And who suffers when billionaires strike? The innocent children who went to school without a care in the world.
The fact 175 Iranian children died in a US attack while Trump and Hegseth obfuscate about manliness and toughness is a microcosm of where we are as a society today.
It's crucial for Trump--and apparently some of his billionaire friends--to continue to distract from the suppression of the Trump-Epstein files.
So far we've spent perhaps $30 billion on this Iran-Epstein War. A drop in the bucket to the $4 TRILLION we spent on the GOP wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
.-------------------
Edit 9/4/26: Actual cost of Trump's uneccessary Iran-Epstein War now unofficially tops $200 billion.
Yes but it is 30 billion AND COUNTING. Also, the 4 trillion included replacing all those armaments and that has not been factored in yet. We're looking at roughly 1.5 billion a day and counting. A hell of a lot of SNAP benefits, Medicare premiums, and USAID assistance could be bought for just one day of this pure evilness.
Krugman profoundly identified how the billionaire’s war is being enabled by funding extensive lying in Republican campaigns which has destroyed American democracy with “the immense effect of other deployments of billionaires’ wealth, notably the subversion of both conventional and social media.”
The deployment of billionaires’ wealth to subvert the media has vividly appeared in a new Republican campaign video TV ad which starts with Trump saying in his SOTU speech – “If you believe the first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens, stand up”. The video then scans the audience and shows how Democrats react with disgust and remain sitting while Republicans cheer and stand up. Then the campaign ad closes by saying “Republicans are for you”.
Democrats need to make a TV and social media campaign ad sending the truth to voters with these words - Republicans are not for you. Republicans are funded by billionaires to take your money, your jobs, your healthcare, your food, your safety, and your voting rights. Republicans are for the lawless, fascist autocracy run by Trump that destroys democracy, rejects the Constitution, ignores the rule of law, and permits armed ICE agents to murder innocent American citizens in the streets of Minneapolis. Republicans are for Trump’s DOJ that blocks any prosecution of the murder and protects officials in Trump’s administration that violate the law and then disobey thousands of court orders to halt the violations. Republicans are for Trump’s war with Iran and for helping Putin win his war with Ukraine. Republicans are for Trump’s attacks on affordability with tariffs and the Big Beautiful Bill that supports wealth inequality to privilege billionaire oligarchs by continuing to steal wealth from 99% of Americans, transferring the wealth to the top 0.01%.
We need a short slogan with emotional appeal which conveys these many facts. The Republican video ad you refer to has the emotional appeal without the clutter of facts. Our trouble is too many examples of facts available to contradict the claim that “Republicans are for you.”
The Republican ad allegedly shows Democrats are “not for you” based on that cleverly false choice Trump offered in his SOTU. Republicans there showed they are “for you” by clapping loud and long. Nothing of substance.
Our ads need to have the emotional appeal, they need to expose the biggest Republican failures (not all in the same ad!), and to provide some recent example of “Democrats are for you!” This is just my opinion and I desperately hope someone can create such ads.
Exactly, Carol. I suggest a masculine voice-over saying something like "It's not about blue and red but right and wrong. It's not about left versus right but right versus wrong. It's not about liberal versus conservative but competent versus incompetent. Extremism and unAmerican behavior can no longer be disguised as patriotic." These words will play over emotional footage of all the nightmarish things this administration has been doing. Powerful ad!
Or just make it about the money, about your taxes going to waste. The GOP's Iraq + Afghanistan wars cost a combined $4 Trillion, all of it added to the debt. That's 12% of the entire national debt. Which translates into [% of your 2025 taxes to pay just that portion of the interest]. For what? For wars that produced little/no benefit for the US.
Trump2 + GOP has added $1.8 Trillion to the debt in FY2025, and $1.6 in FY2026. Which is a 10% increase to the federal debt [% of your FY2025 taxes to just pay the interest on that]. All to fund tax cuts to billionaires, in an economy Trump says is "A+++".
Trump's tariffs, GOP cuts to healthcare, and Trump's attack on wind/solar have cost your family $1,200 more on groceries, $1,000 more on health insurance, and $800 more on electricity. Can you afford it? Are you in favor of it?
Please note that a large percentage of southerners in particular are FULLY in favor of brutalizing both the undocumented AND the protesters! They aren't any better than Trump and his minions.
That comment has been around many times, yet we got 2 terms of Mr. Trump, so what do we make of that? Evidently, there are millions in this country that believe, this man with all his many flaws can be above the law and deserves to be our President. Go figure.
Slogans have worked for the Republicans. Slogans do not substitute for policy proposals and discussion of the facts which support them (or fail to support them.) But maybe they let them get a foot in the door.
It's how oligarchy works. The Supreme Court opened the floodgates for dark money in politics with Citizens United. Billionaires are taking over major media to control the narrative and it's anybody's guess whether the U.S. will have a free and fair national election again.
Given the amount of money in the last elections, the US hasn't really had free or fair elections for quite a while. Why would the next one be different?
Because if he can figure out a way to do it, they may be nonexistent. And he and the billionaires are working on it. I don't think the money is even an issue this time around, they want the whole ball of wax gone or given over to the feds to run,
Agreed and well said, William. Dems need to go on the offensive and also clearly illuminate what they are FOR, not just hoping that being against Rump will be enough with voters.
Agree. What Democrats are for should be described in Project 2029 as Republican described what they were for in Project 2025. And Democrats need a summary of what they are for in campaign ads just as Republicans did in 2024. Read my post. Voters want solutions to core problems including affordability of housing.
Don't forget medical. Since the other first world countries already provide good medical care for the amount our federal government already spends on it, it is clear that the entire establishment needs a thorough house cleaning.
Imagine how much it would simplify peoples' lives if they knew for a fact that if they needed medical care they would get it, period. And with a minimum of paperwork and hassle while they were recovering!
When looking for a job they would not have to factor in the insurance plans being offered, and employers would not have to mess with something totally unrelated to their business.
Yes Republican billioanaires are using philanthropy now to deceive the public so the public doesn't recognize how they and Republican are actually attacking democracy to screw the public with lower taxes for the wealthy, deadly continuous wars, poor affordability wtih poor employment, poor healthcare, poor housing and attacking public education and colleges.
Read the book, The Seeds of the Second U.S. Civil War, was wriiten by an author that saw how billionaires like the DeVos family operate in Western Michigan and are active in local, state and federal politics.
No argument with you on any of that. I can almost excuse them holding on to their ill-gotten gains until they die, but then the least they can do is give back to their communities. Set up an endowment to repair sidewalks in perpetuity or one for capital improvements to school facilities. Those simple acts would take the burden off taxpayers.
I think we need to dial the politics back 20 years and just start screaming about debt. Our debt problems are very extremely, indisputably the fault of the Republican Party. Democrats continue to be the only party that cares about it at all. And people hate debt a lot, which is why it's the most popular political cartoon label of all time.
TALK ABOUT IT. I honestly don't know if they should ever talk about ANYTHING ELSE. This is something the American public cares a LOT about, and is EXACTLY BACKWARDS in their perception of, and, as far as I can tell, Democrats and their pundits barely even TRY to correct the misperception.
We all just decided in 2011 or so that debt is "their thing" to scream about and it's our job to downplay it. Cut that out. Like Krugman reminds us, the value and risk of debt is highly context-dependent and Republicans have not treated it that way. They screamed about it for a reason. And now we actually have a bloody shirt - sorry, a red ink-y shirt - to wave around on the issue, and we're not using it.
Debt should be reduced by Democrats with new higher fair taxes on the wealthy and corporations. Republicans increase the debt with lower taxes on the wealthy and corporations and then increase spending on wars and corruption such as ICE. Republicans secretly increase taxes to pay for their corruption AND increase the cost of living with tariffs. Republicans are masters of deception and lying.
Thanks for mentioning USAID. Sadly, this administration has doomed millions of children to preventable deaths. Numbering far more than the children killed in war, they will die in darkness and anonymity while the world looks away.
Exactly, Rick. My brother worked for two relief organizations, CARE and World Neighbors, throughout the Third World in the 60's through the early 2000's. There were many times when I was visiting him in those poor countries when he would say that such and such a project was in partnership with USAID. Tremendous amounts of humanitarian aid that translates into goodwill for our country and "soft power" has been thrown away by the idiots now running our country.
The Democrats need a modern Goebbels-for-the-good-case. If you want to get to the people who voted for Trump, you can’t use too many words. You’ll lose them in a nanosecond.
Better visualize what “Republicans are for you” means. It can be sarcastic, maybe it should be, and it should show the shit show, applaud on it and repeat “Repuclicans are for you”. So show the 6 coffins coming back to the US, applaud and repeat “Republicans are for you”.
I am sure you have marketing people who know how to do this. But make the message visual, not with many words trying to explain and give background or proof why you are right. These people don’t care. But they do understand visuals, and yes, some of them will find it wonderful American soldiers are dying because that makes you a hero. A dead one, but still. Some people are truly dumb as sh*t.
What's a few billion dollars among friends, eh? But seriously, the short-term damage to US household finances is going to be catastrophic if the GOP's Iran-Epstein war continues. $6/gallon gasoline, +$1,000/household for groceries, +$1,000/household for electricity. In addition to the looming 200% increase in health insurance once the GOP's Medicaid cuts kick in this fall.
If we could get the full Epstein files out with fewer redactions to be able to see names some of those billionaires may be going to jail for their part of that rampage with little and young girls. It's a way to get them gone or in court anyway.
Not to mention the ongoing profiteering that gov't insiders might be engaging in by betting on the war via prediction markets...or the Trump sons working with drone companies to earn Pentagon contracts.
The Trump sons have been very quiet, haven't they? With luck and before daddy's done here, we may see them sitting on the inside of those courtroom tables looking at the Judge.
The GOP is like a speeding, drunken, bus driver, and we're all seated behind praying that the bus doesn't crash. IMHO the only way to get out of this endless and escalating horror show is for the DNC to take a deep breath and nominate Bernie Sanders for POTUS in 2028. He's not too old. Hey, with a younger VP ready to take over after Bernie's first term, Bernie will be a youthful 90 year old, same age as Adenauer when he retired. The hour is late....
The dems can pick just about any white ex general, then run on Bernie Sanders' platform, but promise that none of the benefits will go to black or brown people. It's glaringly obvious that the winning ticket now is some form of racist class war. Appalling that this is what the US has descended to.
I think Democrats have two excellent candidates for POTUS in 2028…if there is an election.
Gov Jay Pritzker of Illinois and Gov Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan. Both have great records, have national recognition and organizations, and are gifted campaigners.
Your visual reminded me of the movie where the suicidal train driver wanted to make sure he took people with him as he attempted to crash his speeding, runaway train. The good guys figured out what he was up to and prevented the worst of his evil plan.
I get what you’re saying and I personally love Bernie. However, despite his vigor, stuff happens at that age. The body is old. Let’s transfer that support to a younger person. He can mentor and support. But Democrats have to find someone electable . And that means taking into consideration the sad prejudices our citizens generally have.
Bernie, god bless him, will be 88 in 2028. Biden was too feeble to run again, and Trump is obviously not up to it now.
Don't leave Mark Kelly out of the conv. The Dems actually have a number of good candidates for '28. A lot will happen between now and then. '26 is what matters now.
If you think Bernie is far left then you have swallowed another Russian talking point.
In most European countries Bernie would be considered middle of the road or perhaps a bit conservative. Almost everything he endorses would be a big win for the US, when implemented. The only issue is, how do we get from here to there?
Take medical care for example. The federal government already spends amounts comparable to other developed countries, and it gets far worse outcomes. Our medical system is a rats nest of insurance companies, pharmaceutical channels, for profit hospitals, and everybody else squeezing out a little more for themselves. If medical schools were free we would have people becoming doctors who want to make lives better rather than themselves well off. If everybody was covered under the same single payor insurance policy dozens of insurance companies would go belly up, and unemployment offices would be flooded. If we acknowledged how much the government support for medical research has benefited pharmaceutical companies, and the government took a more active role in developing cures rather than palliatives for chronic conditions the pharmaceutical cash cows would be gone.
There is no question that medicine here would be far better off on the freeway with everybody else than lost in the boonies.
