularly susceptible to disinformation. Only in the South did such rumors so thoroughly permeate the culture; only there did they infiltrate mainstream political discourse. Looking back from a distance, most Americans today would probably agree that the peculiar condition of the South in 1942 is not one that we wish to replicate 75 years later. But is our civil society today strong enough to resist?

***

Like many other Southerners, Howard Odum heard the rumors. A highly respected professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,Odum saw the region come alive during World War II with frenzied speculation about an impending race revolution. And so in 1942 he enlisted dozens of fellow scholars throughout Dixie to help him collect and catalog wartime rumors. The results of this study, published the following year in a volume entitled Race and Rumors of Race, revealed a region beset by economic, social and demographic change. From the black belt counties of Alabama and Mississippi to the comparatively moderate cities of North Carolina and Virginia, the same themes surfaced.

Sex: “When white men go to the Army,” a South Carolinian relayed, “the Negro men will have the white women.” In Louisiana, two black men were purportedly overheard plotting to find white concubines. In Alabama, a white man heard the black caddie at his country club preparing to “have a really good time with the white women.” Black men in South Carolina allegedly taunted white soldiers, informing them that they would “take care of all the white girls while you are gone.” In Louisiana, “a Negro soldier asked a white girl to a dance,” and a “free-for-all” ensued. In Virginia, a black youngster asked a white dime store clerk out; and in Alabama, black men sent sexually menacing letters to students at an all-girls academy. It was happening everywhere—or so people professed to believe.

Revolution: Black men were allegedly “buying up ice picks to attack the whites,” a man from Georgia told one of Odum’s associates. In Virginia, “There was also a rumor that Negroes were going to take over the entire area during a blackout in September”—a rumor nearly identical to one that pervaded North Carolina. “There are going to be a great many Negro uprisings in Southern cities,” warned a South Carolinian. In Louisiana, white informants worried that their black neighbors were preparing to “take over government after the war through an organized Negro revolution.” They were hoarding “different types of armaments to get it by force in case they don’t get it by peaceful ways.”

And, of course, there were the Eleanor Roosevelt Clubs, known also as the Royal House of Eleanor, the Sisters of Eleanor or the Eleanor Angels Club: “My cousin told me that the sheriff went down there and told those ‘ni**ers’ that they’d better get back to work, or else,” a white Mississippian reported, in reference to black domestic servants who had allegedly quit their posts. An informant complained that since the Army paid black women $15 per week to cook for the soldiers, none would consent to work for lower wages elsewhere. “All of the colored maids at a hotel joined Eleanor Clubs and walked out in a body one day because their pay and hours did not suit,” claimed a North Carolina man. In Alabama, members of the Eleanor clubs supposedly donned wide-brimmed hats with feather adornments. There were reports of maids leaving their posts without warning to attend meetings. They insisted on being called “Miss” and “Mrs.,” rather than by their first names, and began entering their employers’ homes through the front door, rather than through the back service entrance.

No one Odum’s associates spoke with doubted that Roosevelt was behind this wide-ranging domestic insurrection. “Wherever she has spoken the Negroes always act like they are white folks,” complained one white Southerner. Another affirmed that “no individual in my lifetime has created as much trouble. She preaches and practices social equality.” In Nashville, a rumor spread widely that when Mrs. Roosevelt—in town for a meeting of the Southern Conference on Human Welfare—had checked into a hotel room, she insisted that “a great Negro singer should have the suite next to her.” In Alabama, she allegedly declined attendance at a banquet organized by the state’s most respectable white families, preferring to attend another function on the arm of a “big black Negro.”

Of course, none of this was true. But the rumors circulated anyway, primarily by word of mouth, though more than a few newspapers—like the Greenwood Index-Journal, which asserted that Eleanor Clubs “do exist. … They’re a Negro grassroots development … the embryos of unions of Negro workers”—also did their part in stoking the fires of conspiracy theory.

Eventually, the White House asked the FBI to launch a formal investigation into the rumors. Though FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, a conservative opponent of black civil rights, held the first lady in low regard, after extensive field work, his agents concluded that Eleanor Clubs were a work of pure fiction—an outgrowth of the difficulty many white women faced in hiring and retaining black domestic help during the war. Some newspapers flatly rejected the FBI’s findings, but eventually, the rumors died off. Though the South in the following decade would still prove highly receptive to race-based conspiracy theories.

