Skip to content

Month: September 2022

The GOP’s support troops

They are heavily armed and ready to go

NY Times reporter Blake Hounshell interviewed two experts on homegrown terrorism and says what they had to say sent a chill down his spine. He spoke with Luke Mogelson: “a staff writer for The New Yorker, who wrote “The Storm Is Here,” a visceral narrative work chronicling the rise of the movement that played a large part in the assault of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021″ and Andy Campbell, “a reporter for HuffPost, just published a book on the pro-Trump extremist group the Proud Boys, the product of several years of tracking them at rallies, school board meetings and street brawls across the country.” Neither knew he was interviewing the other but their stories track closely — and their hair is on fire with worry about these people.

His piece sent a chill down my spine too:

This week, former President Donald Trump warned in a radio interview of “big problems” if he is indicted over his handling of classified documents, comments widely interpreted as a threat to stoke violent unrest. Election officials across the country have faced so much online vitriol that hundreds of lower-level officials have quit their positions out of fear for their safety.

But the climate of menace goes well beyond elections, Campbell said.

“I really do believe that, going forward, it’s not just going to be MAGA rallies. It’s not just going to be political violence at Proud Boys rallies or leftist rallies or B.L.M. events,” he said. “It’s going to be political violence at any civic event that happens to fall in the cross hairs of Donald Trump and company.”

‘Rapidly mutating’ right-wing movements

Before writing his book, Mogelson spent much of the previous decade living and reporting abroad in conflict zones like Afghanistan. He witnessed a mob killing of someone in Iraq, which gave him an understanding of what he called the “intoxicating” feeling that can whip a crowd of seemingly ordinary people into a frenzy.

“There were elements of Jan. 6 that reminded me of that,” he said, citing “the performative aspect” of the crowd’s expressions of anger.

When he began reporting on anti-lockdown groups that mobilized against the pandemic measures put in place by governors like Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, a Democrat, he immediately saw that the story was much larger.

“I was kind of taken aback by some of those images,” Mogelson recalled — particularly in Michigan, an open-carry state where, in April 2020, gunmen wielding military-style rifles rushed the State Capitol in Lansing to protest the coronavirus precautions.

“I soon realized that these groups and this movement was rapidly mutating,” he said.

Over the next year, he traced their evolution from an anti-lockdown movement to one that opposed the racial-justice protests in the summer of 2020 to what he called “a violent uprising against the government” on Jan. 6.

By that point, Mogelson had come to recognize many of the same people at different way stations along his reporting journey.

“It was literally the same groups and individuals that I met in April 2020,” he said.

The common thread between the seemingly disparate events he covered, Mogelson found, was “a sense of dispossession.” His subjects’ rage might be a response to feeling that their heritage was being taken away by racial minorities or immigrants or the sense that powerful forces in the government and in big technology companies were trying to steal their right to free speech.

Oh boo fucking hoo. I’m so sick of hearing this endless whine from people who seem to find the money to buy big screen TVs, huge trucks and massive arsenals of AR-15s and various other lethal weaponry. (Or how about all those well-off old supporters of these nasty jerks down in the Villages in Florida? What’s being taken away from them? They obviously have plenty of money, free time and a very nice retirement. ) These people are spoiled and pampered bullies who are pissed that they aren’t allowed to subjugate the rest of the country.

Why it’s hard to crack down on extremist groups

Campbell, who has been following the Proud Boys since 2017, said that his book was intended to serve as “a warning shot” to the American public.

“I wanted it to be a primer for the average person,” he said, noting how extremist groups like the Proud Boys had insinuated themselves into democratic functions like school board meetings.

“They’re latching on to political forces and giving themselves legitimacy through that,” he said.

Underscoring the point, members of Congress and administration officials complain of being hamstrung by a lack of authority to pursue members of groups like the Proud Boys, who often operate in a nebulous zone, taking advantage of freedom of speech and assembly as they build support and win political allies.

In the United States, it is not illegal to be a part of a domestic extremist group. To go after specific threats, the government has limited tools, meaning that federal officials often must find links to groups overseas in order to crack down on homegrown extremists or prosecute them under other provisions of law.

Complicating matters, Republican politicians like Trump — who instructed the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” during a presidential debate in 2020 — often provide rhetorical cover.

