Yeah, About That

So, back in 2012, there was quite an effort to revamp and re-brand the GOP. They realized they were perceived as not being down with the good folks of the "Real America" - that the Romney campaign had boomeranged away from McCain's "Just folks and Straight Talk" bullshit, and had shown the party as catering to the elite, with Willard's dumbass "gaffe" of the 47% being the perfect illustration of how badly out of touch Republicans had become.

So they embarked on the project to re-connect with the good people - the workin' guy - the common clay of the heartland. You know - the rubes.

It's not turning out quite the way they said they wanted it to turn out. Which is not to say it's not turning out the way somebody intended it, but that's another foil hat rant for another time.

Let's just say they're -

G.utless
O.bsequious
P.honies

- and let that suffice for now. 

Jennifer Rubin, WaPo:

When listening to President Trump and fellow Republicans throw around accusations against Democrats and the media or advance defenses for Trump’s impeachable conduct, there is a better than even chance they are misleading if not downright lying. In some cases, we discover the lies because other individuals are caught lying.

Roger Stone was convicted, among other things, of lying to Congress about his conversations with WikiLeaks’s Julian Assange. He falsely claimed: He had no emails, documents or texts relating to WikiLeaks; he never sought damaging information (i.e., emails) about Hillary Clinton; never contacted WikiLeaks through intermediaries; and never contacted the Trump campaign about WikiLeaks. The last lie — denying contacts with the Trump campaign — raises the question as to whether President Trump lied in responses to Robert S. Mueller II.

At the trial we learned about Stone’s numerous contacts with the campaign:

Rick Gates, who served as Trump’s deputy campaign chairman, testified Tuesday that Stone began discussing Clinton leaks with the campaign in April 2016 and that from May onward Gates understood Stone to be the campaign’s intermediary with WikiLeaks. By July 2016, Gates testified, Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort said he was updating Trump and others regularly and directed Gates to keep following up with Stone. After Trump ended one phone call from Stone at the end of that month, Gates testified, the future president said to Gates that “more information would be coming.”

In his written answers, however, Trump claimed he had “no recollection” of conversations with Stone about WikiLeaks nor did he recall knowing Stone had discussed WikiLeaks’s email drops with the campaign. Perhaps Trump’s memory is addled; if not, it appears he lied to Mueller.

For most of us, it's not hard to see the truth about the GOP's long slide into the shit pile of distilled concentrated hatred.

But it's also pretty easy to see how, for some, it seems like it all happened suddenly.

It didn't.

I'll say this again: Trump has not remade the GOP in his own image. He's the near-perfect reflection of what the Republican Party has been morphing into for at least 30 years.

Ms Rubin is pointing out just one of the main aspects of a political party that's been trying so hard to hang onto the fantasy of some glorious past that it's lost touch with reality altogether.

And it's gotten to the point where it seems like they have to lie about everything. As if all they can do now is try to reinforce one lie with another - to cover up, or to compensate for one lie with the next.

Likewise, in the Ukraine matter multiple witnesses gave testimony that suggests that Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland has been telling falsehoods under oath. Some he has remedied, such as his initial statement that he had not communicated to the Ukrainians that military aid was dependent upon their opening an investigation into the Bidens. However, we now know from at least one other witness that Sondland’s denial that he spoke to the president or to the State Department was false. (He spoke to both.) One wonders if he’ll share a similar fate as Stone, the former Trump confidant who this week was found guilty on charges of lying to Congress, obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

The Trump lies relating to Ukraine are numerous and serious, although not delivered under oath. CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale has documented 45 Trump lies concerning Ukraine including:

Trump did not ask [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky for anything on the call. (Trump asked Zelensky to look into former Vice President Joe Biden, look into a debunked conspiracy theory about Democratic computer servers, and speak with his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and Attorney General William Barr.)

Zelensky criticized former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch “out of the blue” on the call. (Trump brought up Yovanovitch first.) . . . .

The whistleblower was “sooo wrong.” (The rough transcript and witness testimony have proven the whistleblower to have been highly accurate.) . . .

Schiff might have been the whistleblower’s source. (This is nonsense. The whistleblower said in the complaint that information about the call came from “multiple White House officials with direct knowledge of the call.”)