Michael, Bernie seems very much "with it" mentally, but that is very different from being young in an environment where, increasingly, there is a strong desire for younger politicians. There is no way Sanders can overcome that. Also, one of the realistic concerns about someone Sanders age is that a critical, irreversible change can happen very quickly. As much as I agree with Sanders politics, I would not want him to be the Democratic candidate in 2028. For any number of reasons, I doubt he would win, with age being one of them. I don't believe a young VP would alter the perception that Sanders is simply too old. Joe Biden did not seem frail and infirm in 2020 when he ran, but by 2023 he made a very different impression.
A better candidate from the standpoint of age, with similar politics, is Elizabeth Waren, but I'm afraid that she too is too old now and, of course, we have the widespread belief that no Democratic woman is electable.
It is too early to know who will be up and who will be down in 2028, but the most obvious candidate right now is Gavin Newsom, who I will not support. Few candidates convey an image of raw ambition more than Newsom and his credibility is, or should be, nonexistent. No candidate in my memory has more malleable beliefs. In my mind, Newsom stands for Newsom and nothing else. Would he be better than any Republican? Of course, but a lower bar is impossible. Pritzker has been a strong voice in opposition to Trump, but how does the fact that he's a billionaire play? On one hand, he need not be beholden to moneyed interests since his own considerable wealth insulates him, but can a party rail about billionaires and then nominate one? How would Independents react to him?
There is lots of talk about the need for Democrats to nominate a moderate and Andy Beshear's name comes up a lot. I'm not a fan of moderates and centrists for a number of reasons. First, their claim is to want to join with moderate Republicans to enact bipartisan legislation. The immediate problem with that is there are no moderate Republicans. However, I feel strongly that we've ignored so many problems for so long that moderate solutions won't suffice. That is why the politics of Sanders are appealing. Mamdani won in NYC with the word "socialist" attached to his identity, but the country is clearly not NYC and socialism doesn't play well even among (ignorant) Democrats. If one reads comments on the NY Times, it is routine for moderate/centrist Democrats to lay all the failings of the Democratic Party on the shoulders of AOC and all those progressives. Ignorance is not limited to Republican voters.
There is no Republican who I would consider to be anything but a disaster. If "incumbency" and succession mean anything, then Vance will be something of a favorite, but I doubt his likeability. I expect Rubio, one of histories great sell outs to be possibly a more attractive candidate, not only to Republicans, but to Independents, who are mostly not very well-informed and, thus, are easily manipulated. I referred to Rubio as a "sell-out," but that is more of an appearance than real. I don't think Rubio has ever had a firm set of beliefs, which means he can shift positions radically without facing any internal conflict. Vance has shown he can choose to be anything he thinks will work in his favor. It will never happen (age again), but I'd love to see Lindsey Graham get the nomination. I can't think of any Republican who would be easier to defeat. He's become a crazy old man shouting "get off our lawn" to the world. He's also become really creepy.
Are you being sarcastic? I love Bernie, and he could be a great campaign asset to whomever gets nominated, but nominating Bernie would be shooting ourselves in both feet. Too old and identified as the epitome of a radical leftist by a large proportion of the country.
I find it hard to believe that otherwise smart, well educated, and informed people are here blathering about the fine points of electoral politics. Like you, I have read some history and I follow the news to exhaustion, and that makes it clear to me that believing that this literally criminally culpable, in crazy regime is going to step down and leave office because they allowed themselves to be beaten in a free and fair election, is a total and complete delusion. If there was ever a time to think the previously unthinkable, this is it.
Well, you have thought the unthinkable, what is it?
For myself, nominating Bernie Sanders is bordering on the unthinkable, which explains all the criticisms hurled at me. I don't believe that centrist democrats like Newsom and Pritzker will deliver enough electoral punch to overcome the madness of Trump and his grisly gang, and even if they did we would be left with the 51/49 horror show.
Turns out "The DNC" doesn't choose who our nominees are, at all, as much as people online like to pretend it does, possibly because they think typing the acronym makes them look keyed-in.
If the DNC actually made these decisions, and not voters, Joe Biden would have never been President. What we probably would have gotten is Amy Klobuchar, or maybe Harris, losing to Trump. (Which is not to say either couldn't have won, too.) But the party establishment has never liked Biden much. They consider him to be too traditionalist on labor, too active in markets, and thought he was "cringe" even before his speech started faltering.
(Also, nominating Bernie, whom I supported in 2020, at 87 is a cartoonishly terrible idea, but I'm pretty sure you're joking about that.)
I go by the numbers, and apparently you're not familiar with them. In 2016, before the DNC chose Hillary, there were multiple hypothetical polls running Bernie v Trump and Hillary v Trump. Sanders v Trump was typically 70:30 with practically no-one undecided. On the other hand, Hillary v Trump was 35:35 with 30% undecided. IMHO, the choice of Hillary was political malpractice. So now, Bernie is a decade older. Who cares? He's not demented and he draws wild crowds of young people.
I had thought Gavin Newsom looked presidential, but both he and Pritzker are too corporate, and while they may win an election we're back to the same old 50/50 mushy compromise that got us into this horror show.
As for Trump, let him laugh, Sanders will wipe the floor with his orange combover.
I love Bernie, but nationally, he would not fly. We need millions of other folks to like him as well. This next time around we need candidates that are not "far anything", just people who can run in the middle with films of Minneapolis, Ice, the war, the food lines, Musk with his giant saw, and on and on and. Then, constant shots of the economy. Up close with gas tanks, individual grocery costs, lines of Food Banks, insurance costs, beef alone is off the charts with most meat not far off.
Oh, hold your comment we may get there before this is all over. How much does that plane, and soldiers cost that went down in Iraq? And who really is keeping the books? We get lied to about so many things, why would any of them be honest about the cost of this "non-war" or excursion as Mr. Trump is now calling this tragedy.
Hegseth is already seriously lowballing the cost of Trump's Iran-Epstein War. Maybe multiply any $$$ cost estimates the Administration tosses out by 500%?
A recent study by Brown University, for example, estimates the total cost of our post-911 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have topped $8 TRILLION dollars. That's roughly 20% of our entire federal debt! And for what? What did it gain us? Sure, it made Israel happy; but gave us nothing. No more irresponsibly expensive GOP wars!
Yes. And let’s be clear, it was a GIRLS school. Because when it comes right down to it, who in the billionaire class cares one fig about Iranian schoolgirls?
Matt Schlapp, a prominent conservative lobbyist and the head of the American Conservative Union (which runs CPAC), during a debate on Piers Morgan Uncensored suggested the Iranian girls were better off dead than living a life in a "barbaric, unequal society behind a burqa, with no ability to make career choices".
Two things: the idiot demonstrated his ignorance with his use of the Afghani burqa for Iranian women and girls. Also, he omits mentioning that the White Christian Nationalist ideology promoted by Doug Wilson and Pete Hegseth and Mike Johnson are guilty of many of the same tactics against women, minus the "burqa."
The excruciating fact that this regime bombed a girls’ school is consistent with their ongoing war against women. And there has been one for years. In fact, in the GOP, the war on women is a structurally necessary plank in their platform.
The attack was based on old info, why would the US bomb a school on purpose? Looks bad. The US torpedoed in international waters a ship with 180 people on board - 150 of them drowned. That is 150 husbands, sons, brothers, not coming home.
Iran is now led by a man whose parents, his wife, and one of his children, were killed by us.
And that ‘old’ intelligence may well have been caught by the US Counter Intelligence team (CI-12) tasked with monitoring Iranian threats — had they all not been shitcanned by Kash ‘Krazy Eyes’ Patel barely a week before the US/Israeli offensive began. Let’s just think about that for a minute. He fired at least a dozen counter intelligence agents specifically working on the Iran file one week before this began. A thinking person might ask why? Why do that? And more critically, why then?
Exactly, Patrick. Meanwhile, as in past Middle East U.S. invasions, hatred towards our country just keeps growing exponentially and understandably. How would YOU feel towards some country that flew in and bombed one of our elementary schools, killing hundreds of children? I don't think it is hyperbole to say that Trump has destroyed virtually all the goodwill towards the U.S. around the world in a little over a year.
And it's not just about destroying goodwill. It's about creating anger, resentment, and... terrorism. Think about all the new generations of Iranians now furious at the United States and what could happen.
Iran has hundreds of thousands of members of their Revolutionary Guard, Basij Militia, and military – and Trump thinks he can just stop the hostilities whenever he wants to? So unbelievably stupid. The Strait of Hormuz will be at risk for years to come.
Right, Acela. They completely disregard the reality of blowback. Biggest mistake American voters have ever made putting this sorry excuse for a human being back into power.
Coupled w/ the slashing of USAID, which is hurting places like Afghanistan (which is currently fighting an 'open war' with Pakistan, America's era of soft power is over.
There seems to be this attitude that if we're doing the bombing then it's for their own good because we're America and we're the good guys. Sorry about that school, but we were just trying to help by destroying your country. This might cause some resentment.
The very first day that all happened the news came out that was an American bomb. Here we are days later, and Trump is still trying to blame Iran for it. James from New Orleans once said, if his mouth is moving, he's lying.
And all Zuckerberg cares about is his purchase of a $170 million estate. In Florida, where else. On that safe little island where the filthy rich think they are utterly and completely safe from the little people. 175 dead children? What is that compared to a $170 million compound? /s
Less than a week ago Trump attended the repatriation of servicemen and servicewomen killed in the Iran conflict. Since that time Trump has repeatedly downplayed the conflict and the lives lost...referring to the conflict as an "excursion". Trump's well-known disregard for servicemembers was on full display.
If Trump does not care about the lives of US servicemembers do not expect him care one iota about the loss of 175 Iranian school kids.
Obfuscation is an understatement. When asked about the attack on the school, Trump couldn't just say "It's under investigation". He had to lie and say Iran had done it as they also have Tomahawk missiles. He just can't help himself. The truth to him is whatever he wishes it were. And unfortunately 40% of our country seems to take him at his word.
As usual, the tiny elephant in the room in your otherwise brilliant comments: the disproportionate influence of Israeli Nazi-like prime minister Netanyahu on American foreign policy, in particular in West Asia.
Other people ALWAYS pay the price. Remember "only little people pay taxes"? The billionaires buy their candidates and reap all the rewards. Everyone else is left with crumbs (if they're lucky).
Hey, I have an overfilled house! (Mostly with books.) But that's because I'm a recovering shopaholic and pretty anal-retentive. I don't subscribe to print magazines because I wouldn't be able to force myself to throw the back issues away.
True, but psychopathy is. Especially when the psychopath in question has the big red button for launching half the world's nuclear arsenal within three feet of him at all times.
I hear you. However, psychopathy is not a standalone diagnosis. It's "traits" comprise those of an Antisocial Personality Disorder, which is largely untreatable. Interestingly, there is research, but no treatment or cure for pedophilia even through chemical or physical castration. They will find other ways to sexually violate children. DJT is a flaming antisocial. He appears to meet criteria for Borderline and Narcissistic Personality Disorders. In all my years in psychiatry, I've never seen a patient that is as characterologically disordered as him. Again, no cure.
I'm pretty sure it was H. L. Hunt (Dallas oilman) who said, "life is a game, and money is what we keep score with." I guarantee you that EVERY ONE of these ultra-rich men agrees with that viewpoint.
And they compete with each other by buying bigger, "better" and more expensive toys and trinkets. Zuckerberg's house, Bezos' yacht (and Epstein's island). As Mary Trump said in the title of her book about donald: Too Much and Never Enough. It applies to nearly all billionaires (save a few such as Melinda French Gates and Mackenzie Scott.)
It's not a mental health issue; it's one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Perhaps it should be categorized as a mortal sin, since it destroys lives, the truth, and all that makes us care about humanity.
This is why we need to make it a national policy that there shall not be billionaires. It is pretty obvious that they are a cancer on the body politic. And we need to do it in coordination with other countries so that if they flee - it is to places like North Korea.
Let there be billionaires — but tax them into multimillionaires. Let them pay for their wars. Let them fund the common good. If they were real capitalists, they would know that wealth redistribution is capitalism's life support. But the truth is they were never capitalists. They are fascists.
We are in very precarious territory. The midterms are an inflection point which could turn us back toward Democracy or dump us into a Bizarro-World totalitarian state. We all need to brainstorm ways to increase voter engagement and participation.