It has become a regular talking point in G.O.P. campaigns, for instance, to accuse the Justice Department of seeking to inhibit parents of school-age children from expressing themselves at school board meetings. But those applause lines actually refer to the Justice Department’s response to the way extremist groups have conducted themselves in those venues — showing up armed, in some cases, or shouting down school officials and parents they oppose.

“The Republican Party seems to not know what to do,” Campbell said.

He added, “It seems like their inability to rebut the Proud Boys and other extremists is pushing this machine forward so much faster and really making it hard for law enforcement to keep up.”

I don’t buy it. The Republicans know they are playing with fire but they see it as a political benefit. This helps them stay in power. The logic behind it is very familiar to anyone who’s read any history of the 1920s and 30s. That’s what we’re talking about. They are different arms of the same movement, each benefiting from the other in pursuit of the same goals.

I wonder why the Supreme Court is losing legitimacy

Here’s one good example

Right wingers feel free to lie to them and the right wing justices are happy to let them do it if it advances their mutual causes:

When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that Bremerton assistant football coach Joseph Kennedy had the right to pray on the field, it wasn’t widely understood then that the court had also ordered the school district to give him his job back.

The day of the ruling, Fox News host Sean Hannity expressed doubts the district would follow through. But one of Kennedy’s lawyers clarified that they had no choice: “We’re ready to have that fight. If they want to defy the Supreme Court, I think they’re gonna realize they made a serious mistake.”

Kennedy was sunnier about it all.

“As soon as the school district says ‘Hey, come back,’ I am there, first flight,” he said.

So the school district has been flummoxed about what’s happened since. They complied by offering to reinstate him, they say, and now the football season is in full swing. But Kennedy is nowhere near the sidelines.

“He’s had the paperwork for his reinstatement since August 8th, and we haven’t gotten so much as a phone call,” says Karen Bevers, spokesperson for Bremerton schools.

Instead, as the Bremerton Knights were prepping for the season in August, Kennedy was up in Alaska, meeting with former Vice President Mike Pence and evangelist Franklin Graham. On the eve of the first game, which the Knights won, Kennedy was in Milwaukee being presented with an engraved .22-caliber rifle at an American Legion convention.

The weekend of the second game, which the Knights also won, Kennedy appeared with former President Donald Trump at the Trump National Golf Club in New Jersey. He saw Trump get a religious award from a group called the American Cornerstone Institute.

Coming up this month, Kennedy’s scheduled to give a talk as part of a lectureship series at a Christian university in Arkansas.

“Place a PR/Publicity Request,” invites his personal website, where he’s known as Coach Joe.

It’s an increasingly surreal situation for the Bremerton schools. They were ordered to “reinstate Coach Kennedy to a football coaching position,” according to court documents. But the now-famous coach is out on the conservative celebrity circuit, continuing to tell a story about “the prayer that got me fired” — even though Bremerton never actually fired him.

In 2015, he was put on paid leave near the end of the season after holding a series of prayer sessions on the field with students and state legislators. He still got paid for his full assistant coach contract, about $5,000. High school assistants often work on yearly deals, and Kennedy, at odds with the head coach and aggrieved by what had happened, never reapplied to work the 2016 season.

“He was not terminated,” Bevers said. Most of the coaching staff moved on, she said, because the head coach also retired.

This did not stop Kennedy’s lawyers from telling the Supreme Court repeatedly that he was fired.

“The record is clear that Coach Kennedy was fired for that midfield prayer,” lawyer Paul Clement told the nine justices in the first 15 seconds of the oral arguments of the case in April. The words “fired,” “fire” or “firing” were used 16 times in the hour and a half session.

It wasn’t true though. The district’s lawyers tried to correct the record, to no avail.

Delivered weekday mornings, this email provides a quick overview of top stories and need-to-know news, including the latest on the novel coronavirus.Sign up

“You can’t sue them for failing to rehire you if you didn’t apply,” one lawyer, Mercer Island’s Michael Tierney, argued during a lower court session. “The District didn’t get an application from him, had four positions to fill and filled them with people who had applied. It didn’t fail to rehire him.”