***

The social psychologists Gordon W. Allport and Leo Postman once wrote that “rumor is most frenzied when the public is expecting a momentous event to occur.” That theory certainly applied to the South in 1942. America’s entry into World War II upended life throughout the former Confederacy. As millions of black men joined the armed forces (a point that Odum’s subjects tended to elide when they raved about an impending race revolution) or took jobs in the many war manufacturing plants that the federal government placed in the Southern states, they earned cash wages and thereby freed themselves from the economic dependency of sharecropping and tenant farming—two systems that were often cashless. Black women, too, enjoyed new opportunities. Industrial employment almost doubled in Dixie, and wages rose by roughly 40 percent. It became possible, in theory, that many black Southerners might actually be able to pay their poll taxes and afford consumer luxuries previously unavailable to them.

More than hard economics was at play. As war manufacturing centers swelled with workers of all races—in greater Mobile, Alabama, the population almost doubled during the war—demographic upheaval upset long-standing stasis and familiarity. Women, both married and single, found new autonomy in a world where many men were on Army bases or shipped abroad. Neighborhood boundaries were fluid. People were transient.

And with these changes, black Americans—particularly those in uniform—began demanding greater social and political equality. As the historian Robin D.G. Kelley famously chronicled, the dynamic played itself out in a million everyday encounters, ranging from seemingly isolated displays of sullenness or resistance on buses and trains, to outright acts of insurrection by black servicemen demanding to be served in places of public accommodation.

And so the rumors took off—fun-house mirror delusions of real social changes that were taking place in the South and threatening the region’s long-held status quo. The rumors were false, but the anxieties that they betrayed were very real, and rooted in everyday experience.

Though racial and economic tension were the primary drivers of rumor, there were other dynamics also at play.In his book, Race and Rumors of Race, Odum reproached the region’s media outlets for their complicity in spreading, or in other cases failing to refute, rumors that any sensible person knew to be untrue and potentially dangerous. A case in point: the Delta Democrat-Times, a Mississippi newspaper that affirmed without a shred of evidence that there was “conclusive evidence that [Eleanor Clubs] exist.”

But it took more than a broad distribution channel of small-town newspapers to make people truly believe these preposterous reports.

Indeed, the South in 1942 was particularly vulnerable to rumor and fake news. The region’s public school system was a creaky and underfunded affair. Though one-third of America’s school-aged children lived in the former Confederate states, the South accounted for less than 20 percent of national income. Consequently, expenditures-per-pupil ranged from one-third of the national average in Mississippi, to between 50 percent and 60 percent in Arkansas, Georgia, Alabama, Kentucky and South Carolina. Throughout the region, only 10 percent of children who entered first grade would go on to graduate from high school. In short, an undereducated populace was an easy mark for disinformation campaigns.

The South’s political system was also broken, particularly in Deep South states where poll taxes effectively disenfranchised the majority of black and white adults. On average, only 20 percent of voting-age residents participated in elections, a dynamic that left many ordinary people disconnected from local, state and federal institutions. Robbed of political agency, many Southerners accepted outlandish explanations of social and economic change.

The South was also deeply insular. “The Mississipian has always lived in a self-contained world,” a Southern scholar observed a decade later. “When he traveled, he went to Memphis (where he met other Mississippians in the lobby of the Gayso hotel). … When he read, it was his own local newspapers, edited by Mississippians. … These people had no idea that there was a world beyond themselves.” This assessment was extreme, but it was true that in the 1940s—and well into the 1950s—Southern broadcasters regularly blacked out national radio (and later, television) news casts that challenged prevailing ideas about race relations or workers’ rights. Though there were some exceptions—notably, the Louisville Courier-Journal, the Nashville Tennessean, the Raleigh News and Observer and the Atlanta Constitution—Southern newspapers tended to reinforce the political culture of Jim Crow.

***

The parallels between 1942 and today stand out. In both cases, a country undergoing profound demographic and economic change has proven hospitable to many of the same general types of rumors. In 1942, black men allegedly plotted a violent (and sexually violent) coup against white Americans. In more recent times, a Kenyan-born Muslim managed to capture the presidency, and encouraged violent Mexican criminals to vote illegally. Roosevelt, a powerful first lady who did in fact champion black civil rights, was allegedly complicit in prompting a race war. Hillary Clinton, a powerful former first lady and would-be president, allegedly trafficked young girls through the basement of a Washington, D.C., pizzeria.