That is the solution that Robert Reich is proposing. It is hit or miss, because I don't think it will happen in red or most purple states. And, It does nothing to address the massive spending by the oligarchs.
Unregulated capitalism leads to gilded ages as now and fascism. It is basically social Darwinism. It will probably take a major 30s style Depression (and perhaps a world war} to shock people into some kind of wealth redistribution such as we experienced from the 1940s through the 1980s until the onset of the ridiculous "trickle down" Reagan era nonsense. For historical perspective read CAPITAL IN THE 21ST CENTURY BY Thomas Piketty.
And frankly, that's how Schumer views his job....fund Israel & ensure that Americans at least get the crumbs off the table, as right wing gouges on lobster tail and crab 🦀. Dems have become a subsidiary of MAGA. Just not as cruel but echoing similar policies.
This is why I am not sanguine about the prospects for meaningful reform once the Democrats are in power: Too many are owned by the billionaire and corporate interests. We need to be careful lest we elect people like Schumer, Manchin, Fetterman, . . .
Don't give to the Democrats but rather to individual candidates who are committed progressives.
Dems turned corporate in response to getting smacked down by the St. Reagan "revolution". Schumer originally won over Al D'Amato - who was far worse. In his last election, he went up against Republican nominee Joe Pinion III, a news show host and businessman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Pinion.
Those were the choices we were given. I stayed home for that election.
It was a lie, right from the start. And it took the catastrophe of Trumpkopf for Americans to only first begin waking up to the reality that we've been trickled on for over four and a half decades.
Trickle Down was/is a scam of epic proportions. It was concocted on the back of a napkin by economist Art Laffer....and the right wing after 50 years of transferring wealth to the wealthy/corps are STILL laughing.. And many f*cking idiot Dems went along with it.
It has become the "normal" economic policy in many countries. Our own Macron believes (or pretends to believe...) in it. It is used to justify regressive tax policies and cutting back social and public services, starving the state while privatising essential services. It has been applied more extensively in the US and the UK but it has progressed everywhere since the '80s.
There was never any question that a weekend talk show host on Fox News was totally unqualified to be Secretary of Defense. But, do not ever forget that Hegseth has this position only because the Senate confirmed his nomination. Each of those Senators who knowingly voted to confirm a totally unqualified man to run the US military has the blood of every service member casualty, every Iranian school girls killed, and every other soul killed in this illegal war on their hands.
Do not forget Jon Husted from Ohio, who voted for Hegseth and every other Trump regime nomination. Please support Sherrod Brown's return to the Senate.
Senator Husted is also the moron who blamed the POOR who are having a hard time with the price increases as 'not understanding how money works,' and added a stupid story, supposedly told to him by a woman who bought everything 'with SNAP cards all her life.'
Yet he was one of the Senators attacking Biden for his fiscal policies that were 'hurting Americans.'
I got the list from Wikipedia, but I think you are correct . Perhaps an edit to Wikipedia? I don’t have the first idea of how that works, only that it is done.
Incompetence was the qualification for all the jobs in the administration. One just needed to look good and be a loyal sychopant. Goal to distroy all that was good in the governmment agencies.
This is arguably the most incompetent gang of vicious fools to ever, in all history, be in charge of a significant country. I'm saying this as a professional historian. There have been many dumb, senile, even mad leaders but to my knowledge never such deep incompetence throughout a regime. Current example: Release 400m barrels of oil Big wow. Can anybody here do arithmetic? That's 20 days of oil through the Straits of Hormuz.
Agreed. And if you remember, Collins, Murkowski and McConnell took turns where 2 of the three would vote no, but never all three together... they thought we wouldn't notice their collusion to be able to say they voted no, while never keeping a nominee from being confirmed.
The Republican Party failure to lead extends well beyond the 50+ Senators. Oregon's Republican Party and other state Republican parties took official positions the 2020 election was "stolen" from DJT.
This is not the first time a party narrowed its interests to a tiny fraction of the electorate and its party representatives supported, and participated in, a system of patronage and loyalty over competence. In the 21st century the Republican Party may well replace the Whig Party of the 19th century as the last major political party to be swept from the field of electoral politics in the United States. One can hope for that designation upon a Republican Party with its ranks filled with DJT, JDV, and its motley cast in the Senate, House and state legislatures.
Maybe all that money went to Trump’s elaborate assassination show. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I still can’t believe that no one is questioning “how did your ear cartilage grow back Trump? Who was that assassin? Why is that you duck every time you hear a loud noise, but that day you were pumping your fist as they flew an American flag above you? How did they time that flag so perfectly? Did you deliberately kill that guy in the crowd?” After the Epstein files, nothing would surprise me.
Ya know I have the exact same opinion as you. At first I thought nah… I’m being paranoid but facts is facts. I DO think it’s quite possible it was all a staged thing and some poor bastard died in the process. Also the fact Trump even stood up and pumped his fist right afterwards. That makes no sense - him or his handlers.
Trump's ear looks perfect. It was a stunt gone wrong, or a set up of the trigger kid who wasn't told they were going to kill him. Parents are silent. DHS IG told not to investigate an apparently major failure by the Secret Service. SS agents let him stand up after he punctured the squib. Photographer in perfect position. Someday the truth will come out.
They were reacting to the news, so there's speculation there. What I was hunting for was Dr. Benjamin's take on the undamaged cartilage . Didn't find it.
A key question here is… let’s say you wanted to stage the injury process. What would that effort look like? How would you do it and what would it look like? Also people in the crowd hit by blood… test that blood. Is it real? Does it have Ts DNA? All the complete silence shortly afterward makes little sense but it’s possible I suppose.
FWIW, earlobes tend to bleed a lot more than people expect.
Also, if they were planning on having some kid participate (and get killed), they would have arranged somebody who wasn't also shopping around online for *any* big name political figure to target within driving distance, but give him a clearly pro-Dem and strong anti-Trump background.
Please let the Dem leaders know this. I’m still waiting for them to say billionaires and corruption are the problem…rather than spending their time raising money from them. If we want to return to democracy, stability, a large middle class, the system must go. Abolish super PACs. Abolish dark money. Full and complete transparency. Caps on campaign contributions. Public financing of campaigns. Until I hear this from Dem leaders, they don’t get it and we will stay in this spiral.
Also, abolish the electoral college and gerrymandering! And put term limits and standards of ethics on Supreme Court justices. And if we want to go further, proportional representation in the Senate!
I wonder if part of the problem with many Democrats in power (not all) is that they are at least millionaires? That and many are focused on keeping their place in government rather than on what their people need. I don't think the Dems are anywhere as bad as Repubs, but it's still there.
Yes - to a degree - but our only realistic path to a more just society, as has been the case for over a hundred years - is through a Democratic government. They have given us all of the progressive legislation we have had for the past 100 years. They are not perfect, but the morons who rant against "the system" and who engage in both-siderism are simply wrong. Idealism may be a noble thing, but it won't get a hold of the levers of power. We need someone in the mold of FDR. And if you want to find any of his faults and point them out to the exclusion of what he accomplished, you're part of the problem.
Completely agree, Paul! Our only hope out of this death spiral caused by money from billionaires and votes from Fox News watchers is to install Democrats in Congress and in the White House. For now, it takes money from zillionaires to Dems to fight the money and misinformation coming from maga supporters. That can change when Dems have enough seats in Congress to force legislation that gives the kittle gal/guy more of a voice. Stop this Dem bashing and both-side-ism! Our goal must be to elect Dems and demand with our votes/calls/letters/votes that we want legislative change so that the combination of toxic short-sighted power-hungry captains of industry and the faux populist utterly immoral rabble rouzer politicians are no longer running our country into destruction and dishonor.
I am 80 and learned to hate Nixon at a very early age. It took being a history major and a couple of decades to realize his very positive impact on foreign policy and understand that he signed more Civil Rights legislation into law than either JFK or LBJ. These facts don't change the truth that he was a lying, cheating, paranoid, miserable person who should never have become President.
As a non-American observer, at risk of stating the obvious, unless I my understanding is completely off, the 'problem' is cross-party. Namely, Citizens United.
If and when the Democrats ever regain power (and at this point, with the current administration making every effort to tilt the scales, it is a very big IF), overturning Citizens United must be of utmost, urgent priority. Without which, there is simply no prospect of the US ever becoming a fair and equitable democracy.
Unfortunately, to your point, many a Democrat congressman will be as antithetical to such a policy as any Republican. Short of a massive increase in citizen campaign financing, a citizens uprising, or civil war, the appalling, inequitable, corrupt and undemocratic status quo will remain, changing from time to time only in hue.
I just googled billionaires political contributions and they're 2 to 1 Republican. While I don't disagree, this doesn't seem like where we should be focused. A better argument IMHO is to end citizens united.
It's not whether billionaire money is partisan; it's the fact that it's so disproportionate within the electorate that it's totally undemocratic. It is sufficiently oligarchic to be unconstitutional on its face.
We also need to dilute the two party system. We need open primaries and ranked choice voting. If the billionaires have to think about what’s going on down ballot and third party potential, that also dilutes their influence.
We have become what we fought the Revolutionary War against, a polity ruled by a distant, exploitative elite. So much for government of, by, and for the people.
The US military, all volunteers, has about 1,300,000 enlisted troops, each of whom has a “blue star family” praying for their safety. Not one is on Forbes’ list of billionaires.
The National Gold Star Family Registry reports approximately 472,050 Gold Star families, covering all conflicts since World War I. According to Google AI, not a single Gold Star family belongs to the billionaire class.
When will Barron enlist to support his father’s actions? 47 looks weak when his own family isn’t behind him, imho.
It is strange that so many republicans and right leaning people love "chicken hawks."
As you probably know chicken hawks are people who claim to love the military and war but "dodged the draft" back when we had a draft. Probably the most well-known chicken hawk was Dick Cheney. Dick never met a war that he did not like, and Dick thought that our foreign policy problems could be solved by war. But during the Vietnam War, Dick had other things to do aside from actually serving in the military.
The same with Donald. As we can see he is a great advocate for war and killing. But he dodged actual service in the military.
My personal feeling is that anyone who advocates for war and sending young people to fight and die, should be or should have been willing to do the same thing.
I always had a lot of respect for George H. W. Bush because, although he took us to war in Kuwait, he actually served in the military during World War II and flew airplane missions and was shot down.
So sorry, Aubrey, but the younger Bush served in a special unit of the Texas National Guard reserved for sons of men of influence and even bailed on that service when he went missing from service for a long period during the Vietnam War. This was a matter of controversy during his presidential election but immense political pressure was brought to bear to bury the facts. I’ll look for a reference but can only repeat for now that his service in the military was not honorable.
Of the 14 US President in office after WWII. 10 were veterans of US military service and the 4 who did not were Clinton, Obama, Biden and Trump. Notice the trend?
I agree with you overall position, but there have been extremely wealthy men who died in military service for this country. The most famous is probably JFK's brother who died in WWII in a bomber trying to take out some NAZI sub pens in Norway. He was the one old Joe was grooming to become President, John was just a default choice.
There have been wealthy people who have served in the military and some like J p Morgan, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and so forth who did not serve in the Civil War. But they were not out advocating for war and urging others to fight.
What I am against is the hypocrisy of people (particularly politicians) who praise the military and praise war, but who have themselves never tried to serve in the military. I don't like people who want to have a war, but they want other people to fight and die while they sit safely at home.
Hegseth did serve in combat and he is to be commended for that. But he does not have the character or experience to be Secretary of Defense.
There are hundreds, if not thousands of items to name as part of the degradation of the United States into tens, if not hundreds of descriptors. As an 80 year old with a vivid memory of the Viet Nam era, I would include the ending of the draft. The draft was a burden in many ways. But: there was at least some sense of obligation as part of citizenship; it mixed persons of all races, origins, social status, education levels, wealth levels; it forced at least some period of humility; it meant some period of serving more than oneself; it touched virtually every family (and "bone spurs" meant a bit of life long shame). Having lived through that time, I know that it ended due to the turning of young men (it was only for men) into cannon fodder for no good reason. I will always believe that some period of obligatory service (it need not be only military) would foster a better idea of unity of purpose for the country.