The Supreme Court simply ignored this inconvenient fact — along with a host of others. At one point during oral arguments, as a different school district attorney was saying the narrative that had been spun didn’t fit with the facts — that the coach’s prayers were neither silent nor solitary, nor was he fired — Justice Samuel Alito interrupted him, saying “I know that you want to make this very complicated.”

Alito persisted in asking about the coach being fired — six times he said it, to the point that the lawyer finally corrected him. Which is a touchy thing to do with a Supreme Court justice.

“It’s not a question of firing, and in fact, he was put on paid leave,” the lawyer pleaded, fruitlessly, to Alito.

In the end, it all was too complicated. The effect of the court’s order is that Bremerton has to reinstate someone who didn’t apply for the job then and doesn’t appear eager for it now. It’s as if the justices wanted to script an ending for a Christian redemption movie. But real life isn’t cooperating.

What’s left of the case has been sent back to federal court in Seattle. A judge there is overseeing the rehiring issue and also how much in attorneys’ fees the Bremerton schools will pay Kennedy’s lawyers. That judge has given them 60 days to submit more information on both.

It was all bullshit. He wasn’t fired, he was put on paid leave and then didn’t even reapply for the job. And he still has not done so because he’s too busy hobnobbing with MAGA celebrities and raking in some of that sweet wingnut grift.

Nonetheless, his lawyers and Justice Alito didn’t want to hear it. Perhaps Chief Justice Roberts needs to take a harder look at why the Court majority is widely believed to be a partisan actor. It is.

Rubio goes full MAGA

Following in Lindsey Graham’s footsteps

What in the ever loving hell is that?

Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida is now playing assignment editor when it comes to abortion coverage, ordering Insider in a bizarre email to quiz Democrats about their stance on the polarizing topic or else face some sort of public shaming on September 20. 

In the combative missive, Rubio deputy chief of staff Dan Holler demands that Insider get Democratic lawmakers on record about “what restrictions they support” and ask abortion provider Planned Parenthood about pregnancy-related issues. 

Holler includes a deadline to respond (September 19), adding that the “results” will be published on September 20. 

“Non-answers will be treated as an acknowledgment that your publication has NOT asked those types of questions to any federally elected Democrat,” Holler wrote, accentuating the ultimatum by underlining and bolding the text.  

It’s not clear whether that email or a similar note was sent to other reporters.  

The ominous note appeared two days after Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina introduced a proposed national abortion ban several GOP colleagues shied away from. Rubio declined to endorse a specific abortion ban in May, but told Insider Wednesday that there was nothing inconsistent about his signing on to Graham’s latest proposal. 

“I didn’t change my mind. I’ll vote for any bill that saves lives,” the visibly annoyed two-term lawmaker said at the US Capitol.

Rubio pointed to similarly restrictive abortion laws around the globe as proof of concept, characterizing Graham’s polarizing bill  as “more permissive than virtually every country in Europe, but two.”

The issue, Rubio said, is that Democrats insist on “taxpayer-funded abortion on demand for any reason, at any time” and won’t budge on that.

While noting that Graham’s proposal is consistent with Florida law, Rubio indicated that he’s somewhat open to negotiation.

“It’s four months. But if they would accept five months, we’ll do five months,” Rubio said. He said he doubts there’ll be any compromise because “Democrats won’t vote for any restriction of any kind on abortion.”

Rubio actually co-sponsored Graham’s stupid abortion proposal. He must be feeling the heat from Val Demmings and is worried the MAGA freakshow won’t turn out for him. Either that or his former reputation for being a halfway normal person was the phony one, which wouldn’t surprise me. These modern Republicans are remarkable shape-shifters.

But this juvenile, performative hostility is something else. Does Rubio think he’s Trump or something? Is his spokesperson trying to compete with DeSantis’s toxic spokesperson?What is going on here?

BTW: Europe’s abortion laws are very, very different than what these creeps are proposing. Even the most restrictive have exceptions for rape, incest, health of the fetus and life and health of the mother, including mental health. Oh, and they also have very generous health care and paid family leave.

20 votes

And an anecdote

Many readers are no doubt policy geeks. I’m not. (I’m a field geek.) Nor am I a messaging guru.

Michael Sokolove addressed progressives and messaging at New Republic this week and offered a salutary anecdote about progressive geekiness.