In both eras, for many white Americans—particularly many white men experiencing a decline in economic and political power—these rumors were and are a way to protest a world in which women and people of color demanded greater privilege.

The internet is a faster and wider distribution channel than anything that was remotely imaginable in 1942. Once heralded as a powerful agent of democratization, in more recent months, it has provided a powerful platform for purveyors of rumors, hate speech and fake news. But an empirical study that appeared recently in the Columbia Journalism Review suggests that the internet has not infected Americans equally or indiscriminately with fake news. Republicans tend to be easier marks for conspiracy-laden sites like Breitbart News (which recently claimed, without a shred of evidence, that former President Obama tapped then-candidate Donald Trump’s phone lines) and Infowars (which played a prominent role in promulgating Pizzagate); conversely, Democrats tend to absorb both left-leaning opinion outlets and mainstream outlets that adhere to standard fact-checking and editorial quality standards.

Just as a particular subset of Americans proved unusually receptive to fake news and conspiracy in the 1940s, it may be time to acknowledge that a particular subset of Americans, today, has grown unhinged from reality.

American racists are really a breed apart, aren’t they? Just crazy as loons from the very beginning all the way up until today. And their leaders are cynically using it to maintain power for the wealthy white people who think they are fools. Which they are.

The Real Reset

Trump’s behavior on the world stage was always one of my greatest worries when he was president. National security and foreign policy is where most of the real power in the presidency lies and his clear, obvious, overwhelming ignorance of the world and the way it works was terrifying. You could have plucked anyone off the street in downtown LA and he or she would probably have had a better instinctive understanding of the issues than he did.

And it’s not that I think our “standing” and “prestige” is all important or that the system doesn’t need reforming or even, dare I say it, “disruption.” It probably does. But for better or worse (probably worse) the US is the greatest military power on the planet and when it acts irrationally it destabilizes the whole world. And in the nuclear age that is extremely dangerous. If we are to “disrupt” the system in some way in order to reset the world order we’d damn well better have a strategy and a well thought out goal because if things go sideways that could be the end of it all.

I don’t know if Joe Biden’s worldview is the best we can hope for in this situation but it’s damned sure better than what we had before. If nothing else we can breathe a sigh of relief that the Orange Ignoramus isn’t traipsing around the world representing the country any longer.

Champ

President Joe Biden pets the Biden family dog Champ in the Oval Office of the White House Wednesday, Feb. 24, 2021, prior to a bipartisan meeting with House and Senate members to discuss supply chains. (Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz)

ItalyGate was not built in a day

Former Italian senator Matteo Renzi.

TPM’s Josh Kovensky this morning delves into the origins of one of the most “whackadoodle Big Lie claims” popular in the Maga-QAnon-sphere. ItalyGate alleges that in the middle of the night in November 2020, “An Italian defense contractor teamed up with the U.S. Embassy in Rome to use satellite transmissions to switch millions of Trump votes to Biden votes, thus stealing the election.”

No, really. Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows asked the Department of Justice to look into it. The DOJ thought he was nuts. TPM has identified other purveyors of this wild-ass theory:

It’s not clear where the bogus allegations originated. But one of the earliest examples of them spreading, Reuters reported, was in a December 2020 recording of a Florida woman named Maria Zack.

Zack runs Nations in Action, a non-profit that describes itself as devoted to addressing “the collapse of the civil society with families struggling to maintain faith, values and virtues.” A longtime conservative election law firm, Holtzman Vogel Josefiak Torchinsky, incorporated the company.

It has not been previously reported that longtime Heritage Foundation fellow Hans von Spakovsky, a leading voter fraud alarmist, served on the board of Nations in Action. More on von Spakovsky in a moment.

Nations in Action became one of ItalyGate’s main proponents.

The theory even made it to Mar-a-Lago, where Zack said that on Christmas Eve she gave Trump a note about an affidavit that supposedly supported the allegations.

That would have been enough for Trump, clearly. Zack claims to have brought the affidavit to D.C. on Jan. 6. The group issued a press release claiming proof enough “for each state to recall their slate of electors immediately.”