Other Trump lies include his denial that United States military aid was held up, his bizarre accusations that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) was the whistleblower’s source and his unfounded allegations that former vice president Joe Biden “stole” millions of dollars from foreign countries and pressured Ukraine to fire a prosecutor when Hunter Biden was still under investigation.

House Republicans continually traffic in lies — e.g., Ukraine interfered with our election, Joe Biden’s conduct pressuring removal of a delinquent prosecutor was illegal or corrupt, Trump was concerned about Ukraine’s corruption in general.

The good news is that Dems keep turning out and voting down the candidates who Trump is working very hard to prop up.

The bad news is that lots of Repubs are still in charge of some very important places, and they continue to ramp up their attempts to scotch the elections.

And I think it's a very safe bet that they're still getting plenty of help from the Russians.

Today's Tweet

"The Great Deal Maker" can't even get what he needs from a 3rd rate tin pot dictator like Kim.

And why? Because he gives everything away up front. He just says, "Yeah OK, whatever you want, Mr Prospect. Take it all." And then he acts surprised when they don't respect him - when they don't give him what he wants in return - and all he can do is attack them in one of his stoopid little PR smears, or just shut up and slink away.

Worst. Fucking. Salesman. Ever.

A day after Trump tweeted “see you soon!” and the US canceled another joint military exercise, North Korea says it is not “interested” in further meetings with US.

“We will no longer give the US president something to boast about for nothing in return”, says NK For. Ministry

— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) November 18, 2019

The Great Divide

"The republic cannot endure half Fox News and half free." --driftglass

Adam Przeworski, a political scientist who has studied struggling democracies in Eastern Europe and Latin America, has argued that to survive, democratic institutions “must give all the relevant political forces a chance to win from time to time in the competition of interests and values.” But, he adds, they also have to do something else, of equal importance: “They must make even losing under democracy more attractive than a future under non-democratic outcomes.” That conservatives—despite currently holding the White House, the Senate, and many state governments—are losing faith in their ability to win elections in the future bodes ill for the smooth functioning of American democracy. That they believe these electoral losses would lead to their destruction is even more worrying.

We should be careful about overstating the dangers. It is not 1860 again in the United States—it is not even 1850. But numerous examples from American history—most notably the antebellum South—offer a cautionary tale about how quickly a robust democracy can weaken when a large section of the population becomes convinced that it cannot continue to win elections, and also that it cannot afford to lose them.

the collapse of the mainstream Republican Party in the face of Trumpism is at once a product of highly particular circumstances and a disturbing echo of other events. In his recent study of the emergence of democracy in Western Europe, the political scientist Daniel Ziblatt zeroes in on a decisive factor distinguishing the states that achieved democratic stability from those that fell prey to authoritarian impulses: The key variable was not the strength or character of the political left, or of the forces pushing for greater democratization, so much as the viability of the center-right. A strong center-right party could wall off more extreme right-wing movements, shutting out the radicals who attacked the political system itself.

Dancing at the edge of Both-Sides:

The left is by no means immune to authoritarian impulses; some of the worst excesses of the 20th century were carried out by totalitarian left-wing regimes. But right-wing parties are typically composed of people who have enjoyed power and status within a society. They might include disproportionate numbers of leaders—business magnates, military officers, judges, governors—upon whose loyalty and support the government depends. If groups that traditionally have enjoyed privileged positions see a future for themselves in a more democratic society, Ziblatt finds, they will accede to it. But if “conservative forces believe that electoral politics will permanently exclude them from government, they are more likely to reject democracy outright.”

I contend there's no such thing as a "left-wing totalitarian" - lefties really don't do that. If it's a totalitarian regime, then it's only pretending to be "lefty". Stalin was not a Communist - he called himself that as a disguise. He walked and talked and acted like a Tsarist, and that's what he was.

Yes, "the left" generally insists on consistency regarding people's rights and some kind of doctrine of fairness, but centralized consolidated government power is a principle - indeed, the main tenet and overarching goal - of Plutocratic Daddy State Wingnuts (like Stalin, and Putin, and Erdogan, and Trump).