“Let’s start with a proposition that nearly all Democrats can enthusiastically rally around: The party’s messaging is awful. It’s piss-poor,” Sokolove begins. Every yahoo progressive off the street is convinced they can do it better and gets it wrong anyway. Not to mention being verbose. We can’t resist showing off to voters with how smart we are.

“Truth,” Democratic messaging strategist Anat Shenker-Osorio a tells Sokolove, “has very little impact on persuasion.”

Sokolove writes:

Democrats, and particularly the progressive wing of the party, are sloppy with language. You get the impression they use words that they like, rather than what might best connect on the receiving end, which really ought to be the point.

Here’s the anecdote involving an interaction with GOP adviser Frank Luntz:

Luntz is not a Trump fan but believes the former president’s resurrection of the slogan “America First” was brilliant. “It’s just two words,” he pointed out, and they resonate. When I countered that America First is a phrase associated with the aviator Charles Lindbergh, an antisemite who wanted the United States to stay out of World War II and negotiate with Hitler, Luntz threw back his head and laughed. “You’re a freak,” he said. “Do you know how many Americans know that? One percent? A half-percent?”

I got the point. Republicans don’t assume voters have much historical literacy. They don’t overestimate their intelligence. But Democrats do.

“That,” as Master Yoda said, “is why you fail.”

The rest of the article rambles around without really going anywhere, IMHO. But the Luntz laugh hit the bullseye.

18 votes plus two

Nevertheless, if you must show others how smart you are….

Courtesy of Richard Greene “The Civics Dean,” author of “WTF are ‘TheMidterms’?”, some information just to drive home the point that the two major parties are not the same.


Here are recent ROLL CALL VOTES in The House of Representatives on 18 of the most consequential and popular bills in modern history — bills THAT AMERICA WANTS.

Democrats cast a total of 3,939 votes for these bills (and just 17 votes against).

Republicans cast a total of 154 votes for these bills (and 3,595 votes against).

Category 1: 13 Bills Passed By Democrats in The House but blocked by Republicans in The Senate

1.“The Women’s Health Protection Act”: Should women have a right to have an abortion in America?

Dems: YES 218, NO 1

Reps: YES 2, NO 208

2. “The Right to Contraception Act”. Should Americans have a legal right to purchase contraception?

Dems: YES: 220, NO 0

Reps: YES 8, NO 195

3. “The Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act”. Should the oil industry face penalties for price gouging?

Dems: YES 217, NO 4

Reps: YES 0, NO 203

4. “The Assault Weapons Ban”. Should military style assault weapons be illegal for sale or purchase?

Dems: YES 215, NO 5

Reps: YES 2, NO 208

5. “The Bipartisan Background Checks Act”. Should we expand background checks to cover all gun sales?

Dems: YES 219, NO 1

Reps: YES 8, NO 202

6. “The Paycheck Fairness Act”. Should women receive equal pay for equal work in America?

Dems: YES: 216, NO: 0

Reps: YES: 1, NO: 210

7. “The Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement Act”. Should cannabis be decriminalized federally and have past non-violent arrests and convictions expunged?

Dems: YES 217, NO 2

Reps: YES 3, NO 202

8. “The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Enhancement Act”. Should we enforce the provisions of The 1965 Voting Rights Act ensuring equal treatment for all voters?

Dems: YES 219, NO 0

Reps: YES 0, NO 212

9. ” The Respect for Marriage Act”. Should the Constitutional Right of same sex marriage declared by The Supreme Court be codified into American law?

Dems: YES 220, NO 0

Reps: YES 47, NO 157

10. “The George Floyd Justice in Policing Act”. Should there be consequences for police for discriminatory and illegal policing?

Dems: YES 219, NO 2

Reps: YES 1, NO 210

11. “The American Dream and Promise Act”. Should “Dreamers” who came to The US when they were young have a path to earn citizenship?

Dems: YES 219, NO 0

Reps:: YES 9, NO 197

12. “The Affordable Insulin Now Act”. Should the price of pharmaceutical insulin be capped at $35?

Dems: YES 220, NO 0

Reps: YES 12, NO 193

13. “Child Care for Working Families Act” (part of “Build Back Better) Should the government subsidize the cost of child care for certain working mothers and families?

Dems: YES 220, NO 1

Reps: YES 0, NO 212

14. “The Violence Against Women Act”: Should the government have and fund comprehensive responses to domestic violence, sexual assault dating violence and stalking?