Having von Spakovsky, the Harold Hill of voter fraud, on the board of Nations in Action should be enough to discredit the rest. For his part, von Spakovsky claims he resigned on Jan. 8, was never really on the board, and has nothing to do with the ItalyGate conspiracy theory. His name on their corporate filing is “their mistake.”

But wait, there’s more. Nations in Action in a press release thanked the Institute for Good Governance for partnering on its investigation. The latter group is connected to one Michele Roosevelt Edwards, who runs another firm called USAerospace Partners. The letter Meadows forwarded to Jeffrey A. Rosen at the DOJ originated with Carlo Gloria, allegedly with USAerospace Partners and typed on its letterhead.

TPM tried to reach both Goria and Roosevelt Edwards to gain clarity on why these companies were promoting allegations that Italy changed the result of the 2020 election.

Someone at a number listed for Goria picked up the phone but hung up after a TPM reporter identified himself, and refused to take further calls.

There was more on Edwards Roosevelt, however. The USAerospace chair also goes by other names: Michele Ballarin, Michele Golden, and Amira Ballarin.

She denies knowledge of the letter Meadows obtained, etc., etc. It gets weirder from there.

Mass hysteria.

Update: Weirder still.

More thumb on the scale

Washington Post Editorial Board:

report from New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice this week shows that one-third of election officials feel unsafe, with most saying that social media has made their professions more dangerous. Election workers up and down the ranks have endured death threats, racial slurs and menacing protests outside their homes. One website displayed a state election director’s home address and a photo with crosshairs over it along with a warning: “Your days are numbered.”

These threats continue long after the height of the 2020 vote dispute: In May, Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs tweeted, “Earlier today a man called my office saying I deserve to die and wanting to know ‘what she is wearing so she’ll be easy to get.’ It was one of at least three such threats today. Then a man who I’ve never seen before chased me and my staffer outside of our office.” It is only a matter of time before election officials end up hurt — or worse. Even if the point is merely to intimidate, it is toxic for democracy if voting administrators have to fear what one side may do to them if it loses.

That Brennan Center report includes audio clips of threats being directed at election officials.

https://youtu.be/WOCBIiVUBMc

The Editorial Board calls on state lawmakers to halt their verbal assaults on election administrators. Voters, too, should reject candidates frothing about bogus “election integrity” issues, the Board insists. Lawmakers might also supply security details for election officials and state-furnished attorneys if they face politically motivated lawsuits. But mostly Republicans should cease their jihad against truth.

This is all nuts, of course. Conservative neighbors who loathe social safety net programs (a.k.a. entitlements) that help Americans they feel are less deserving may deliver “bootstraps” lectures about how life is not fair. Until they feel life has been unfair to them. The sort of people issuing threats against election officials feel pretty damned entitled to certain election outcomes. Their 2020 presidential candidate encourages them whining about how unfair it all was.

But it is not only personal threats eating at election administrators, but new legislation aimed at increasing the mass of the thumb Republicans want to put on the scale.

New York Times:

Lonnie Hollis has been a member of the Troup County election board in West Georgia since 2013. A Democrat and one of two Black women on the board, she has advocated Sunday voting, helped voters on Election Days and pushed for a new precinct location at a Black church in a nearby town.

But this year, Ms. Hollis will be removed from the board, the result of a local election law signed by Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican. Previously, election board members were selected by both political parties, county commissioners and the three biggest municipalities in Troup County. Now, the G.O.P.-controlled county commission has the sole authority to restructure the board and appoint all the new members.

Hollis is one of at least 10 county elections board members removed this way. Five (at least) are non-white. Most are Democrats. The few Republicans removed will be replaced by other Republicans.

These are some of the less-noticed casualties of GOP-led legislatures in the wake of the 2020 elections. More-prominent are changes at the state level:

G.O.P. lawmakers have also stripped secretaries of state of their power, asserted more control over state election boards, made it easier to overturn election results, and pursued several partisan audits and inspections of 2020 results.

Republican state lawmakers have introduced at least 216 bills in 41 states to give legislatures more power over elections officials, according to the States United Democracy Center, a new bipartisan organization that aims to protect democratic norms. Of those, 24 have been enacted into law across 14 states.

Maintenance or purge?