Ziblatt points to Germany in the 1930s, the most catastrophic collapse of a democracy in the 20th century, as evidence that the fate of democracy lies in the hands of conservatives. Where the center-right flourishes, it can defend the interests of its adherents, starving more radical movements of support. In Germany, where center-right parties faltered, “not their strength, but rather their weakness” became the driving force behind democracy’s collapse.

Of course, the most catastrophic collapse of a democracy in the 19th century took place right here in the United States, sparked by the anxieties of white voters who feared the decline of their own power within a diversifying nation.

It always backfires for the majority (or at least for a plurality), but it gets pushed through by the minority if their propaganda works, and if their voter suppression efforts are sufficient.

And remember, it really only takes a few hundred thousand votes nationwide. Trump "won" in 2016 by less than 200,000 votes, micro-targeted in a few dozen precincts.

The GOP’s efforts to cling to power by coercion instead of persuasion have illuminated the perils of defining a political party in a pluralistic democracy around a common heritage, rather than around values or ideals. Consider Trump’s push to slow the pace of immigration, which has backfired spectacularly, turning public opinion against his restrictionist stance. Before Trump announced his presidential bid, in 2015, less than a quarter of Americans thought legal immigration should be increased; today, more than a third feel that way. Whatever the merits of Trump’s particular immigration proposals, he has made them less likely to be enacted.

Here's where the author's hypothesis is both bolstered, and starts to fail.

For a populist, Trump is remarkably unpopular. But no one should take comfort from that fact. The more he radicalizes his opponents against his agenda, the more he gives his own supporters to fear. The excesses of the left bind his supporters more tightly to him, even as the excesses of the right make it harder for the Republican Party to command majority support, validating the fear that the party is passing into eclipse, in a vicious cycle.

No goddammit - "the excesses of the left" ARE NOT THE SAME AS THOSE COMING FROM THE RIGHT.

For the most part, the guy gets it right - it may seem like a Both Sides thing, but what we're looking at is a problem growing mostly - if not exclusively - from the right.

Relax

Here's a weird little thing that might be of use for us to stare at and find some small measure of calm in this tempest of political stress.

Every dot is traveling in a straight line.

Today's Tweet

Eternal sadness.

School shootings from 2009 to 2018:

🇬🇧 0
🇦🇷 0
🇳🇱 0
🇯🇵 0
🇮🇹 0
🇨🇭 0
🇦🇺 0
🇪🇸 0
🇬🇷 1
🇨🇳 1
🇰🇪 1
🇦🇿 1
🇩🇪 1
🇷🇺 1
🇪🇪 1
🇹🇷 1
🇭🇺 1
🇫🇷 2
🇨🇦 2
🇧🇷 2
🇦🇫 3
🇵🇰 4
🇳🇬 4
🇮🇳 5
🇿🇦 6
🇲🇽 8
.
.
.
🇺🇸 288

— Public Citizen (@Public_Citizen) November 15, 2019

An Outcome

Lots of manufactured hand-wringing and concern trolling over the effects impeachment can have on electoral politics.

Let's take a quick look at what's happened before, when Republicans have gone to great lengths trying to defend and rationalize the actions of a POTUS impeached for High Crimes & Misdemeanors.

Homemade Music

Mary Spender and Danish Pete

Joyce Takes 'Em Down

Joyce Vance, Time Magazine:

Many people have become numb to this Administration’s wrongdoing after almost three years of constant scandal. Some feel that no matter what Trump does, he’ll never be held accountable. Why should they invest time in today’s awful news, when it will give way in a few days or weeks without anything changing?

This is the challenge the Democrats face as they open public impeachment hearings this week. Can they get the country to pay attention? Can they produce a coherent narrative that will help people understand this most serious of Trump Administration debacles?