Dems: YES 215, NO 0

Reps: YES 29, NO 172

15. BUILD BACK BETTER: In addition to Affordable Insulin and Child Care (above):Hearing Aids for Seniors, Child Tax Credit, Universal Pre-K

Dems: YES: 220, NO 0

Reps: YES 1, NO 212

2022 Midterm Election Note: Most of the above bills WILL pass in early 2023 if voters re-elect a Democratic Majority in The House and #JUST2MORE Democrats in The Senate. None of these bills will be brought up for a vote in The House if Republicans regain the Majority and either Kevin McCarthy or Donald Trump is Speaker of The House. Republicans need #JUST5MORE Republicans to regain the Majority.

Category 2: 3 Democratic Bills that became law with UNANIMOUS support by Democrats and minor support from Republicans in The Senate

16. The Honoring Our PACT Act”Should Veterans receive health care for serious injuries received from “burn pit” pollution while fighting in our wars?

Dems: YES 222, NO 0

Reps: YES 34, NO 174

17. “The Invest In America Act’ (Infrastructure Bill). An historic, massive infrastructure bill for America

Dems: YES: 219, NO: 0

Reps: YES: 2, NO 201

18. “The CHIPS and Science Act. Should we invest heavily in an American micro-processor (Chips) industry to compete with China?

Dems: YES 219, NO 0

Reps: YES 24, NO 187

19. “The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act”. Should the government fund mental health, school safety and crisis intervention programs and incentivize states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System?

Dems: YES 220, NO 0

Reps: YES 14, NO 193

Category 3: 1 Democratic Bill that became law with ZERO Republican support in The Senate

20. “The Inflation Reduction Act”. The largest bill to fight climate change in history, reductions in prescription drugs, a 15% minimum tax on major corporations (and many other things)

Dems: YES 220, NO 1

Reps: YES 0, NO 212

2022 Midterm Election Note: Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and other House Republicans have openly declared that THEIR legislative priorities include none of the above. Instead they will say they will focus on: a) Impeaching President Biden, b) Impeaching Merrick Garland, c) Investigating Hunter Biden and d) Making all abortions illegal throughout the United States.


In the end, the GOP’s stance on abortion has a better chance of sinking them this fall. Lead with that. Follow with Democrats’ committment to preserving personal freedom and bodily autonomy.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us

It’s worse … for Republicans

Deep doo-doo

They finally caught the car. Meaning Roe v. Wade. Republicans campaigned on repealing it for decades. It was a reliable cattle prod for turning out their voters, especially the religious right. You had to wonder if they ever wanted to lose abortion as a campaign issue. But they promised to overturn it, campaigned on it, and thanks to Donald Trump’s and Mitch McConnell’s help in hijacking the Supreme Court, last June they undid 50 years worth of women’s constitutional rights. Extremists in the states had already prepositioned abortion bans to go into effect the minute that happened.

Then what? Then a month later came the voter smackdown of an anti-abortion amendment in Kansas.

Republicans find themselves in deep doo-doo, as Bush père put it. Even with other Republicans.

Greg Sargent reports in the Washington Post:

It was a long-accepted rule in U.S. politics: Yes, a majority of Americans are pro-choice, but on the antiabortion side, there is a lopsided intensity of feeling. That notion has often been given great weight in parsing the politics of abortion.

But a new poll from the New York Times and Siena College provides another reminder that the rule might be obsolete. If that’s right, it could scramble expectations about the midterm elections.

After the Dobbs v. Jackson decision in June, Republicans and some pundits remained confident that political intensity would ultimately be driven by “real” concerns, such as inflation and crime. But a solid majority now appears to feel pretty intensely about preserving abortion rights.

Specifically, the Times-Siena poll finds that 62 percent of registered voters oppose the decision overturning Roe v. Wade, while 30 percent support it. But the poll also asked how strongly people feel about it, and this was the result:

● 52 percent of registered voters strongly oppose the ruling overturning Roe, vs. only 19 percent who strongly support it
● 57 percent of women strongly oppose the ruling, vs. 15 percent who strongly support it

The poll offers other grounds for concluding abortion is shifting our politics. It finds that 62 percent of voters favor keeping abortion always or mostly legal, versus only 31 percent who think it should be mostly or always illegal.