Yes, I think everyone needs to experience a period of mandatory service, especially in the nonprofit world. Places like soup kitchens, homeless shelters and helping newly arriving refugees to acclimate to a brand new world.
I agree with this, the idea of civic spirit, but slightly different. It should be required that everyone serve the country in some way - could be military, teach for America, some sort of conservation core, serving the elderly or homeless, etc. There could be many choices that young people applied for and spent a year or two doing. It would hopefully grow world views, empathy, compassion, and encourage continued investment in civic duty. Of course there would be people who try to get out. Since there would be choices, make that a hard no. Of course there would be people who would hate every moment and learn nothing, but those kinds of people always have and always will exist.
Young men of even less than affluent families could find ways to avoid the draft. The war would increasingly fall on the shoulders of the poor. African Americans were disproportionately represented in the casualty lists.
The Vietnam war ended not long after the lottery system was set up and deferments were no longer available. Of course, the millionaires could buy their way to safety. GW Bush learned to fly fighter jets and could come and go at will.
It only seemed "not long" because the war dragged on for so long. The lottery was first held in December 1969 and US involvement in the war continued into 1972. Casualties began to drop after 1968, before the lottery, as Johnson began a series of withdrawals that Nixon continued. Nixon, though, shifted the burden of the war onto the people of Indochina by carpet bombing Cambodia and destroying North Vietnam's infrastructure. The war worsened but fewer American boys weren't returning in caskets.
Indeed, hence “bone spurs.” But still, overall there was some leveling. Now, a universal time of some sort of service to the country would be a worthy idea.
Guys could get a deferment during the Vietnam war from the draft if they were enrolled in college, another way that money could influence who got drafted.
So, we had people making babies and enrolling in college to avoid the draft. Probably not the best idea for building loving families or leadership quality.
The outcome of having less people who actually cared about learning getting degrees, and who have been running things for decades is part of why we’re in this mess now.
Only until the lottery entered the picture in 1970. We went to a lottery because the military complained about the intelligence level of draftees. They wanted to be able to draft some of those college kids.
I thought the lottery was instituted because draft boards were perceived as discriminatory, and that most men were drafted before’70. My memory is a little cloudy on this.
The war continued until 1975. The draft itself ended in 1973. That's quite a lot of time if one were to be eligible for the draft. The April 24, 1971 march on Washington (in which I participated) was not at the time believed to be a step towards the end of the war - the war seemed endless at that time.
What I posted about the reasons for the lottery was what the Pentagon claimed at the time.
Mandatory service for all, male and female, at age 10 for a minimum of 1 year. Novel concept. Not really because Israel has been doing it for about 75 years.
And service in Israel isn't actually mandatory yet. The religious exemption has been eliminated by the Supreme Court, but Netanyahu is slow walking the implementation because the religious vote keeps him in power.
This post highlights the importance of the approach taken by Texan James Talarico. He says we need to turn away from the left vs right and right vs left arguments to one of the ultra rich vs everyone else. Maybe an “anti-feudalism” movement will resonate with more Americans than even “anti-fascism.”
I think Talarico's vision is very astute. His version of Christianity is extremely powerful and will resonate in places where the usual liberal Democrat message is anathema. People consistently say they want bipartisan governance. Media that reflects that is the key. How we get that is the question.
Here's a third alternative: The billionaires are, for the most part, idiot-savants and/or imbeciles whose wish-list includes things that are ultimately catastrophic. But being idiot-savants and/or imbeciles, they're not capable of thinking through any of their actions or desires beyond "me want NOW!!"
Thus Musk and DOGE. Thus MBS and bribing Kushner&Witkoff to go to war with Iran. Thus the wiping out of America's clean-energy capabilities. And so on--all of these things long-term disasters that provide the extremely short-term kick the billionaires want NOW!!!
I don't think the Arabs were all in on attacking Iran. They were working on coming to diplomatic agreements with them. I think it is mostly Israel and MAGA/Trump. Both have dreams of colonial empires.
I saw a video shot in Bahrain during an Iranian missile attack on U.S. interests (I think the subtitle said it was a military base). Every time a missile hit, the people there would send up a loud cheer.
Boom. You have hit the nail on the head. The billionaire hoarders care not for We the People and how we live... or die, so long as they have the power and riches to do as they please.
Thanks to Professor Krugman for his clearsighted comments. He hit the nail on the head as he often does.
Is America a great country or what?
The Federalist Society and the Supreme Court lead by CJ Roberts have done more to destroy Democracy in America than anyone else. Why don't we hear more criticism of the Supremes?
The Democrats should be traveling the country speaking against the corruption of the Supreme Court and the Federalist Society, Heritage Society, and so forth.
Welcome I've been talking about the vitality of the supreme court since 1998, I am a political scientist, historian, and a former journalist, and many others that's why we fought so hard and yelled so hard and nobody listened nobody listened to 98 nobody listened in 2016 they let the judge had taken away from President Obama they let Citizens United go through and it's hard to talk about something when they are for life and practically untouchable and operate behind veil of secrecy and the politicians who could do something about it which would be what they call stacking the court didn't see it and didn't have the courage to do it it would have taken a hell of a fight politically, but that's the only way to stop it, and that remains if the Democrats do Take Over Control the only way to stop it legally anyway within our system period but y'all have not been listening all this information is out there, this latest article is just a Stark provable look backwards as to how we got where we are, and it tracks with everything many of us have been saying for a long time about money in politics and the elimination of the fairness immediate doctrine they've made movies about this written about this you all laugh about this but it's happened, and now the world is barreling towards something pretty damn badge, I hope nobody pushes a button, but that wouldn't shock me either, there's seven or eight maybe nine or ten and one of those countries is right in the middle of the worst of it that's that time you think that if there is a full-on existential threat to their very existence their leader won't push that button? Think again you know that guy you know what he's already done and oh that's possible Force in the universe to hold in back what have been the leader of the former us that but currently, that guy I'll probably push him to do it
What's particularly interesting about the Federalist Society is that they are now under attack from MAGA. They are far right and want to dismantle the social safety net and modern social norms, but they do believe in the rule of law and democracy. Scores of them have been fired or quit in protest.
At this point, what is the most important is rule of law and democracy.
I was amused to read that Nazi Israelis and American Nazi Christians are expecting this war to usher in their Messiahs, someone is going to be disappointed.
They think Armageddon is real? So did psychic-to-the-stars-and-devout-Christian Jeane Dixon, who predicted that the Messiah will return in 2037. I kinda hope they’re right. I like how that story ends.
I always thought that Christianity and the teaching of Jesus were about living a Good, Christian life now. So, I find it strange that so many people who say that they are strong Christians are so obsessed about life in the end times or Armageddon which happens off in the future.
And who suffers when billionaires strike? The innocent children who went to school without a care in the world.
The fact 175 Iranian children died in a US attack while Trump and Hegseth obfuscate about manliness and toughness is a microcosm of where we are as a society today.
It's crucial for Trump--and apparently some of his billionaire friends--to continue to distract from the suppression of the Trump-Epstein files.
So far we've spent perhaps $30 billion on this Iran-Epstein War. A drop in the bucket to the $4 TRILLION we spent on the GOP wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
.-------------------
Edit 9/4/26: Actual cost of Trump's uneccessary Iran-Epstein War now unofficially tops $200 billion.
Yes but it is 30 billion AND COUNTING. Also, the 4 trillion included replacing all those armaments and that has not been factored in yet. We're looking at roughly 1.5 billion a day and counting. A hell of a lot of SNAP benefits, Medicare premiums, and USAID assistance could be bought for just one day of this pure evilness.
Peter
Krugman profoundly identified how the billionaire’s war is being enabled by funding extensive lying in Republican campaigns which has destroyed American democracy with “the immense effect of other deployments of billionaires’ wealth, notably the subversion of both conventional and social media.”
The deployment of billionaires’ wealth to subvert the media has vividly appeared in a new Republican campaign video TV ad which starts with Trump saying in his SOTU speech – “If you believe the first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens, stand up”. The video then scans the audience and shows how Democrats react with disgust and remain sitting while Republicans cheer and stand up. Then the campaign ad closes by saying “Republicans are for you”.
Democrats need to make a TV and social media campaign ad sending the truth to voters with these words - Republicans are not for you. Republicans are funded by billionaires to take your money, your jobs, your healthcare, your food, your safety, and your voting rights. Republicans are for the lawless, fascist autocracy run by Trump that destroys democracy, rejects the Constitution, ignores the rule of law, and permits armed ICE agents to murder innocent American citizens in the streets of Minneapolis. Republicans are for Trump’s DOJ that blocks any prosecution of the murder and protects officials in Trump’s administration that violate the law and then disobey thousands of court orders to halt the violations. Republicans are for Trump’s war with Iran and for helping Putin win his war with Ukraine. Republicans are for Trump’s attacks on affordability with tariffs and the Big Beautiful Bill that supports wealth inequality to privilege billionaire oligarchs by continuing to steal wealth from 99% of Americans, transferring the wealth to the top 0.01%.
We need a short slogan with emotional appeal which conveys these many facts. The Republican video ad you refer to has the emotional appeal without the clutter of facts. Our trouble is too many examples of facts available to contradict the claim that “Republicans are for you.”
The Republican ad allegedly shows Democrats are “not for you” based on that cleverly false choice Trump offered in his SOTU. Republicans there showed they are “for you” by clapping loud and long. Nothing of substance.
Our ads need to have the emotional appeal, they need to expose the biggest Republican failures (not all in the same ad!), and to provide some recent example of “Democrats are for you!” This is just my opinion and I desperately hope someone can create such ads.
Exactly, Carol. I suggest a masculine voice-over saying something like "It's not about blue and red but right and wrong. It's not about left versus right but right versus wrong. It's not about liberal versus conservative but competent versus incompetent. Extremism and unAmerican behavior can no longer be disguised as patriotic." These words will play over emotional footage of all the nightmarish things this administration has been doing. Powerful ad!
Or just make it about the money, about your taxes going to waste. The GOP's Iraq + Afghanistan wars cost a combined $4 Trillion, all of it added to the debt. That's 12% of the entire national debt. Which translates into [% of your 2025 taxes to pay just that portion of the interest]. For what? For wars that produced little/no benefit for the US.
Trump2 + GOP has added $1.8 Trillion to the debt in FY2025, and $1.6 in FY2026. Which is a 10% increase to the federal debt [% of your FY2025 taxes to just pay the interest on that]. All to fund tax cuts to billionaires, in an economy Trump says is "A+++".
Trump's tariffs, GOP cuts to healthcare, and Trump's attack on wind/solar have cost your family $1,200 more on groceries, $1,000 more on health insurance, and $800 more on electricity. Can you afford it? Are you in favor of it?
Please note that a large percentage of southerners in particular are FULLY in favor of brutalizing both the undocumented AND the protesters! They aren't any better than Trump and his minions.
That's still too long. 20 secs tops. Flash pics wo speech, then ask in large font: is this what you want? Don't forget the ominous music.
James Talarico might be on the right track. He's reminding us what being a truly Christian nation REALLY means.
My modest suggestion:
If you believe that NOBODY is above the law,
If you believe that NOBODY is below deserving a hand up when they need it,
Then you are a Democrat.
That comment has been around many times, yet we got 2 terms of Mr. Trump, so what do we make of that? Evidently, there are millions in this country that believe, this man with all his many flaws can be above the law and deserves to be our President. Go figure.
BTW, it just struck me that that second sentence should be rephrased positively:
If you believe that EVERYBODY deserves a hand up when they need it,
Carol C
Totally agree, and in addition to ads with emotional appeal, a longer description is needed in a Project 2029 of what Democrats are for and WILL DO.
Read my post.
https://williamlmiller.substack.com/p/post-6-project-2029-will-get-democrats-348
The farmstead idea is interesting. We knew a guy who grew hydroponic tomatoes for himself. Why not?
throw in a bunch of cuddly basset hounds with geriatric grandmoms, thats helpful for catching eyeballs.
cant wait, just what I hoped for a new slogan
Slogans have worked for the Republicans. Slogans do not substitute for policy proposals and discussion of the facts which support them (or fail to support them.) But maybe they let them get a foot in the door.
