Podcasts by smart people make me smarter (and more hopeful)

 Submerging myself in podcasts and it's giving me so much hope.

Anand Giridharadas

Pete Buttigieg incl about communicating effectively

https://the.ink/p/live-from-iowapete-buttigieg

Political consultant Anat Shenker-Osorio

https://the.ink/p/watch-the-leaders-we-need

Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson about their book Abundance

https://the.ink/p/watch-will-abundance-be-hijacked

On Morning Joe about the reckoning that hasn't happened

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQRgiJDHrDU

Ezra Klein

Talking with Zack Beauchamp and Andrew Marantz about Trump & authoritarianism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO7-Ij8l9jI

Talking with Hasan Minhaj

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUNSNXcfAgg&t=1s

Losing my religion

 I've been the ray of sunshine and the glass half full in conversations with my liberal friends these past weeks, but, after this weekend, I'm seriously worried. Why is no one stopping this train wreck?

I listen to almost constant political commentary and it has not been reassuring. Despite DJT's minions out in force trying to explain the inexplicable, the people who actually know how these things work are not convinced.

Manufacturing would take years to "reshore" in America and most of the work would be automated, plus the cost for consumer goods would skyrocket. The global supply chain has taken decades to establish and Trump will do permanent damage in just a few months, not to mention all the good will he is incinerating with his approach. 

The stock market has lost trillions in value, for no discernable rational reason. That's the retirement accounts of millions of Americans. I hope the 529 I have for my daughter has enough left in it after this debacle to cover her final year in school. If not, I suppose it will go on my credit card.

People are saying, why are we surprised, this is what he ran on. But he said he would make things better. He didn't say he would put the steadily recovering economy into the shredder.

I just hope it doesn't get as bad as it could...

Okay Boomer

I had an argument with a friend of mine on Facebook last week about cops and protests.

It's a touchy topic of course. She posted someone's Twitter comment about cops who are behaving well during these protests being like abusive boyfriends who briefly act nice and then abuse you again later. My response was that I disagreed because I feel like you have to accept an effort in the right direction. She (a fellow librarian) said there was "significant evidence" that cops who had been friendly to protesters were gassing them later in the evening and I said I wanted to see her evidence because I had looked for evidence myself and wasn't able to find any. But she seemed to misinterpret me and responded with information about police officers and domestic violence and abusive behavior.

I tried to clarify. I said the evidence I was asking about was the evidence she said she had for the exact same cops who were being friendly turning around and being aggressive. But she continued to be outraged that I had challenged her. She said I had suggested her personal experience as a victim of abuse is not adequate evidence of cops' bad behavior. The whole conversation ran off the rails. I kept trying to bring it back to the original issue of the current protests, but she just got more outraged. She said I had been "rude" (which I thought was strange).

This is not somebody that I know only on Facebook. This is a friend. In fact, I had offered to let her stay at my house a couple of years ago when she thought she was going to lose her apartment. This is someone I thought I had a relationship with. I was shocked at how determined she was to misunderstand me.

It got me thinking of another FB argument with a person the same age: 30 year old. They have a huge chip on their shoulder about "Boomers." The argument I had with the other person devolved into "you don't understand what it's like for my generation." I feel like that's the response of both of them and it kind of annoys me because they ignore the histories of people older than they are.

I didn't appear on this planet as a middle aged woman living in the suburbs. I have a whole life history neither one of them know anything about. By the time I was their age, I was a  military veteran. I've been on a human rights commission. I fought for women's rights and gay rights. I was at the March for Women's Lives in DC in 1986 and the gay rights march in 1993. And I was in the gallery of the NJ legislature when they became the 3rd state to recognize gay marriage. I've participated from a very early age in community building and trying to make the world better. Not slacktivism, not liking posts on Facebook. On the ground work.

I know it's typical for young people to dismiss older people and for older people to dismiss younger people, but these are people I know personally - I expect more consideration from them. It's very noticeable that their demand for understanding, sympathy, and tolerance includes none for me. I'm very disappointed in this most recent interaction, especially since she blocked me.

Her loss.

Dem Debate

Buttigieg's China answer was amazing; his answer on problems in South Bend was inspiring.