What’s more, the poll finds Democrats with a slight edge in the generic House ballot matchup, 46 percent to 44 percent. This is the case even though Republicans still enjoy sizable advantages on such issues as the economy — and a plurality of voters say the economy is most important to them.

But what voters say is not as important as what they do in November. That intensity gap threatens to swallow up Republicans’ 2022 ambitions.

Polling suggests “Women are so clearly more engaged than men in this election. Especially younger women,” says Tom Bonier of TargetSmart. They are outpacing men in voter registration in states where reproductive rights are most at risk.

In fairness, not all data shows this intensity gap. A Post-Schar School poll in July found that higher percentages of Americans who want abortion to be illegal are certain to vote this fall. But that poll also found that a whopping 65 percent view the ruling as a major loss of women’s rights.

Meanwhile, other recent polls have found that Democrats are more motivated to vote by the ruling, that disapproval of the decision is overwhelming and that support for keeping abortion legal is at new highs. And as my Post colleague David Byler has detailed, recent special elections offer clear evidence that Democratic turnout has been “supercharged.”

Bonier points out that this pro-abortion-rights intensity gap could mark a deeper shift in our politics. He notes that intensity has long been on the antiabortion side precisely because pro-choice constituencies didn’t actually believe the court would end abortion rights.

Justice Samuel Alito settled that question in late June.

Since then, and especially since Kansas, Republicans have furiously tried to change the subject. To the point of two GOP governors inviting kidnapping or human trafficking charges this week.

Republicans fucked around. In a few short weeks we’ll have a better idea what they found out.

Help educate them when voting begins, won’t you?

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.

Friday Night Soother

Capybara pups!

Have you seen them yet? A few days ago, Zoo Osnabrück’s capybara Jenna gave birth to five little capybaras. So tiny – and yet near carbon copies of their mom! Capybaras are precocial and already have fur and permanent teeth at birth, so they can quickly run with the herd and nibble solid food.

Soulless Huckleberry

He knows. He just doesn’t care

Lindsey Graham is a vacuous, moral cipher:

South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham attempted to defend his defence of then-president Donald Trump’s conduct during his first impeachment, describing him to a pair of veteran Washington reporters as a liar and using expletives.

In their upcoming book The Divider: Trump in the White House 2017-2021, authors Peter Baker and Susan Glasser recall how they met with Mr Graham outside a Washington DC steakhouse less than 48 hours after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry into whether Mr Trump had extorted the president of Ukraine in a now-infamous July 2019 phone call. The Independent obtained a copy ahead of its 20 September publication date.

Standing on the sidewalk on 19th Street in Northwest Washington, Mr Graham bragged about his access to Mr Trump and told the husband-and-wife author duo about Mr Trump’s boasts regarding his closeness with evangelical pastors who’d met with him the day before. He said Mr Trump had told him: “Those f***ing Christians love me”.

Donald Trump ‘to be invited’ to US memorial service for Queen after missing out on funeral guestlist, and other top stories from September 16, 2022.

Mr Graham had already declared that it would be “insane” for Democrats to impeach Mr Trump over the Ukraine controversy, but he confided to Mr Baker and Ms Glasser that he was not blind to what the then-president had done.

“He’s a lying motherf***er,” Mr Graham said, adding the caveat that Mr Trump was also “a lot of fun to hang out with”.

Continuing, the senator justified his defence of the then-president by noting that he was the leader of the Republican Party.

“He could kill fifty people on our side and it wouldn’t matter,” he said.

He’s right, of course. But he loves being close to manly power and he thinks Trump has it. He’d better hope Trump doesn’t go down because he’s sold his soul to him and it’s going with him.

Good news on boosters

If only we could get everyone to take them

Zeynap Tufekci in the NY Times pulls together everything that we know and what we should be doing:

For the first time, the United States is rolling out Covid vaccines updated to match variants that are currently dominant, as well as the original strain. This bivalent character will provide a better response to the most threatening variants today but probably to future variants, too, because when the immune system faces different versions of the same virus it generates broader protections overall.

This is terrific news, and there’s more. Not only will a booster with the new vaccines decrease the likelihood of infection and severe illness and help reduce transmission of the virus; it could also decrease the likelihood of developing long Covid.