It's how oligarchy works. The Supreme Court opened the floodgates for dark money in politics with Citizens United. Billionaires are taking over major media to control the narrative and it's anybody's guess whether the U.S. will have a free and fair national election again.
Given the amount of money in the last elections, the US hasn't really had free or fair elections for quite a while. Why would the next one be different?
Because if he can figure out a way to do it, they may be nonexistent. And he and the billionaires are working on it. I don't think the money is even an issue this time around, they want the whole ball of wax gone or given over to the feds to run,
So, other than tax cuts, what are these billionaires getting out of this man? They already have that so now what?
Agreed and well said, William. Dems need to go on the offensive and also clearly illuminate what they are FOR, not just hoping that being against Rump will be enough with voters.
Peter
Agree. What Democrats are for should be described in Project 2029 as Republican described what they were for in Project 2025. And Democrats need a summary of what they are for in campaign ads just as Republicans did in 2024. Read my post. Voters want solutions to core problems including affordability of housing.
https://williamlmiller.substack.com/p/post-6-project-2029-will-get-democrats-348
https://rebeccarbibbs.substack.com/p/billionaires-renege-on-promise-to?r=5dsiiv&utm_medium=ios
Don't forget medical. Since the other first world countries already provide good medical care for the amount our federal government already spends on it, it is clear that the entire establishment needs a thorough house cleaning.
Imagine how much it would simplify peoples' lives if they knew for a fact that if they needed medical care they would get it, period. And with a minimum of paperwork and hassle while they were recovering!
When looking for a job they would not have to factor in the insurance plans being offered, and employers would not have to mess with something totally unrelated to their business.
And cheaper to boot!
https://rebeccarbibbs.substack.com/p/billionaires-renege-on-promise-to?r=5dsiiv&utm_medium=ios
https://rebeccarbibbs.substack.com/p/billionaires-renege-on-promise-to?r=5dsiiv&utm_medium=ios
Rebecca
Yes Republican billioanaires are using philanthropy now to deceive the public so the public doesn't recognize how they and Republican are actually attacking democracy to screw the public with lower taxes for the wealthy, deadly continuous wars, poor affordability wtih poor employment, poor healthcare, poor housing and attacking public education and colleges.
Read the book, The Seeds of the Second U.S. Civil War, was wriiten by an author that saw how billionaires like the DeVos family operate in Western Michigan and are active in local, state and federal politics.
No argument with you on any of that. I can almost excuse them holding on to their ill-gotten gains until they die, but then the least they can do is give back to their communities. Set up an endowment to repair sidewalks in perpetuity or one for capital improvements to school facilities. Those simple acts would take the burden off taxpayers.
the DNC hardly wants to separate itself from the GOP.
I think we need to dial the politics back 20 years and just start screaming about debt. Our debt problems are very extremely, indisputably the fault of the Republican Party. Democrats continue to be the only party that cares about it at all. And people hate debt a lot, which is why it's the most popular political cartoon label of all time.
TALK ABOUT IT. I honestly don't know if they should ever talk about ANYTHING ELSE. This is something the American public cares a LOT about, and is EXACTLY BACKWARDS in their perception of, and, as far as I can tell, Democrats and their pundits barely even TRY to correct the misperception.
We all just decided in 2011 or so that debt is "their thing" to scream about and it's our job to downplay it. Cut that out. Like Krugman reminds us, the value and risk of debt is highly context-dependent and Republicans have not treated it that way. They screamed about it for a reason. And now we actually have a bloody shirt - sorry, a red ink-y shirt - to wave around on the issue, and we're not using it.
Debt should be reduced by Democrats with new higher fair taxes on the wealthy and corporations. Republicans increase the debt with lower taxes on the wealthy and corporations and then increase spending on wars and corruption such as ICE. Republicans secretly increase taxes to pay for their corruption AND increase the cost of living with tariffs. Republicans are masters of deception and lying.
Thanks for mentioning USAID. Sadly, this administration has doomed millions of children to preventable deaths. Numbering far more than the children killed in war, they will die in darkness and anonymity while the world looks away.
Exactly, Rick. My brother worked for two relief organizations, CARE and World Neighbors, throughout the Third World in the 60's through the early 2000's. There were many times when I was visiting him in those poor countries when he would say that such and such a project was in partnership with USAID. Tremendous amounts of humanitarian aid that translates into goodwill for our country and "soft power" has been thrown away by the idiots now running our country.
The Democrats need a modern Goebbels-for-the-good-case. If you want to get to the people who voted for Trump, you can’t use too many words. You’ll lose them in a nanosecond.
Better visualize what “Republicans are for you” means. It can be sarcastic, maybe it should be, and it should show the shit show, applaud on it and repeat “Repuclicans are for you”. So show the 6 coffins coming back to the US, applaud and repeat “Republicans are for you”.
I am sure you have marketing people who know how to do this. But make the message visual, not with many words trying to explain and give background or proof why you are right. These people don’t care. But they do understand visuals, and yes, some of them will find it wonderful American soldiers are dying because that makes you a hero. A dead one, but still. Some people are truly dumb as sh*t.
How about a little edit of their slogan, one added word:
Republicans are (coming) for you!
What's a few billion dollars among friends, eh? But seriously, the short-term damage to US household finances is going to be catastrophic if the GOP's Iran-Epstein war continues. $6/gallon gasoline, +$1,000/household for groceries, +$1,000/household for electricity. In addition to the looming 200% increase in health insurance once the GOP's Medicaid cuts kick in this fall.
If we could get the full Epstein files out with fewer redactions to be able to see names some of those billionaires may be going to jail for their part of that rampage with little and young girls. It's a way to get them gone or in court anyway.
https://rebeccarbibbs.substack.com/p/billionaires-renege-on-promise-to?r=5dsiiv&utm_medium=ios
Not to mention the ongoing profiteering that gov't insiders might be engaging in by betting on the war via prediction markets...or the Trump sons working with drone companies to earn Pentagon contracts.
The Trump sons have been very quiet, haven't they? With luck and before daddy's done here, we may see them sitting on the inside of those courtroom tables looking at the Judge.
The GOP is like a speeding, drunken, bus driver, and we're all seated behind praying that the bus doesn't crash. IMHO the only way to get out of this endless and escalating horror show is for the DNC to take a deep breath and nominate Bernie Sanders for POTUS in 2028. He's not too old. Hey, with a younger VP ready to take over after Bernie's first term, Bernie will be a youthful 90 year old, same age as Adenauer when he retired. The hour is late....
How about taking one election at a time? And how about understanding what elections in our system are for…WINNING!
WINNING ELECTIONS IS ALL THAT MATTERS. And your choice for winning the presidency is Bernie?!!??!!
Again?!!??!!
The Democratic Party has two possible choices for winning a presidential election in 2028…assuming there is an election.
Do some research on Gov Jay Pritzker of Illinois and Gov Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan. Pick one!
Stop wishing & hoping…the silly ol’ Democrat method for deciding who to vote for!
Forget about all the other ideological crap! WINNING ELECTIONS IS ALL THAT MATTERS. Period.
The dems can pick just about any white ex general, then run on Bernie Sanders' platform, but promise that none of the benefits will go to black or brown people. It's glaringly obvious that the winning ticket now is some form of racist class war. Appalling that this is what the US has descended to.
I think Democrats have two outstanding candidates for POTUS in 2028. Gov Jay Pritzker of Illinois and Gov Gretchen Whitmer, Michigan.
I think Democrats have two outstanding candidates for POTUS in 2028…if there is a presidential election that year.
Gov Jay Pritzker of Illinois and Gov Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.
Check them out.
I think Democrats have two excellent candidates for POTUS in 2028…if there is an election.
Gov Jay Pritzker of Illinois and Gov Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan. Both have great records, have national recognition and organizations, and are gifted campaigners.
Check them out.
Loved the visual! Ha! I agree w you!
Your visual reminded me of the movie where the suicidal train driver wanted to make sure he took people with him as he attempted to crash his speeding, runaway train. The good guys figured out what he was up to and prevented the worst of his evil plan.
LOVE Bernie but feel we need youthful energy at this time. Sixty or under, healthy, and physically fit.
No Bernie please! All talk and no action plus (IMHO) Bernie is one of the big reasons why we got Trump in 2016.
On the contrary. Look at my response to JC Andrijeski above.
I looked at your response to the other comment. You’ve got nothing!
Gotta go by the numbers, not the gut. Keep voting for corporate shills and you're gonna get what the corporations want.
So you think that the way for Democrats to win swing states is……. to go further left?
Makes no sense whatsoever
Look at Sanders talking to MAGA voters in West Virginia. Not only could he win the swing states, but also the Ruby Reds.
Oddly, as an old man he would bring in the young voters.
I get what you’re saying and I personally love Bernie. However, despite his vigor, stuff happens at that age. The body is old. Let’s transfer that support to a younger person. He can mentor and support. But Democrats have to find someone electable . And that means taking into consideration the sad prejudices our citizens generally have.
Didn’t he also win over a studio audience on Fox some years ago?
He has the message and the conviction and the charisma to be very effective, but not as a presidential candidate himself.
Bernie, god bless him, will be 88 in 2028. Biden was too feeble to run again, and Trump is obviously not up to it now.
Don't leave Mark Kelly out of the conv. The Dems actually have a number of good candidates for '28. A lot will happen between now and then. '26 is what matters now.
How about Bernie as vice-president?
If you think Bernie is far left then you have swallowed another Russian talking point.
In most European countries Bernie would be considered middle of the road or perhaps a bit conservative. Almost everything he endorses would be a big win for the US, when implemented. The only issue is, how do we get from here to there?
Take medical care for example. The federal government already spends amounts comparable to other developed countries, and it gets far worse outcomes. Our medical system is a rats nest of insurance companies, pharmaceutical channels, for profit hospitals, and everybody else squeezing out a little more for themselves. If medical schools were free we would have people becoming doctors who want to make lives better rather than themselves well off. If everybody was covered under the same single payor insurance policy dozens of insurance companies would go belly up, and unemployment offices would be flooded. If we acknowledged how much the government support for medical research has benefited pharmaceutical companies, and the government took a more active role in developing cures rather than palliatives for chronic conditions the pharmaceutical cash cows would be gone.
There is no question that medicine here would be far better off on the freeway with everybody else than lost in the boonies.
Just how do we get there?
Michael, Bernie seems very much "with it" mentally, but that is very different from being young in an environment where, increasingly, there is a strong desire for younger politicians. There is no way Sanders can overcome that. Also, one of the realistic concerns about someone Sanders age is that a critical, irreversible change can happen very quickly. As much as I agree with Sanders politics, I would not want him to be the Democratic candidate in 2028. For any number of reasons, I doubt he would win, with age being one of them. I don't believe a young VP would alter the perception that Sanders is simply too old. Joe Biden did not seem frail and infirm in 2020 when he ran, but by 2023 he made a very different impression.
A better candidate from the standpoint of age, with similar politics, is Elizabeth Waren, but I'm afraid that she too is too old now and, of course, we have the widespread belief that no Democratic woman is electable.
It is too early to know who will be up and who will be down in 2028, but the most obvious candidate right now is Gavin Newsom, who I will not support. Few candidates convey an image of raw ambition more than Newsom and his credibility is, or should be, nonexistent. No candidate in my memory has more malleable beliefs. In my mind, Newsom stands for Newsom and nothing else. Would he be better than any Republican? Of course, but a lower bar is impossible. Pritzker has been a strong voice in opposition to Trump, but how does the fact that he's a billionaire play? On one hand, he need not be beholden to moneyed interests since his own considerable wealth insulates him, but can a party rail about billionaires and then nominate one? How would Independents react to him?
There is lots of talk about the need for Democrats to nominate a moderate and Andy Beshear's name comes up a lot. I'm not a fan of moderates and centrists for a number of reasons. First, their claim is to want to join with moderate Republicans to enact bipartisan legislation. The immediate problem with that is there are no moderate Republicans. However, I feel strongly that we've ignored so many problems for so long that moderate solutions won't suffice. That is why the politics of Sanders are appealing. Mamdani won in NYC with the word "socialist" attached to his identity, but the country is clearly not NYC and socialism doesn't play well even among (ignorant) Democrats. If one reads comments on the NY Times, it is routine for moderate/centrist Democrats to lay all the failings of the Democratic Party on the shoulders of AOC and all those progressives. Ignorance is not limited to Republican voters.