Swalwell's line #passthetorch was inspiring. VP???

Harris was great, but her attack on Biden, though effective, was pure political theater. It worked though, she got great press out of it and showed she can take the fight to the Man. . .

Warren is great, but not inspiring; loved her response when asked if she has a plan for dealing with Mitch McConnell: yes she does.

Booker is great, and may still pull out of the pack.

Castro was impressive, but his attack on Beto seemed weird and mean.

Beto was a huge disappointment - where was the inspiration? Debate is clearly not his forte.

Sanders always seems annoyed, what is his deal?

Biden was under-prepared; I still hope that he will be bested by someone younger.

DiBlasio seemed so aggressive and it was kind of annoying.

Overall, I felt like they are such an impressive field - an embarrassment of riches. I would vote for almost any of them.

P.S. Christy said the candidates must avoid any statment that would allow Trump to call them socialist, but I think he will use that attack no matter what. It gets a visceral response, even when the actual meaning is completely unclear to most.

She also said her dad will just stay home and not vote if the chosen candidate has said they will eliminate private insurance. Not that most of the candidates support that anyway, but also, sheesh. I mean, Congress passes the healthcare bill. And there are so many more important issues. Obama's original plan was not the one that actual passed. It wasn't perfect and has been changed since it originally passed. It's a process. I mean, do your homework. It would be so much easier to elect someone who represents your values if voters actually understood issues.

David Frum on Immigration

Thoughts about David Frum's article in the April 2019 issue of the Atlantic about immigration policy:

Nice, even-handed presentation of the pros and cons of immigration - both how it benefits America and also causes problems (if it was simple and straight-forward, we would have addressed it long ago!)

I don't think that he makes enough of a distinction between legal and illegal immigration in some of his discussion.

I wish that he had included sources for the data he included. I question his information on the financial contributions of immigrants - he says that they cost more in benefits as they age than they contribute. This is certainly true of citizens, but I have heard the opposite is the case with immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, who are not eligible for many types of benefits. I wonder about his source for these assertions.

Very eye-opening (and credible) assertions regarding the impact of immigration on political attitudes, especially that Trump's hard line is both a result of liberal attitudes and is reinforcing liberal attitudes (and probably making liberals more extreme).

Biden

Holy shit. Now the misogynists in my own party are trying to tear down Ms Flores by noting that she has posed for photos touching men and especially posed with Bernie touching her. It's all a plot to crush Biden, supposedly. A political "hit job"!!

Saying this woman is lying because she touched someone or is seen being touched by someone is nuts. Not all touching is the same!! Touching while posing for a picture is not the same as having someone come up behind you and sniff your hair. You'd think we are sophisticated enough to consider some subtlety here.

And this is the same argument Biden is making - I'm friendly. I touch people. I don't MEAN ANYTHING BY IT. 

So we're back to the same place - women are unreasonable, over sensitive. NOT IN CONTROL OF OUR OWN BODIES!

Expecting our candidate to be decent to women and holding them to a high standard is NOT going to get Trump re-elected. 

This conversation is worth having. Women have a right to their own personal body integrity, WHATEVER that means to THEM.

Beto is for "vapid morons"

A friend asked for responses to this article, highly critical of Beto O'Rourke. Here's the first few paragraphs:

     In 2008, I was swept up in the energy surrounding Barack Obama's campaign. I volunteered at phone banks, I gave money, I heroically posted on the Internet, etc. etc. I was 25 years old, and I believed in Obama the transformational figure, and believed in the Great Man theory of systemic change. I believed, in short, that Obama could bend history to his will, and each time he talked about reaching across the aisle and working with Republicans, I envisioned a future in which, like me, those Republican congressmen would find him irresistible, bow to his political talents, and, well…get things done, or something.
     Of course, we know what happened. Obama had two years with a stacked Democratic Congress, and the most he accomplished was to institute a healthcare system that was barely adequate to survive the first real GOP onslaught, and that was utterly inadequate at resolving a staggering crisis in America. Republicans heard his pitch about pragmatism and compromise, and spit in his face just before going into an obstructionist crouch that lasted eight years.
     But instead of immediately shifting to war footing in response, Obama and his team spent those eight years continuing to believe in the original idea of West Wing-style triumphalism, and what they did manage to accomplish was pretty horrific—deportations, drone strikes against U.S. citizens, a massive bailout and subsequent lack of prosecution for the criminals of the economic crisis. 