Here it gets confusing. Voter list maintenance is standard practice in election administration. Kris Kobach’s all but disbanded and error-ridden Interstate Crosscheck program gave list maintenance a bad reputation. For good reason. Red states, particularly in the South, relied on it to engage in voter purges mere months ahead of elections. Those delistings tended to flag more “African American, Asian American and Latino voters for removal than Caucasian voters.”

There is a difference, however, between off-year voter list maintenance and voter purges, especially ahead of general elections. States must under federal law maintain the accuracy of registration lists by removing people identifed as having moved within the state, left the state, or died. But with all the GOP efforts to suppress turnout or to pass legislation allowing legislatures to overturn them, even normal list maintenance now draws suspicion.

Georgia’s secretary of state, Republican Brad Raffensperger, issued a statement Friday that 100,000 names deemed “obsolete and outdated” will be removed in the latest update there:

The effort to remove 101,789 names from Georgia’s voter files marks the first time the state has conducted a “major cleaning” since 2019, but Georgia regularly removes the voter files of convicted felons and the dead on a monthly basis, according to the statement.”

The 101,789 obsolete voter files that will be removed include 67,286 voter files associated with a National Change of Address form submitted to the U.S. Postal Service; 34,227 voter files that had election mail returned to sender; and 276 that had no-contact with elections officials for at least five years,” the statement says. “In each of these cases, the individual had no contact with Georgia’s elections officials in any way – either directly or through the Department of Driver Services – for two general elections.”

The full list of “obsolete and outdated” names that are being removed was published publicly with the statement.

In addition to the “obsolete and outdated” files, Georgia also removed “18,486 voter files of dead individuals based on information received from Georgia’s Office of Vital Records and the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), an interstate partnership of 30 states and the District of Columbia focused on maintaining accurate voter rolls,” the statement says.

This non-election-year effort strikes me as normal list maintenance. Unfortunately, the headlines reporting on Raffensperger’s operation oscillate between “remove” and “purge” with little distinction between the two. In fact, purge seems to be the dominant term of journalistic art.

But it doesn’t help that Raffensperger went after voting rights advocate Stacey Abrams in his statement:

“Making sure Georgia’s voter rolls are up to date is key to ensuring the integrity of our elections,” said Raffensperger. “That is why I fought and beat Stacey Abrams in court in 2019 to remove nearly 300,000 obsolete voter files before the November election, and will do so again this year. Bottom line, there is no legitimate reason to keep ineligible voters on the rolls.”

That last sentence is true, but in this environment also inflammatory.

BTW: ERIC is was launched in 2012 with help from the Pew Charitable Trusts.

Read It

5 YouTube Motivational Speakers what will change your perspective - The  Sauce

If you want to understand how the country with “the greatest public healthcare system in the world ™” managed to get 600,000 people killed in a little over a year, read Michael Lewis’s The Premonition. Brilliantly written and filled with remarkable characters and stories, you won’t be able to put to it down.

Unlike other works that focus on the early days of the pandemic, this one doesn’t harp on the sheer incompetence of the Trump administration, which, after all, was plain for everyone to see. (But not to fear, the Trumpists are hardly ignored or get off easy.) Instead, it tells the story of some brilliant American experts who had been planning their entire lives to fight a pandemic and how, due to an incredibly sclerotic and chaotic public health system, weren’t able to do anything to contain the virus when that may have still been possible.

As with so many other awful problems this country faces — racism, rampant cronyism, inequality, and political corruption — Trump turbocharged a disastrous system. But the rot goes far beyond one awful actor and his henchmen.

And as with so many other amazing people this country currently has — from Ocasio-Cortez to Stacey Abrams to Letitia James — the public health system has unforgettable, deeply competent characters whose stories will stay with you long after the book is finished.

Maverick Wannabe

Oh please:

EMULATING MCCAIN — KYRSTEN SINEMA’S advisers heard it constantly from her during her 2018 campaign for Senate: “I want to be the next JOHN MCCAIN.

After she won, Sinema called the late senator a “legend” and “my personal hero.” This year, when she voted against a minimum wage hike, she rankled the left by mimicking McCain’s iconic thumbs-down that tanked the GOP’s effort to kill Obamacare.

Now Sinema’s commanding the spotlight not only as a rare swing vote in a hyperpartisan Congress but as a lead negotiator on an infrastructure deal that could determine the success of President JOE BIDEN’S first term. If she pulls it off, she will establish herself, like McCain, as a legislative force inside the Senate.