There is no Republican who I would consider to be anything but a disaster. If "incumbency" and succession mean anything, then Vance will be something of a favorite, but I doubt his likeability. I expect Rubio, one of histories great sell outs to be possibly a more attractive candidate, not only to Republicans, but to Independents, who are mostly not very well-informed and, thus, are easily manipulated. I referred to Rubio as a "sell-out," but that is more of an appearance than real. I don't think Rubio has ever had a firm set of beliefs, which means he can shift positions radically without facing any internal conflict. Vance has shown he can choose to be anything he thinks will work in his favor. It will never happen (age again), but I'd love to see Lindsey Graham get the nomination. I can't think of any Republican who would be easier to defeat. He's become a crazy old man shouting "get off our lawn" to the world. He's also become really creepy.
Are you being sarcastic? I love Bernie, and he could be a great campaign asset to whomever gets nominated, but nominating Bernie would be shooting ourselves in both feet. Too old and identified as the epitome of a radical leftist by a large proportion of the country.
I find it hard to believe that otherwise smart, well educated, and informed people are here blathering about the fine points of electoral politics. Like you, I have read some history and I follow the news to exhaustion, and that makes it clear to me that believing that this literally criminally culpable, in crazy regime is going to step down and leave office because they allowed themselves to be beaten in a free and fair election, is a total and complete delusion. If there was ever a time to think the previously unthinkable, this is it.
Well, you have thought the unthinkable, what is it?
For myself, nominating Bernie Sanders is bordering on the unthinkable, which explains all the criticisms hurled at me. I don't believe that centrist democrats like Newsom and Pritzker will deliver enough electoral punch to overcome the madness of Trump and his grisly gang, and even if they did we would be left with the 51/49 horror show.
So, what is your unthinkable?
Eliminate the possibility of a peaceful transfer of power due to electoral chaos, and then use your imagination.
Turns out "The DNC" doesn't choose who our nominees are, at all, as much as people online like to pretend it does, possibly because they think typing the acronym makes them look keyed-in.
If the DNC actually made these decisions, and not voters, Joe Biden would have never been President. What we probably would have gotten is Amy Klobuchar, or maybe Harris, losing to Trump. (Which is not to say either couldn't have won, too.) But the party establishment has never liked Biden much. They consider him to be too traditionalist on labor, too active in markets, and thought he was "cringe" even before his speech started faltering.
(Also, nominating Bernie, whom I supported in 2020, at 87 is a cartoonishly terrible idea, but I'm pretty sure you're joking about that.)
You mean George McGovern, not Mondale, against Nixon.
I go by the numbers, and apparently you're not familiar with them. In 2016, before the DNC chose Hillary, there were multiple hypothetical polls running Bernie v Trump and Hillary v Trump. Sanders v Trump was typically 70:30 with practically no-one undecided. On the other hand, Hillary v Trump was 35:35 with 30% undecided. IMHO, the choice of Hillary was political malpractice. So now, Bernie is a decade older. Who cares? He's not demented and he draws wild crowds of young people.
I had thought Gavin Newsom looked presidential, but both he and Pritzker are too corporate, and while they may win an election we're back to the same old 50/50 mushy compromise that got us into this horror show.
As for Trump, let him laugh, Sanders will wipe the floor with his orange combover.
I love Bernie, but nationally, he would not fly. We need millions of other folks to like him as well. This next time around we need candidates that are not "far anything", just people who can run in the middle with films of Minneapolis, Ice, the war, the food lines, Musk with his giant saw, and on and on and. Then, constant shots of the economy. Up close with gas tanks, individual grocery costs, lines of Food Banks, insurance costs, beef alone is off the charts with most meat not far off.
Oh, hold your comment we may get there before this is all over. How much does that plane, and soldiers cost that went down in Iraq? And who really is keeping the books? We get lied to about so many things, why would any of them be honest about the cost of this "non-war" or excursion as Mr. Trump is now calling this tragedy.
Hegseth is already seriously lowballing the cost of Trump's Iran-Epstein War. Maybe multiply any $$$ cost estimates the Administration tosses out by 500%?
A recent study by Brown University, for example, estimates the total cost of our post-911 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have topped $8 TRILLION dollars. That's roughly 20% of our entire federal debt! And for what? What did it gain us? Sure, it made Israel happy; but gave us nothing. No more irresponsibly expensive GOP wars!
https://rebeccarbibbs.substack.com/p/billionaires-renege-on-promise-to?r=5dsiiv&utm_medium=ios
its where the US public [not just Trump etc] has been since 1945.
Yes. And let’s be clear, it was a GIRLS school. Because when it comes right down to it, who in the billionaire class cares one fig about Iranian schoolgirls?
Matt Schlapp, a prominent conservative lobbyist and the head of the American Conservative Union (which runs CPAC), during a debate on Piers Morgan Uncensored suggested the Iranian girls were better off dead than living a life in a "barbaric, unequal society behind a burqa, with no ability to make career choices".
Two things: the idiot demonstrated his ignorance with his use of the Afghani burqa for Iranian women and girls. Also, he omits mentioning that the White Christian Nationalist ideology promoted by Doug Wilson and Pete Hegseth and Mike Johnson are guilty of many of the same tactics against women, minus the "burqa."
American women need to pay attention.
.
Yes they say stupid things which is another reason we should not elect anymore of them.
Or American schoolgirls, unless they're home-schooled or attend an Evangelical church school and aren't dark-skinned.
The excruciating fact that this regime bombed a girls’ school is consistent with their ongoing war against women. And there has been one for years. In fact, in the GOP, the war on women is a structurally necessary plank in their platform.
The attack was based on old info, why would the US bomb a school on purpose? Looks bad. The US torpedoed in international waters a ship with 180 people on board - 150 of them drowned. That is 150 husbands, sons, brothers, not coming home.
Iran is now led by a man whose parents, his wife, and one of his children, were killed by us.
And that ‘old’ intelligence may well have been caught by the US Counter Intelligence team (CI-12) tasked with monitoring Iranian threats — had they all not been shitcanned by Kash ‘Krazy Eyes’ Patel barely a week before the US/Israeli offensive began. Let’s just think about that for a minute. He fired at least a dozen counter intelligence agents specifically working on the Iran file one week before this began. A thinking person might ask why? Why do that? And more critically, why then?
And it was a double tap operation!!!
Exactly, Patrick. Meanwhile, as in past Middle East U.S. invasions, hatred towards our country just keeps growing exponentially and understandably. How would YOU feel towards some country that flew in and bombed one of our elementary schools, killing hundreds of children? I don't think it is hyperbole to say that Trump has destroyed virtually all the goodwill towards the U.S. around the world in a little over a year.
And it's not just about destroying goodwill. It's about creating anger, resentment, and... terrorism. Think about all the new generations of Iranians now furious at the United States and what could happen.
Iran has hundreds of thousands of members of their Revolutionary Guard, Basij Militia, and military – and Trump thinks he can just stop the hostilities whenever he wants to? So unbelievably stupid. The Strait of Hormuz will be at risk for years to come.
Right, Acela. They completely disregard the reality of blowback. Biggest mistake American voters have ever made putting this sorry excuse for a human being back into power.
Coupled w/ the slashing of USAID, which is hurting places like Afghanistan (which is currently fighting an 'open war' with Pakistan, America's era of soft power is over.
There seems to be this attitude that if we're doing the bombing then it's for their own good because we're America and we're the good guys. Sorry about that school, but we were just trying to help by destroying your country. This might cause some resentment.
Yeah, we destroyed the girls school to push the opposition to overthrow the regime and save your country. You're welcome.
And Congress and the SCOTUS let him!
Let's be clear. The GOP Congress let him.
The very first day that all happened the news came out that was an American bomb. Here we are days later, and Trump is still trying to blame Iran for it. James from New Orleans once said, if his mouth is moving, he's lying.
And all Zuckerberg cares about is his purchase of a $170 million estate. In Florida, where else. On that safe little island where the filthy rich think they are utterly and completely safe from the little people. 175 dead children? What is that compared to a $170 million compound? /s
Bring it on, West Antarctic and Greenland. Flood all of Southern FL.
I would think certain entities would appreciate the concentration of "high value" targets, not to mention Mother Nature herself on a tear.
Less than a week ago Trump attended the repatriation of servicemen and servicewomen killed in the Iran conflict. Since that time Trump has repeatedly downplayed the conflict and the lives lost...referring to the conflict as an "excursion". Trump's well-known disregard for servicemembers was on full display.
If Trump does not care about the lives of US servicemembers do not expect him care one iota about the loss of 175 Iranian school kids.
Right. And he wouldn't even show respect by taking off his ball cap. My guess is that he was afraid the wind might show how bald he's getting.
Agreed, wearing a ballcap at one of the nation's most solemn ceremonies shows his complete lack of respect.
Obfuscation is an understatement. When asked about the attack on the school, Trump couldn't just say "It's under investigation". He had to lie and say Iran had done it as they also have Tomahawk missiles. He just can't help himself. The truth to him is whatever he wishes it were. And unfortunately 40% of our country seems to take him at his word.
To be fair, the rightist regime doesn’t give a damn about American schoolchildren getting shot up, either.
Innocent are the first victims of war; Unfortunately, the school house in Iran it’s just collateral damage. No way to make it pretty
I have been haunted by that event ever since I heard of it. There are no words to describe its horror.
As usual, the tiny elephant in the room in your otherwise brilliant comments: the disproportionate influence of Israeli Nazi-like prime minister Netanyahu on American foreign policy, in particular in West Asia.
Other people ALWAYS pay the price. Remember "only little people pay taxes"? The billionaires buy their candidates and reap all the rewards. Everyone else is left with crumbs (if they're lucky).
Greed is a mental health issue.
It's just hoarding, same mindset as the people in over-full houses.
Hey, I have an overfilled house! (Mostly with books.) But that's because I'm a recovering shopaholic and pretty anal-retentive. I don't subscribe to print magazines because I wouldn't be able to force myself to throw the back issues away.
My brother and I claim that "Patterson" is ancient Gaelic for "Packrat."
You know what? "Patterson" is my middle name! So it must be true!
It is. And the worst part is that the people who have it won't get help because they're not the ones suffering from it.
There is no "help" for greed. It's not a mental health issue.
True, but psychopathy is. Especially when the psychopath in question has the big red button for launching half the world's nuclear arsenal within three feet of him at all times.
I hear you. However, psychopathy is not a standalone diagnosis. It's "traits" comprise those of an Antisocial Personality Disorder, which is largely untreatable. Interestingly, there is research, but no treatment or cure for pedophilia even through chemical or physical castration. They will find other ways to sexually violate children. DJT is a flaming antisocial. He appears to meet criteria for Borderline and Narcissistic Personality Disorders. In all my years in psychiatry, I've never seen a patient that is as characterologically disordered as him. Again, no cure.
You're too kind. Most of the words I have to describe him are unprintable.
And a deadly sin…along with sloth, gluttony, hubris and several others that perfectly describe the Epstein class
I'm pretty sure it was H. L. Hunt (Dallas oilman) who said, "life is a game, and money is what we keep score with." I guarantee you that EVERY ONE of these ultra-rich men agrees with that viewpoint.
And they compete with each other by buying bigger, "better" and more expensive toys and trinkets. Zuckerberg's house, Bezos' yacht (and Epstein's island). As Mary Trump said in the title of her book about donald: Too Much and Never Enough. It applies to nearly all billionaires (save a few such as Melinda French Gates and Mackenzie Scott.)
It's not a mental health issue; it's one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Perhaps it should be categorized as a mortal sin, since it destroys lives, the truth, and all that makes us care about humanity.
https://substack.com/@danajae33/note/p-188742651?r=9q803&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
This is why we need to make it a national policy that there shall not be billionaires. It is pretty obvious that they are a cancer on the body politic. And we need to do it in coordination with other countries so that if they flee - it is to places like North Korea.
Let there be billionaires — but tax them into multimillionaires. Let them pay for their wars. Let them fund the common good. If they were real capitalists, they would know that wealth redistribution is capitalism's life support. But the truth is they were never capitalists. They are fascists.