The bad news? The boosters are getting so little fanfare, and so much unfounded skepticism, that too few people might get them, and lots of people who need not get sick, suffer or die will get sick, suffer or die.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said that a national survey found that 72 percent of respondents said they were likely to receive an updated booster. But to actually get them vaccinated requires making the boosters easily accessible and making sure people know about their benefits.

The White House coronavirus response coordinator, Ashish Jha, said last week that people might consider getting the booster when they get flu shots, which many do in October and, barring a new variant curveball, think of it as an annual shot going forward. That’s fine if people do that, especially since many immunologists say it’s best to wait three to six months after one’s last vaccination or infection, and many people have had recent infections.

However, only about half of adults in the United States get the flu vaccine, and most haven’t gotten the earlier Covid boosters. Without a vigorous outreach program and promotion, millions of Americans who are not anti-vaxxers but could use a powerful nudge won’t get this helpful dose.

While booster rates have been dismal among Republicans, many of whom have adopted anti-vaccine stances, it is also many of the most vulnerable Americans, even those who got initial doses of vaccines, who are likely to be left behind. Those who haven’t gotten earlier booster shots despite having gotten earlier doses were more likely to lack health insurance, be Black or Hispanic, or be poorer and be less educated.

Meanwhile, funding for distributing these vaccines has dried up amid congressional gridlock — Democrats did not put new pandemic funding in the March spending package because it could cut into stimulus funds for states, and they now face Republican resistance to new pandemic funding. There will most likely be fewer of the dedicated vaccine outreach centers that were set up before.

Benjamin Mueller reported in The Times that local health departments are battling staffing shortages and the monkeypox outbreak, and playing catch-up with childhood immunizations. Plus, some health officials seem to believe that it’s enough to leave it up to individuals to seek these vaccines, mostly at private sites like pharmacies — there is only $550 million in vaccination spending allocated through FEMA so far this year, compared with $8.5 billion last year.

Boosters are especially helpful for older adults or those with existing health issues — but such groups often face challenges navigating access. Last year, there were campaigns to bring vaccination to senior centers and convenient community locations, and to help people make it to vaccination centers and even get vaccinated at home. White House officials tell me they will keep trying to carry out such campaigns, but acknowledge it will be only to the extent that dwindling resources allow. Without such support, how many of those at most risk, who would otherwise be willing, will fail to get the booster?

While young, healthy people who have been vaccinated and had an uneventful breakthrough infection are at much less risk of severe illness even without a booster, they might prefer to avoid getting sick or reduce their risk of long Covid. But beyond the personal benefits: Despite common claims to the contrary, vaccines still help dampen spread, and boosters can further reduce transmission of the disease, including by reducing infections in the first place, and thus help protect especially the more vulnerable.

Another survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that about a third of people who got vaccinated but not boosted said they had “not had the time to get it” as a reason. That response was highest among Hispanic adults, with 41 percent citing it. About another quarter of respondents mentioned side effects.

Paid time off following vaccination campaigns in workplaces, combining flu and Covid vaccines, could overcome this obstacle. Jha tells me that the administration is already asking employers to carry out such steps, and it remains to be seen how many step up.

Then there’s the information gaps. Most of those who got vaccinated but not boosted (and about a third of those who don’t plan to get the updated booster) said they had enough protection from previous doses or past infections.

Many who did not get the previous booster, and many who don’t plan to get the updated one, say that they did not believe the boosters to be effective — a claim that is routinely made because Omicron caused a lot of breakthrough infections among the vaccinated.

A straightforward message could rebut all of this: It’s true that variants can cause breakthroughs, but vaccines still prevent serious illness and death, and even more so with boosters.

Many European countries and Canada, for example, did a better job of making sure more of their population got boosters. Their cumulative death and illness tolls from the Omicron wave are sharply lower than those of the United States, where only about a third of eligible adults had gotten boosters, compared with two-thirds of adults in many European countries. The United States has had a death rate 80 percent greater than Canada’s from the Omicron wave — a similar pattern holds globally. Countries like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have about 80 percent or more of their adult population boosted, and their death tolls are even lower.