- snip -

Despite what Trump has claimed repeatedly, anyone who followed the president’s directive to “read the transcript”— actually a memo of the conversation that at least one witness has told Congress excluded some pertinent information — knows that even this sanitized version of the President’s call exposes the scheme to public view. Rudy Giuliani, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, and Trump appointees Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland and Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker worked toward the call where Trump would tell Zelensky, “I would like you to do us a favor”and ask for the announcement of an investigation that everyone now knowswas about Joe Biden and his son. Trump was intent on extracting the favorbefore he would permit the purchase of American military equipment and release over $400 million in aid to Ukraine, which suffered the loss of 13,000 people in five years during the conflict with Russia, and agree to meet with Zelensky. Far from a perfect call, it was a scheme to have a foreign country intervene in our election. It was so far off the mark that when White House officials learned about it, they stashed the record of it on a highly classified server, apparently in hopes it wouldn’t come to light. You don’t have to cover up legitimate government operations.

As boring as I sound even to myself, the only way to get this to stick is to play Cult45's game - the part that has everything to do with repetition.

They keep repeating the same kinda shit, and before you know it, people start to internalize it and it becomes part of the 'norm'.

Propaganda works.

Today's Tweet

I keep thinking this level of depravity has to cause pain. But I guess when a guy has no depth to begin with, there's no depth to which a guy like 45* can't sink.

Hypothesis:
The only way you won't feel the pain of breaking with morality is to abandon that morality, and substitute a kind of Micro-Level Moral Relativism, where your "morality" is relative to your situational needs at any given moment(?)

🇺🇸

AMERICAN HARASSMENT!pic.twitter.com/YWfnu3vbvX

— Clear Cider (@TheClearCider) November 9, 2019

The Arts

Art Education helps us develop critical thinking skills and a sense of shared experience (empathy).

Brian Kasida & Daniel Bowen, Brookings:

Engaging with art is essential to the human experience. Almost as soon as motor skills are developed, children communicate through artistic expression. The arts challenge us with different points of view, compel us to empathize with “others,” and give us the opportunity to reflect on the human condition. Empirical evidence supports these claims: Among adults, arts participation is related to behaviors that contribute to the health of civil society, such as increased civic engagement, greater social tolerance, and reductions in other-regarding behavior. Yet, while we recognize art’s transformative impacts, its place in K-12 education has become increasingly tenuous.

A critical challenge for arts education has been a lack of empirical evidence that demonstrates its educational value. Though few would deny that the arts confer intrinsic benefits, advocating “art for art’s sake” has been insufficient for preserving the arts in schools—despite national surveys showing an overwhelming majority of the public agrees that the arts are a necessary part of a well-rounded education.

Gee - I wonder why "conservatives" are always trying to cut back on what the arts can do for us.

Maybe it's because the problems we love to bitch about - poverty, crime, ignorance, tribalism, the degeneration of civil discourse, etc - can be at least partly attributed to the erosion of the skills we need, but don't get to learn about anymore, because Republicans keep shitting on the arts by cutting the funding.

And maybe those problems are due to deliberate efforts to cause the problems, blame it all on "the other", and then trade on that disinformation to gain ideological advantage and political power.

The GOP Playbook, Page 1:

1. Fuck something up
2. Wait
3. Point at it and say, "Whoa, look - it's fucked up."
4. Run for office by promising to fix it
5. "Fix" it by contracting the solution out to your pals
6. Collect "contributions" from those pals
7. Get re-elected as a "Problem Solver"
8. Start again at #1 above

- and -

We find that a substantial increase in arts educational experiences has remarkable impacts on students’ academic, social, and emotional outcomes. Relative to students assigned to the control group, treatment school students experienced a 3.6 percentage point reduction in disciplinary infractions, an improvement of 13 percent of a standard deviation in standardized writing scores, and an increase of 8 percent of a standard deviation in their compassion for others. In terms of our measure of compassion for others, students who received more arts education experiences are more interested in how other people feel and more likely to want to help people who are treated badly.

When we restrict our analysis to elementary schools, which comprised 86 percent of the sample and were the primary target of the program, we also find that increases in arts learning positively and significantly affect students’ school engagement, college aspirations, and their inclinations to draw upon works of art as a means for empathizing with others. In terms of school engagement, students in the treatment group were more likely to agree that school work is enjoyable, makes them think about things in new ways, and that their school offers programs, classes, and activities that keep them interested in school. We generally did not find evidence to suggest significant impacts on students’ math, reading, or science achievement, attendance, or our other survey outcomes, which we discuss in our full report.