And now we have a budding fascist dictatorship. The end point is the same. We must have wealth taxes and caps. We have to overturn Citizens United.
I'd say it's past the budding stage at this point. It's not in absolute full bloom yet, but the bud has already opened up and it's growing rapidly.
We are in very precarious territory. The midterms are an inflection point which could turn us back toward Democracy or dump us into a Bizarro-World totalitarian state. We all need to brainstorm ways to increase voter engagement and participation.
I believe the rallies help to that end. They bring visibility and wake people up, at least a little bit.
It's a great reminder of the imperative that we continue to Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊
The next nationwide No Kings rally is Saturday, March 28. Be there or be square!
https://www.the50501movement.org/p/announcement-the-next-no-kings-mobilization
That is the solution that Robert Reich is proposing. It is hit or miss, because I don't think it will happen in red or most purple states. And, It does nothing to address the massive spending by the oligarchs.
Unregulated capitalism leads to gilded ages as now and fascism. It is basically social Darwinism. It will probably take a major 30s style Depression (and perhaps a world war} to shock people into some kind of wealth redistribution such as we experienced from the 1940s through the 1980s until the onset of the ridiculous "trickle down" Reagan era nonsense. For historical perspective read CAPITAL IN THE 21ST CENTURY BY Thomas Piketty.
And frankly, that's how Schumer views his job....fund Israel & ensure that Americans at least get the crumbs off the table, as right wing gouges on lobster tail and crab 🦀. Dems have become a subsidiary of MAGA. Just not as cruel but echoing similar policies.
This is why I am not sanguine about the prospects for meaningful reform once the Democrats are in power: Too many are owned by the billionaire and corporate interests. We need to be careful lest we elect people like Schumer, Manchin, Fetterman, . . .
Don't give to the Democrats but rather to individual candidates who are committed progressives.
Fetterman has been a big disappointment for me. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he switched parties.
But even if he did, I think he'd still be an improvement over that quack he beat in the election.
Dems turned corporate in response to getting smacked down by the St. Reagan "revolution". Schumer originally won over Al D'Amato - who was far worse. In his last election, he went up against Republican nominee Joe Pinion III, a news show host and businessman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Pinion.
Those were the choices we were given. I stayed home for that election.
You mean Joe Pinion is a real person's name? When I first saw it I thought it was a variation on this old chestnut:
"What's your name?" "Joe."
"Joe who?" "Joe mama!"
Bunk.
Biden didn't do the things Trump is doing.
And you are describing what you think about Schumer, not what he thinks or said.
Same song, different war: …some folks inherit star-spangled eyes
Hoo, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask 'em, “How much should we give?"
Hoo, they only answer, "More, more, more, more"…
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no millionaire’s son, son, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, one.
Good old fogerty
Jan, what about trickle down economics?
It was a lie, right from the start. And it took the catastrophe of Trumpkopf for Americans to only first begin waking up to the reality that we've been trickled on for over four and a half decades.
Trickle Down was/is a scam of epic proportions. It was concocted on the back of a napkin by economist Art Laffer....and the right wing after 50 years of transferring wealth to the wealthy/corps are STILL laughing.. And many f*cking idiot Dems went along with it.
It has become the "normal" economic policy in many countries. Our own Macron believes (or pretends to believe...) in it. It is used to justify regressive tax policies and cutting back social and public services, starving the state while privatising essential services. It has been applied more extensively in the US and the UK but it has progressed everywhere since the '80s.
Will Rogers coined the term in the 1930's.
The trickle was so slow it dried up and went away....
Never existed.
Sure it did. While the C-Suite got their golden parachutes, the rest of us were given the golden shower.
It was a derogatory term for Reagan's policies. What's amazing is that people now see it as a legit economic theory.
Just a fancy name for "piss on the little people."
It trickles down in the form of pollution and global warming!
It's worse now though.
There was never any question that a weekend talk show host on Fox News was totally unqualified to be Secretary of Defense. But, do not ever forget that Hegseth has this position only because the Senate confirmed his nomination. Each of those Senators who knowingly voted to confirm a totally unqualified man to run the US military has the blood of every service member casualty, every Iranian school girls killed, and every other soul killed in this illegal war on their hands.
Naming Names:
Senators Who Voted to Confirm Pete Hegseth
Confirming Senators Up for Reelection in 2026
(All republicans)
Todd Young Indiana
Bill Cassidy Louisiana
John Boozman Arkansas
Marsha Blackburn Tennessee
John Cornyn Texas
Joni Ernst Iowa
Mike Rounds South Dakota
Shelley Moore Capito West Virginia
Roger Wicker Mississippi
Lindsey Graham South Carolina
-Wikipedia
Do not forget Jon Husted from Ohio, who voted for Hegseth and every other Trump regime nomination. Please support Sherrod Brown's return to the Senate.
Senator Husted is also the moron who blamed the POOR who are having a hard time with the price increases as 'not understanding how money works,' and added a stupid story, supposedly told to him by a woman who bought everything 'with SNAP cards all her life.'
Yet he was one of the Senators attacking Biden for his fiscal policies that were 'hurting Americans.'
A bought-and-paid-for ASS. Congrats Ohio!
I got the list from Wikipedia, but I think you are correct . Perhaps an edit to Wikipedia? I don’t have the first idea of how that works, only that it is done.
How to Edit/Contribute a Wikipedia Article
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LRUl6u-jrs
Thanks. I think this is up to Larry Wilcox or c pierce, they know a lot more about him than I do.
I heard somewhere that Ernst was retiring.
Too late.
Incompetence was the qualification for all the jobs in the administration. One just needed to look good and be a loyal sychopant. Goal to distroy all that was good in the governmment agencies.
Loyalty to Trump was the main qualification. They’re all toadies!
You're correct. Competent people got in Trump's way in his first term. He learned not to appoint competent people.
This is arguably the most incompetent gang of vicious fools to ever, in all history, be in charge of a significant country. I'm saying this as a professional historian. There have been many dumb, senile, even mad leaders but to my knowledge never such deep incompetence throughout a regime. Current example: Release 400m barrels of oil Big wow. Can anybody here do arithmetic? That's 20 days of oil through the Straits of Hormuz.
I think the Iranians have done the arithmetic.
and that's completely ignoring the LNG losses.
Senate confirmation of completely un-serious cabinet candidates on party line votes was the Rubicon for the GOP.
Agreed. And if you remember, Collins, Murkowski and McConnell took turns where 2 of the three would vote no, but never all three together... they thought we wouldn't notice their collusion to be able to say they voted no, while never keeping a nominee from being confirmed.
The Republican Party failure to lead extends well beyond the 50+ Senators. Oregon's Republican Party and other state Republican parties took official positions the 2020 election was "stolen" from DJT.
This is not the first time a party narrowed its interests to a tiny fraction of the electorate and its party representatives supported, and participated in, a system of patronage and loyalty over competence. In the 21st century the Republican Party may well replace the Whig Party of the 19th century as the last major political party to be swept from the field of electoral politics in the United States. One can hope for that designation upon a Republican Party with its ranks filled with DJT, JDV, and its motley cast in the Senate, House and state legislatures.
Maybe all that money went to Trump’s elaborate assassination show. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I still can’t believe that no one is questioning “how did your ear cartilage grow back Trump? Who was that assassin? Why is that you duck every time you hear a loud noise, but that day you were pumping your fist as they flew an American flag above you? How did they time that flag so perfectly? Did you deliberately kill that guy in the crowd?” After the Epstein files, nothing would surprise me.
Totally agree. I was an ER nurse back in the 60's during the riots in Newark...you don't see "clean"looking wounds around the face like he had!!!
Not only grow back, but grow back in a mere week. A salamander can't do that.
Ya know I have the exact same opinion as you. At first I thought nah… I’m being paranoid but facts is facts. I DO think it’s quite possible it was all a staged thing and some poor bastard died in the process. Also the fact Trump even stood up and pumped his fist right afterwards. That makes no sense - him or his handlers.
Trump's ear looks perfect. It was a stunt gone wrong, or a set up of the trigger kid who wasn't told they were going to kill him. Parents are silent. DHS IG told not to investigate an apparently major failure by the Secret Service. SS agents let him stand up after he punctured the squib. Photographer in perfect position. Someday the truth will come out.
Here's the United Front's take - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKEvu8udag4
Thanks man. I’ll watch it after work
They were reacting to the news, so there's speculation there. What I was hunting for was Dr. Benjamin's take on the undamaged cartilage . Didn't find it.
A key question here is… let’s say you wanted to stage the injury process. What would that effort look like? How would you do it and what would it look like? Also people in the crowd hit by blood… test that blood. Is it real? Does it have Ts DNA? All the complete silence shortly afterward makes little sense but it’s possible I suppose.
FWIW, earlobes tend to bleed a lot more than people expect.
Also, if they were planning on having some kid participate (and get killed), they would have arranged somebody who wasn't also shopping around online for *any* big name political figure to target within driving distance, but give him a clearly pro-Dem and strong anti-Trump background.
Please let the Dem leaders know this. I’m still waiting for them to say billionaires and corruption are the problem…rather than spending their time raising money from them. If we want to return to democracy, stability, a large middle class, the system must go. Abolish super PACs. Abolish dark money. Full and complete transparency. Caps on campaign contributions. Public financing of campaigns. Until I hear this from Dem leaders, they don’t get it and we will stay in this spiral.
Also, abolish the electoral college and gerrymandering! And put term limits and standards of ethics on Supreme Court justices. And if we want to go further, proportional representation in the Senate!
I wonder if part of the problem with many Democrats in power (not all) is that they are at least millionaires? That and many are focused on keeping their place in government rather than on what their people need. I don't think the Dems are anywhere as bad as Repubs, but it's still there.
Yes - to a degree - but our only realistic path to a more just society, as has been the case for over a hundred years - is through a Democratic government. They have given us all of the progressive legislation we have had for the past 100 years. They are not perfect, but the morons who rant against "the system" and who engage in both-siderism are simply wrong. Idealism may be a noble thing, but it won't get a hold of the levers of power. We need someone in the mold of FDR. And if you want to find any of his faults and point them out to the exclusion of what he accomplished, you're part of the problem.
Completely agree, Paul! Our only hope out of this death spiral caused by money from billionaires and votes from Fox News watchers is to install Democrats in Congress and in the White House. For now, it takes money from zillionaires to Dems to fight the money and misinformation coming from maga supporters. That can change when Dems have enough seats in Congress to force legislation that gives the kittle gal/guy more of a voice. Stop this Dem bashing and both-side-ism! Our goal must be to elect Dems and demand with our votes/calls/letters/votes that we want legislative change so that the combination of toxic short-sighted power-hungry captains of industry and the faux populist utterly immoral rabble rouzer politicians are no longer running our country into destruction and dishonor.
I am 80 and learned to hate Nixon at a very early age. It took being a history major and a couple of decades to realize his very positive impact on foreign policy and understand that he signed more Civil Rights legislation into law than either JFK or LBJ. These facts don't change the truth that he was a lying, cheating, paranoid, miserable person who should never have become President.
Nixon also would have implemented universal basic income, but the right wing shut it down.
Paul, I agree wholeheartedly. We need to weed out the folks that don't stand up for our democratic principles. The people we elect will be Democrats.
As a non-American observer, at risk of stating the obvious, unless I my understanding is completely off, the 'problem' is cross-party. Namely, Citizens United.
If and when the Democrats ever regain power (and at this point, with the current administration making every effort to tilt the scales, it is a very big IF), overturning Citizens United must be of utmost, urgent priority. Without which, there is simply no prospect of the US ever becoming a fair and equitable democracy.
Unfortunately, to your point, many a Democrat congressman will be as antithetical to such a policy as any Republican. Short of a massive increase in citizen campaign financing, a citizens uprising, or civil war, the appalling, inequitable, corrupt and undemocratic status quo will remain, changing from time to time only in hue.
I just googled billionaires political contributions and they're 2 to 1 Republican. While I don't disagree, this doesn't seem like where we should be focused. A better argument IMHO is to end citizens united.
It's not whether billionaire money is partisan; it's the fact that it's so disproportionate within the electorate that it's totally undemocratic. It is sufficiently oligarchic to be unconstitutional on its face.