Here's my reply:

I totally get what the writer is saying, I do. Obama was appealing as a campaigner, but not always bold in his adminstration. 

That being said, as much as we seem to have forgotten it, the American governing model is built on compromise. That is literally the Founder's vision. And it assumes disagreement and conflict. It assumes that the middle is the only way forward. 

For all this writer dismisses the entire 8 years of the Obama administration as getting "nothing" done, that could not be farther from the truth. Gay marriage is legal throughout this country. You don't have to give Obama credit for that, but it happened while he was in office. We are having a serious cultural conversation about criminal justice reform which Obama helped to start. Our economy is humming along, our car industry is healthy. Bin Laden is dead. These things are not nothing. 

With Obama, and frankly, with Trump, we have ample evidence of how important it is to have a charismatic leader for voters to rally around. The policies that a candidate embraces during their campaign will not all be adopted. What many people vote for is an avatar, a representation of what they want the country to be.

Another issue is that not all Democrats want the policies that this writer mentions, such as free college and the Green New Deal. The candidate who is chosen will have to appeal to a lot of different kinds of voters, not just the ones who agree with this writer. 

I'm not sold on Beto, and I have heard that he is actaully pretty conservative in his positions. On the other hand, I think this article is pretty narrow minded. 

And it's early. There is a LONG way to go before the Dems pick their candidate.

And just for good measure, here is a list of 28 accomplishments of the Obama presidency.

Thank u, next

With so many candidates in the ring or considering it, I have lost interest in some of the candidates who seems to have Achilles Heels of one kind or another:

Stacey Abrams - lost her election - needs to run and win a race for ANY other office

Amy Klobuchar - lots of strengths, but treating your staff like shit is kind of a deal breaker

Elizabeth Warren - such a passionate advocate for important issues but the way she handled that Native background issue really annoyed me

Kristen Gillebrand - love her consistent stands for women but hearing that she mishandled a sexual harrassment claim against her own staff is pretty disheartening, and the way she threw

Kamala Harris - not a deal breaker for me but her being a prosecutor raises objections in a year when criminal justice reform is a VERY important issue for many progressive voters

Cory Booker - I love him but he has very close ties to Big Pharma and that might be enough to tank his run, plus at least some people feel like we had a black guy already and we need to have other groups represented

Pete Buttegeig - so great on so many issues but it is not the Year of the Dorky White Guy; he's young, he can wait

Beto O'Roarke - I love him but I know progressives are super cautious about his many moderate stands on important issues

Julian Castro - I love him so much, but he has a major charisma deficit

Waiting for Biden to get in

Yet another thing making me break out in hives is this talk about how the Democrats can't win if they go too far to the left. OMG! We have this conversation every 4 years. And it's bullshit.

We have lost so many times with the safe candidate - Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry. We win when we have a young exciting candidate - Clinton, Obama - who inspire voters to come out.

Clinton and Obama were smart and in some ways wonky. But also charismatic. 

Hillary had policy positions out the wazoo. That had no relevance to her electability.

I am not a seasoned political analyst, I don't work at Five Thirty Eight. But I can see the excutiatingly obvious!

I don't want some wacko empty suit who can throw out a catchy phrase, but I want the guy who plays sax on Arsenio Hall or says "Yes, We Can" and they write a song about him. Not a snooze! Not an idiot, but someone with a bit of wow factor. 

Atlantic magazine analysis of political openmindedness

Jefferson County, and Watertown, NY comes out on top of their assessment. Weird.