McCain is obviously a singular figure who spent decades building his stature in the chamber. But Sinema’s current and former colleagues say the two do share some traits: She doesn’t like to be told what to do. She’s also unafraid to buck her party, and at times seems to relish it.

— WHAT MEGHAN SAYS: We asked McCain’s daughter what she thought of the comparison.

“I do believe when she makes decisions she thinks about what [John McCain] would do, which is both surprising and nice and interesting — and not what I expected from her at all,” MEGHAN MCCAIN said.

She added that her father was also “obsessed” with his predecessor BARRY GOLDWATER’S legacy.

“I think she’s pretty fearless,” McCain said. Sinema, she added, has the mindset, “‘What’s the worst that can happen to me?’ She’s not scared of being uncool with the woke left. Politically she’s pretty well tuned to the state in a lot of ways.”

A message from Amazon:

“This is the first time in my life that I have dental insurance, visual insurance, [and] life insurance.” Comprehensive benefits give employees like Leonardo a sense of security. Amazon is committed to creating good jobs with a starting wage of at least $15 an hour and benefits for employees.

— HER GOP CHARM OFFENSIVE: Sinema doesn’t really fit in with DemocratsShe’s been known to skip party lunches and votes and even missed VP KAMALA HARRIS’ dinner with female senators this week. (Her staff said it was because Sinema broke her foot.) All the while she’s been on a charm offensive with Republicans, many of whom adore her. They say they can trust her, that she keeps her word.

“I think Sen. Sinema is comfortable with who she is,” Sen. DEB FISCHER (R-Neb.) told Playbook. The two senators have become close friends and regularly have dinner together, most recently two weeks ago at Charlie Palmer with Sens. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO (R-W.Va.) and CYNTHIA LUMMIS (R-Wyo.).

“She is certainly willing to step in in a needed way to bring people together, and she does go her own way. I would say she’s probably similar to McCain in that way. They’re willing to take the slings and arrows from their own side when they’re trying to accomplish something.”

— DEMS SAY SHE’S GOT IT WRONG: On the flip side, some Democrats worry that she’s feeling the love from Republicans only because they need her while they are in the minority.

“She’s still new, that’s the bottom line,” said a senior Democratic Hill official. “Do you think if the Republicans were in the majority they would care about Sinema? She has to be wary of the relevancy trap. You can easily be beguiled by the moment. It’s a mistake of early legislators who want to make inroads with the other side at the expense of their own caucus, of their advancement and at the expense of their state.”

Sinema was the first Democrat to win an Arizona Senate seat since 1995, and she won by a small margin. A former Sinema aide warned that she’s not reading the Democratic Party in Arizona if she thinks McCain is the person to emulate.

“She’s trying to brand herself as a brand of Arizonan that won’t exist anymore,” the aide said, referring to the leftward shift of the state, which narrowly backed Biden in November. “It’s misguided to look backward than forward. You can’t be a carbon copy because it won’t work.”

McCain was a prisoner-of-war hero, which Americans consider to be a sort of sainthood. And his “maverickyness” also stemmed from having been caught out in a corruption scandal which caused him to feel some shame and work across the aisle on an issue like campaign finance reform. He was also hugely popular with the beltway press because he was a raconteur who appealed to a certain macho sensibility. Kyrsten Sinema isn’t John McCain.

And yes, it was mostly pure ego so in that respect he has a lot in common with Sinema. Other than that, I really don’t see the resemblance.

It isn’t 1988, 1998 or 2008 anymore and Arizona isn’t the same place it was when McCain was in office. In fact the wingnuts ground him hard in his last election and would have taken him out just like Flake if he had continued. Good luck with this, Kyrsten.

Bastards

An illustration shows heretics being tortured and nailed to wooden posts during the first Inquisition.

Oh look, a bunch of people who covered up for pedophiles in their ranks for decades, maybe centuries, want to tell Joe Biden he isn’t a good Catholic:

U.S. Catholic bishops overwhelmingly approved the drafting of a “teaching document” that many of them hope will rebuke Catholic politicians, including President Joe Biden, for receiving Communion despite their support for abortion rights. 

The result of the vote — 168 in favor and 55 against — was announced Friday near the end of a three-day meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that was held virtually. 