Many might also be wondering why bother with one more shot since 68 percent of Americans have had two initial vaccination shots, some of those have had booster shots already, and most likely about 60 percent of the country got some level of immunity from an Omicron infection.

Deepta Bhattacharya, an immunologist, told me that variants evolved to evade the first line of antibody protection generated by earlier vaccines or past infections, even though protections against severe disease remained fairly strong. But the new boosters can greatly decrease that evasion. When the initial vaccines were trialed, matching the strain that was then in circulation, they reported 90 percent to 95 percent protection against any symptomatic infection, which then declined against variants and with time. While exact numbers remain to be seen, all the immunologists I spoke with told me the updated boosters should again increase such protections.

Vaccines (and boosters) have already been shown to greatly reduce rates of long Covid among the infected, but obviously, if infection is avoided completely, that would directly sidestep the risk of long Covid. Shane Crotty, an immunologist, also noted that these boosters will probably further reduce the chances of more severe disease complications, which include long Covid, and says “the higher your level of immunity, the less viral replication you’re going to have, the less viral damage, the less likelihood of long Covid.”

And these new boosters can be expected to do even more going forward — including providing better protection against future variants, by better training both antibodies and memory cells, which are different parts of the immune system. As Bhattacharya told me, being exposed to different versions of the virus (as will happen with these updated boosters) further deepens and broadens the kind of antibodies that get generated, including ones that can work against future variants. Marion Pepper, an immunologist, told me a new variant vaccine can also “create new, more diverse memory cells that will help protect from Omicron variants and new variants that we have yet to encounter.”

Unfortunately we may face another problem we have witnessed throughout the pandemic: public health officials or prominent media doctors casting doubt on the boosters by focusing on their imperfections rather than their immense benefits and worrying about public reaction — like concerns about “vaccine fatigue.”

When I hear that phrase, I wonder how it would have sounded in the spring of 2020 when we had field hospitals in Central Park, bodies were stacked in trailers as funeral homes ran out of space and hospitals ran out of body bags.

I’ve never understood the second-guessing by public health authorities and doctors about how the public may or may not react. Why not just provide accurate, detailed information and make it easy to get vaccinated? That’s the best response to “vaccine fatigue,” even if committed anti-vaxxers might remain hard to reach.

And some writers and scientists have said the boosters should not have been offered until their specific human trials were complete. But there have already been extensive human trials for this vaccine and some of its updates, and it is not unusual to tweak a vaccine using data from sources like lab work or mice. That’s similar to what’s done every year for influenza vaccines.

It’s likely that last fall and winter, fewer people got boosters at least partly because some well-known scientists unfairly questioned the usefulness of the shots. There’s now a similar dynamic, with disproportionate attention on minor issues, like booster mandates in colleges. Blanket mandates are now less necessary for college students, though some dorms may apply them to protect medically frail students or to provide other students with options. But young people should still be informed of the benefits of boosters, and older and medically frail people should still be strongly reminded of the continuing risks posed by Covid-19. White House officials say they will roll out their own messaging campaign to counter the confusion — let’s hope it works.

There’s much research on vaccine messaging, but most of it comes down to establishing trust, being honest and transparent, and making vaccination easier. Our terrible health care system is a major impediment: Having a regular relationship with a doctor can be a key factor, but many Americans don’t have one. It’s not surprising that among all groups, it’s the uninsured who remain least likely to be vaccinated and boosted.

As has been shown throughout the pandemic, it’s vaccination, not vaccines, that saves lives — and many more would be vaccinated if given information and easy access. Not having tools against diseases that cause so much suffering is one tragedy, but having them remain unused should be an unacceptable one.

I got mine a week ago. No side effects other than a slightly sore arm for a day. I wish that everyone in the world would/could get them too. As she points out in this piece, they are not just protections against death, which is the most important thing, they also protect against infection and Long COVID.

Please go get one if you haven’t done it yet. COVID is still the third leading cause of death in the US. The vaccines are medical miracles and we are so lucky to have them.

A monster in a pale pink blazer

Marjorie Taylor Greene mixes it up with young Gen Z activists. She even kicks one. And then she tells another that she will “defend her home” with her guns … “especially from people like you.”

What a horrible human being,. A monster. And she is one of the biggest stars in the Republican Party today. I won’t be surprised to see her become a Senator or Governor from Georgia.