The Geography of Partisan Prejudice

A guide to the most—and least—politically open-minded counties in America

AMANDA RIPLEY, REKHA TENJARLA, ANGELA Y. HE

Trump support is so scary

Post on FB from Lynn Greer:

OK, seriously, most of you know I am a conservative. I use to post a lot of political posts. But, I came to realize that those that disagree with me have their own path and we may or may not meet up. However, I have to say this.... I was a Democrat. I walked away when I knew that the Clinton’s were criminals. I held my nose as I voted against Hillary. Then I watched as the MSM trashed Trump. Every thing he did was twisted in the news. I wasn’t a Trump supporter until I saw how the corrupt Democrats spent millions trying to bring him down! They lost the election and spent our $ to bring Trump down. Evidence proved that Hillary colluded with the Russians. But, that didn’t matter.. must bring Trump down!! I am sick of my tax dollars going to this! I have tried to stay quiet. But, if you believe this type of investigation is OK then I beg you to educate yourself!! This is not OK!! Trump is our president and he is doing a damn good job!

I went from plugging my nose and voting for him to believing he is the best President ever! Open your eyes. Stop believing the MSM. Both parties are working against Trump! That’s because both parties are corrupt!!

I’m so sick and tired of the Democrats and their bull shit. I literally get nauseous watching the news.... I don’t care what channel! It use to be a difference off opinion. Now it is right vs evil!

Her friend Giselle:

I agree 100%. At first I did not want Donald Trump to be President, but as I watched how evil and corrupt the left is, and saw how they would viciously go after everything that he does, and how he exposed this web of evil corruption in our country, from politicians, the media, Hollywood elites and so on, I can only be grateful for what an amazing man he is. We would never have known all of what he has exposed, and I don’t believe there is any other man who is strong enough and bold enough to be able to take them all on. I love my President!

Her friend James:

Lynn, you are on the money 100%. I shudder as I think of the garbage going on around us. Trump should be hailed as one if the greatest presidents we've ever had. But instead they make him a racist, misogynist, dangerous tyrant. His only crime was he won against the anointed successor to their lord and savior Obama. His only sin was carrying through on the empty promises they have made for decades. America is stronger, and safer, better off with Trump, and they just can't stand it. I will vote for him in 2020, and will always support him.

MY REPLY:

There was plenty of negative coverage of Obama, especially in the conservative media; not just Fox News, but all the outlets, print and electronic. The conservative media spent 8 years saying Obama was not legitimately the president and that everything he did was ruining America. He was called a tyrant and dictator. I just don't see the difference between then and now. Go ahead, call me names. Dismiss me as a socialist, an idiot, a libtard. I'm used to it.

Commentary on Noah Smith's "You and Whose Army?"

This blog post by Noah Smith is a super interesting analysis of our current political situation and the possible parallels with Spain in the 1930s, after the Spanish American War.

I disagree with some of the premise though:

• I grew up in Arizona, a purple state. Then I lived in Pennsylvania for many years, also a purple state. America is not as clearly divided as your essay suggests.

• I also disagree that all the guns are owned by conservatives (see Arizona and Pennsylvania experience, noted above).

• And having spent 12 years in the military and knowing LOTS of liberals in the military, I disagree that the military would side completely with the right.

• I also disagree that the left would have no super power on its side - the EU is not a single nation, but it has a military and it would most certainly side with the US left.

• I also question whether all the conservative gun owners could be counted on to rise up and fight. A lot of gun owners talk tough but they would never really stand up, either because they are gutless, or even because they are just too decent.

I do not buy the argument that the only way the left can prevail is to "woo" people on the right. The majority of Americans support Democratic positions on issues such as gun control and the social safety net. We have to protect voting rights and make sure that all Americans are truly represented. Then we will have nothing to fear.

I really enjoyed this essay and I will read the suggested book. But I will not despair about the US (yet).

Brett Kavanaugh - SCOTUS nominee

What a perfect example of a entitled white douchebag. The more I learn about this guy, the more convinced I am that he shouldn't even be considered for the SCOTUS. 

• The complaints brought by Dr Ford and others is just the icing on a pretty vile cake. Even if Ford and other accusers have mistaken Kavanaugh for someone else, the fact that so many people have come forward with stories about him demonstrates that he is not who he says he is. Why does he insist on presenting himself as a "saint" when it is very clear that he was not. Why not just admit that he was a dog?