We also need to dilute the two party system. We need open primaries and ranked choice voting. If the billionaires have to think about what’s going on down ballot and third party potential, that also dilutes their influence.
The problem is that the Dem politicians want the billionaire money too.
Well they NEED it. There are far fewer super pacs for Dems
But then they’re beholden to the billionaires too. Better to get the big money out of politics.
We have become what we fought the Revolutionary War against, a polity ruled by a distant, exploitative elite. So much for government of, by, and for the people.
Exactly. The people that are in the government are supposed to represent their people, yet many don't seem to care.
The US military, all volunteers, has about 1,300,000 enlisted troops, each of whom has a “blue star family” praying for their safety. Not one is on Forbes’ list of billionaires.
The National Gold Star Family Registry reports approximately 472,050 Gold Star families, covering all conflicts since World War I. According to Google AI, not a single Gold Star family belongs to the billionaire class.
When will Barron enlist to support his father’s actions? 47 looks weak when his own family isn’t behind him, imho.
https://nationaltoday.com/gold-star-mothers-and-family-day/
https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/
It is strange that so many republicans and right leaning people love "chicken hawks."
As you probably know chicken hawks are people who claim to love the military and war but "dodged the draft" back when we had a draft. Probably the most well-known chicken hawk was Dick Cheney. Dick never met a war that he did not like, and Dick thought that our foreign policy problems could be solved by war. But during the Vietnam War, Dick had other things to do aside from actually serving in the military.
The same with Donald. As we can see he is a great advocate for war and killing. But he dodged actual service in the military.
My personal feeling is that anyone who advocates for war and sending young people to fight and die, should be or should have been willing to do the same thing.
I always had a lot of respect for George H. W. Bush because, although he took us to war in Kuwait, he actually served in the military during World War II and flew airplane missions and was shot down.
So sorry, Aubrey, but the younger Bush served in a special unit of the Texas National Guard reserved for sons of men of influence and even bailed on that service when he went missing from service for a long period during the Vietnam War. This was a matter of controversy during his presidential election but immense political pressure was brought to bear to bury the facts. I’ll look for a reference but can only repeat for now that his service in the military was not honorable.
Aubrey, my apology! You referenced Bush 1, who did honorable service in the military, not Bush 2. Mea culpa!
Hegseth served in combat. Look at what an idiot he is.
And he built an international consensus with formal UN support around a carefully articulated set of goals.
Of the 14 US President in office after WWII. 10 were veterans of US military service and the 4 who did not were Clinton, Obama, Biden and Trump. Notice the trend?
Never, ISOequanimity! You knew that!
How will 47’s supporters back this action if his own family doesn’t? He looks weak, imho.
I think some of his supporters are already questioning the need for this war, for that reason and for other, equally unanswered, questions.
I agree with you overall position, but there have been extremely wealthy men who died in military service for this country. The most famous is probably JFK's brother who died in WWII in a bomber trying to take out some NAZI sub pens in Norway. He was the one old Joe was grooming to become President, John was just a default choice.
There have been wealthy people who have served in the military and some like J p Morgan, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and so forth who did not serve in the Civil War. But they were not out advocating for war and urging others to fight.
What I am against is the hypocrisy of people (particularly politicians) who praise the military and praise war, but who have themselves never tried to serve in the military. I don't like people who want to have a war, but they want other people to fight and die while they sit safely at home.
Hegseth did serve in combat and he is to be commended for that. But he does not have the character or experience to be Secretary of Defense.
Best wishes.
History is full of empires steered by elites who thought wealth made them wise.
There are hundreds, if not thousands of items to name as part of the degradation of the United States into tens, if not hundreds of descriptors. As an 80 year old with a vivid memory of the Viet Nam era, I would include the ending of the draft. The draft was a burden in many ways. But: there was at least some sense of obligation as part of citizenship; it mixed persons of all races, origins, social status, education levels, wealth levels; it forced at least some period of humility; it meant some period of serving more than oneself; it touched virtually every family (and "bone spurs" meant a bit of life long shame). Having lived through that time, I know that it ended due to the turning of young men (it was only for men) into cannon fodder for no good reason. I will always believe that some period of obligatory service (it need not be only military) would foster a better idea of unity of purpose for the country.
Yes, I think everyone needs to experience a period of mandatory service, especially in the nonprofit world. Places like soup kitchens, homeless shelters and helping newly arriving refugees to acclimate to a brand new world.
I agree with this, the idea of civic spirit, but slightly different. It should be required that everyone serve the country in some way - could be military, teach for America, some sort of conservation core, serving the elderly or homeless, etc. There could be many choices that young people applied for and spent a year or two doing. It would hopefully grow world views, empathy, compassion, and encourage continued investment in civic duty. Of course there would be people who try to get out. Since there would be choices, make that a hard no. Of course there would be people who would hate every moment and learn nothing, but those kinds of people always have and always will exist.
Young men of even less than affluent families could find ways to avoid the draft. The war would increasingly fall on the shoulders of the poor. African Americans were disproportionately represented in the casualty lists.
The Vietnam war ended not long after the lottery system was set up and deferments were no longer available. Of course, the millionaires could buy their way to safety. GW Bush learned to fly fighter jets and could come and go at will.
It only seemed "not long" because the war dragged on for so long. The lottery was first held in December 1969 and US involvement in the war continued into 1972. Casualties began to drop after 1968, before the lottery, as Johnson began a series of withdrawals that Nixon continued. Nixon, though, shifted the burden of the war onto the people of Indochina by carpet bombing Cambodia and destroying North Vietnam's infrastructure. The war worsened but fewer American boys weren't returning in caskets.
Indeed, hence “bone spurs.” But still, overall there was some leveling. Now, a universal time of some sort of service to the country would be a worthy idea.
Guys could get a deferment during the Vietnam war from the draft if they were enrolled in college, another way that money could influence who got drafted.
fatherhood was also an exemption
So, we had people making babies and enrolling in college to avoid the draft. Probably not the best idea for building loving families or leadership quality.
The outcome of having less people who actually cared about learning getting degrees, and who have been running things for decades is part of why we’re in this mess now.
Only until the lottery entered the picture in 1970. We went to a lottery because the military complained about the intelligence level of draftees. They wanted to be able to draft some of those college kids.
I thought the lottery was instituted because draft boards were perceived as discriminatory, and that most men were drafted before’70. My memory is a little cloudy on this.
The war continued until 1975. The draft itself ended in 1973. That's quite a lot of time if one were to be eligible for the draft. The April 24, 1971 march on Washington (in which I participated) was not at the time believed to be a step towards the end of the war - the war seemed endless at that time.
What I posted about the reasons for the lottery was what the Pentagon claimed at the time.
Thanks for clarifying. And thanks for marching on Washington, I’m sure it did shorten the war.
I should have said "us college kids." My number came up in May. My status changed to 4F. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFFOUkipI4U
Mandatory service for all, male and female, at age 10 for a minimum of 1 year. Novel concept. Not really because Israel has been doing it for about 75 years.
I'm guessing "age 10" is a typo.
And service in Israel isn't actually mandatory yet. The religious exemption has been eliminated by the Supreme Court, but Netanyahu is slow walking the implementation because the religious vote keeps him in power.
Correct. 19 was intended.
This post highlights the importance of the approach taken by Texan James Talarico. He says we need to turn away from the left vs right and right vs left arguments to one of the ultra rich vs everyone else. Maybe an “anti-feudalism” movement will resonate with more Americans than even “anti-fascism.”
I think Talarico's vision is very astute. His version of Christianity is extremely powerful and will resonate in places where the usual liberal Democrat message is anathema. People consistently say they want bipartisan governance. Media that reflects that is the key. How we get that is the question.
Here's a third alternative: The billionaires are, for the most part, idiot-savants and/or imbeciles whose wish-list includes things that are ultimately catastrophic. But being idiot-savants and/or imbeciles, they're not capable of thinking through any of their actions or desires beyond "me want NOW!!"
Thus Musk and DOGE. Thus MBS and bribing Kushner&Witkoff to go to war with Iran. Thus the wiping out of America's clean-energy capabilities. And so on--all of these things long-term disasters that provide the extremely short-term kick the billionaires want NOW!!!
I don't think the Arabs were all in on attacking Iran. They were working on coming to diplomatic agreements with them. I think it is mostly Israel and MAGA/Trump. Both have dreams of colonial empires.
I saw a video shot in Bahrain during an Iranian missile attack on U.S. interests (I think the subtitle said it was a military base). Every time a missile hit, the people there would send up a loud cheer.
Boom. You have hit the nail on the head. The billionaire hoarders care not for We the People and how we live... or die, so long as they have the power and riches to do as they please.
Thanks to Professor Krugman for his clearsighted comments. He hit the nail on the head as he often does.
Is America a great country or what?
The Federalist Society and the Supreme Court lead by CJ Roberts have done more to destroy Democracy in America than anyone else. Why don't we hear more criticism of the Supremes?
The Democrats should be traveling the country speaking against the corruption of the Supreme Court and the Federalist Society, Heritage Society, and so forth.
Welcome I've been talking about the vitality of the supreme court since 1998, I am a political scientist, historian, and a former journalist, and many others that's why we fought so hard and yelled so hard and nobody listened nobody listened to 98 nobody listened in 2016 they let the judge had taken away from President Obama they let Citizens United go through and it's hard to talk about something when they are for life and practically untouchable and operate behind veil of secrecy and the politicians who could do something about it which would be what they call stacking the court didn't see it and didn't have the courage to do it it would have taken a hell of a fight politically, but that's the only way to stop it, and that remains if the Democrats do Take Over Control the only way to stop it legally anyway within our system period but y'all have not been listening all this information is out there, this latest article is just a Stark provable look backwards as to how we got where we are, and it tracks with everything many of us have been saying for a long time about money in politics and the elimination of the fairness immediate doctrine they've made movies about this written about this you all laugh about this but it's happened, and now the world is barreling towards something pretty damn badge, I hope nobody pushes a button, but that wouldn't shock me either, there's seven or eight maybe nine or ten and one of those countries is right in the middle of the worst of it that's that time you think that if there is a full-on existential threat to their very existence their leader won't push that button? Think again you know that guy you know what he's already done and oh that's possible Force in the universe to hold in back what have been the leader of the former us that but currently, that guy I'll probably push him to do it
And get rid of the shadow docket, period.
I've been screaming about the supreme court since the early 1980's. Because Roe v Wade and every single court opinion benefiting we, the people.
What's particularly interesting about the Federalist Society is that they are now under attack from MAGA. They are far right and want to dismantle the social safety net and modern social norms, but they do believe in the rule of law and democracy. Scores of them have been fired or quit in protest.
At this point, what is the most important is rule of law and democracy.
I think we have little criticism of the Supremes because there's nothing that can be done about them short of a Constitutional Convention.
The supreme court can be enlarged without a constitutional convention
Excellent analysis again.... Hail to Paul.
These hermetically sealed egomaniacs who can hurt people but do not feel pain are going to destroy the world.
I was amused to read that Nazi Israelis and American Nazi Christians are expecting this war to usher in their Messiahs, someone is going to be disappointed.
They think Armageddon is real? So did psychic-to-the-stars-and-devout-Christian Jeane Dixon, who predicted that the Messiah will return in 2037. I kinda hope they’re right. I like how that story ends.
I always thought that Christianity and the teaching of Jesus were about living a Good, Christian life now. So, I find it strange that so many people who say that they are strong Christians are so obsessed about life in the end times or Armageddon which happens off in the future.
💯
I suspect if Armageddon happens, it’ll be our fault or at least Trump’s voters.
If Armageddon happens, that will solve the problem of dealing with climate change.
And oligarchs.
Na, they'll just find some absurd excuse, like they always do.
Yes, that’s the beauty of cognitive dissonance!
Actually, it would be amusing just to see Trump’s face.
💯 So true. “Pathological liars frequently lie to themselves and often believe their own fabrications. Through constant repetition, they may lose the ability to distinguish their lies from reality, creating a constructed, often fantastical, world that they accept as true. This self-deception serves to maintain a desired, often grandiose, self-image (google AI).” https://www.newportinstitute.com/resources/co-occurring-disorders/pathological-liar-signs/#:~:text=Do%20pathological%20liars%20believe%20their,convenient%20than%20telling%20the%20truth