The bishops had cast their votes privately on Thursday after nearly three hours of impassioned debate. 

Supporters of the measure said a strong rebuke of Biden was needed because of his recent actions protecting and expanding abortion access, while opponents warned that such action would portray the bishops as a partisan force during a time of bitter political divisions across the country. 

They are a far-right partisan force and have been for a long time. Total hypocrites too. And it’s one of the reasons why this is happening:

Fewer than half of U.S. adults say they belong to a church, synagogue or mosque, according to a new Gallup survey that highlights a dramatic trend away from religious affiliation in recent years among all age groups.

The new Gallup poll, published Monday, indicates that religious membership in the U.S. has fallen to just 47% among those surveyed — representing less than half of the adult population for the first time since Gallup began asking the question more than 80 years ago.

While membership in a house of worship fell only slightly in the latest survey, which was conducted in part during the coronavirus pandemic, the results reflect a trend that Gallup has been tracking since the turn of the century.

In 2018, 50% of adults polled said they belonged to a religious congregation, down sharply from the 70% who said so as recently as 1999. That figure fluctuated only a few percentage points over a period of six decades beginning in 1937 — the first year of the survey — when 73% of U.S. adults said they belonged to a church, synagogue or mosque.

I feel terrible for Biden if they manage to do this. He is a very sincere Catholic and he has a very high pressure, important job which holds the lives of countless numbers of people in his hands. And they want to take the comfort of Communion away from him because he allows people to disagree on the question of whether or not to allow abortion. It’s all about them and their control. It’s grotesque.

“I did a good thing”

There’s a new book out about the Trump campaign by Michael C. Bender of the Wall St. Journal. Here’s the money quote:

“I’ve done all this stuff for the Blacks—it’s always Jared telling me to do this,” Trump said to one confidante on Father’s Day. “And they all f—— hate me, and none of them are going to vote for me.”

Imagine that. The story recounts much of what we already know about Trump’s racism. But I thought the last part of this anecdote was especially juicy and I hadn’t heard it before. It happened after Trump gave his series of obtuse, rationalizations for Charlottesville:

Gary Cohn, the president’s top economic adviser—and a registered Democrat—was even more despondent. Raised Jewish on the East Side of Cleveland and a longtime New York resident, he stood next to Trump for the infrastructure news conference and grew increasingly alarmed and uncomfortable. Later, in a private meeting inside the Oval Office, Cohn unloaded on the president.

Cohn told Trump that his lack of clarity had been harmful to the country and that he’d put an incredible amount of pressure on people working in the White House. He told Trump that he might have to quit. No one backed Cohn up. Others in the room, including Pence, remained quiet.

Cohn returned to his office after the meeting broke up. Following a few minutes behind, Pence climbed the flight of stairs and appeared at the threshold of Cohn’s door.

“I’m proud of you,” Pence told him, safely out of earshot of the president.

What a little weasel.

The story goes on to discuss Trump’s response to the George Floyd murder and subsequent protests. Nothing too surprising except that in private he seemed to acknowledge that he knows cops can be vicious.(I think he gave that hint when he told Laura Ingraham that sometimes they “choke” like a golfer missing a putt.) But he felt that any sympathy for Floyd or criticism of the police would be seen as “weak” by his voters, which says a lot more about his own insecurities than about the sycophantic cult that worships him and believes he’s a super-hero no matter what he does. He needn’t have worried.

It also discussed that Tulsa rally that finally ended Brad Parscale’s grift and put what appears to be a permanent wedge between him and Jared Kushner. And it features this amazing quote. You may recall that he’d originally scheduled the Tulsa rally for Juneteenth (!) and then canceled it:

In our interview, one year ago this week, Trump tried to put a spin on the controversy. He told me that he had made Juneteenth a day to remember.

“Nobody had heard of it,” Trump told me.

He was surprised to find out that his administration had put out statements in each of his first three years in office commemorating Juneteenth.

“Oh really?” he said. “We put out a statement? The Trump White House put out a statement?”

Each statement, put out in his name, included a description of the holiday.

But such details were irrelevant to him. Instead, he insisted, “I did something good.”

“I made Juneteenth very famous,” he said.

All you can do is laugh at this point. And wonder once again how in the world 75 million of our fellow Americans could have voted for this dolt.