• He was a Republican political operative who was extrememly involved in the impeachment of Bill Clinton. This seems like it should be automatically disqualifying. I don't think anyone who has served a political party should be considered for the High Court.

• There is quite a bit of evidence that he has committed perjury during all his confirmation hearings - for all judicial appointments that he has received as well as the current one.

I don't understand why the Repugs don't cut their losses on this tool and just get another hardliner for the Court. It's not like they don't have a BUNCH of them lined up.

I heard a Republican talking head on the news a couple days ago complaining that the Dems are always trying to torpedo Republicans with this same sexual misconduct charge. And I thought, "well, so many of your guys are predators!" Dems have their own, of course, but the Republicans seem to have a pretty noticable blind spot when it comes to sexual predators and gender violence (e.g., domestic violence). They preach a good game about moral standards, but they are awfully comfortable with a particular kind of misogynist. Just sayin.

We need to stop hating Trump

More and more, I agree with what, for example, Matt Taibbi, is saying - I think we are missing the opportunity to craft a positive vision rather than just being appalled all the time. That's so easy, to just push the outrage button. I have tons of friends who are just rabid about Trump, but how does that help? On the other hand, I'm less and less convinced that the really red state voters would vote for Democrats if we would just "listen" to their concerns. Hillary spoke to many issues that affected them, including the opioid crisis, which Donald Trump's policies is making worse. Many of those voters are not ever ever EVER going to vote for a Democrat. And they fricking love "the way Trump talks," which they pretend has to do with his being off the cuff and "real," but has a LOT more to do with his being racist as fuck. They are not ever ever EVER going to vote for a candidate they think cares about black and brown people. Dems and progressives need to inspire our natural constituencies to come out and vote. That's why Roy Moore lost. Not because Dems successfully appealed to "white working class" voters.

Here's excerpts from Matt:

. . . Despising Trump and his followers is easy. What's hard is imagining how we put Humpty Dumpty together again. This country is broken. It is devastated by hate and distrust. What is needed is a massive effort at national reconciliation. It will have to be inspired, delicate and ingenious to work. Someone needs to come up with a positive vision for the entire country, one that is more about love and community than blame.

. . . Division isn't an accident. It's not even just a by-product of a commercial scheme, though the pioneering work of Roger Ailes and Fox News played a crucial role in our current mess, by showing media companies they could make easy money through the politics of bifurcation and demonization.

Division does make money, but beyond that, it's highly political. It's an ancient technique of elites, dividing populations into frightened and furious camps so as to more easily control them. When people are scared enough and full enough of hate, they will surrender their rights more quickly.

It's not an accident that as the right-left divide has grown in this country, we've gradually given up on almost every principle that used to define us, collectively, as Americans. We surrendered our rights to privacy, failed to protest vast expansions of federal power (including to classify the inner workings of our own government – our government), stopped requiring due process to jail people and closed our eyes to torture and assassination and all sorts of other atrocities.

. . .If we were serious thinkers, and not obvious or malleable ones, we'd have spent this last year coming up with ways to improve this country, or make it more just, or more beautiful, or less violent, instead of obsessing constantly about Trump.

Republican authoritarianism

Still, as the conservative movement has completed its conquest of the Republican Party, it has never resolved the dilemma that haunted it from the beginning. Conservative opposition to policies like business regulation, social insurance, and progressive taxation has never taken hold among anything resembling a majority of the public. The party has grown increasingly reliant upon white identity politics to supply its votes, which has left an indelible imprint on not only the Republican Party’s function but also its form.

. . . 

Here is a sitting governor in the United States, not some post-Soviet kleptocrat, actually calling for “authoritarian power.” To be sure, LePage lies along the edge of his party rather than at its center. But the nature of party coalitions is that they cluster around common principles, and the mainstream of Republican thought is closer to LePage than anybody could have imagined possible a few decades ago. In a September National Review cover story, co-authors Yuval Levin and Ramesh Ponnuru, two of the right’s most erudite intellectuals, acknowledged that Trump has made some questionable statements that “certainly do not sound like the views of a person with a deep esteem for the constitutionally limited role of the president or for the delicate balance of our system of government.” But, they quickly insisted, Hillary Clinton’s support for executive actions, laws that create more bureaucracy, and liberal judges poses “a more concrete and specific threat than Trump.” Indeed, “mainstream liberalism now subverts and threatens our democracy,” and so they concluded that the safer choice, from the standpoint of the republic’s stability, would be to hand control of the Executive branch to Trump. This is how a party consensus forms. The more strident wing openly endorses authoritarianism, and the “moderate” wing refrains while agreeing that authoritarianism is still preferable to liberalism.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/the-gops-age-of-authoritarianism-has-only-just-begun.html

What has happened to you America?

Every time Trump says some moronic thing and people who actually know something about the economy or the government or international relations say it doesn't work like that. And his supporters say, we love him, he speaks for us. But what he says is stupid. And then his supporters cry and say "Don't call us stupid!" and I just think then stop applauding that stupidity. They aren't alternative facts. Most "illegal" immigrants are not actually Mexican rapists and it never actually trickles-down Insisting that it's not an apple doesn't make you misunderstood it makes you misinformed.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Tom Price is out.
Ryan Zinke is in the cross hairs.
Trump looks like a dolt most days.
His approval ratings are continuing to slip.
Paul Ryan shelved that fucking silencer bill.
Tax reform bill is facing opposition.
Trump does nothing to push Congress on his agenda.
Mueller.

House passed a bill to outlaw abortion after 20 weeks.
Roy Moore is probably going to be a US Senator.
Some of the Supremes are fucking old.

Congress let CHIP funding expire.
Trump administration is undermining ACA.
Crazy white guy shot 58 people (a record!) for no apparent reason.
Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands are wrecked.
Trump has 39 more months as president.

The left is doomed

I attended a "teach-in" about Charlottesville at SU tonight. Great speakers - a religion professor talked about refusing to compromise, a white woman talked about growing up in segregated Gainesville FL, a Jewish professor talked about the neo-Nazi resurgence in the US after Trump's election, a black "activist" professor talked about the "religon" of whiteness in America, and a gay professor talked about confronting fascists in NC. It was very inspirational. Then came the Q&A. It was all Jews suck because of Zionism and white people suck because they only hate Trump and they don't understand that black people have been fighting these issues for years and blacks should just go off on their own and fight since whites suck so badly. I ended up in complete despair. If only I had left when the original presentation ended. No wonder the Repugs are kicking our asses - we are too busy stabbing each other in the back while they roll over us and watch us recede in their rear view mirror.

Newtown, Connecticut massacre

Random thoughts:

Basically, just WTF.

I told the rabbi that I would not want to have to represent God after an event like this. (What kind of fucked up Supreme Being lets 20 kids be slaughtered a week before Christmas?)

Why wouldn't Nancy Lanza (the killer's mother) store her gun collection away from her troubled son?

I think we should bring some sanity to our gun policy, since what we have is barbaric. But these mass killings are much more a matter of mental health access than they are about gun control. That being said, you'd think the so-called "greatest country in the world" could figure out a way to keep assault rifles out of the hand of schizophrenics.

Great quote: "It's harder to adopt a pet in the US than it is to buy a gun."

Nic Kristof's column, "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?" is a wonderful breath of sanity, of course.

Jezebel's column, "Fuck You, Guns" (part of a series) is great, of course.

Gawker republished a column called "I am Adam Lanza's Mother" by a woman with a violent, mentally ill 13 year old. Terrifying.

I heard an absolutely fascinating commentary over the weekend - the guy was a former official in the Bush administration (I think - wish I had noted his name) and he said that when the 2nd amendment was written, the average citizen could have the same weapon as the military (i.e., a musket) and therefore could, in theory, protect themselves from "tyranny," but now, the military has drones and nukes and chemical weapons, etc, and the average person, no matter how many guns they have, could not truly face down a "tyrant" backed by this arsenal. His point was, it's just a matter of where we draw the line - obviously we don't let citizens own their own drone, but no one considers that an affront to the 2nd amendment. Super thought-provoking.

Government aid

I've seen similar maps over the years - notice that many of the most anti-federal government states are the ones that get the most aid from the federal government!