May 28, 2022

Friday Talking Points -- This Is Shameful

Last week, America experienced a racist extremist shooting up a grocery store, in an effort to kill as many Black people as he could. This week, America had to once again watch as innocent schoolchildren age 10 or under were massacred for no reason whatsoever. This is who we are, and it is shameful.

It is not, however, who we want to be. The public wants more and tighter gun safety laws, by an overwhelming margin. But even in the wake of the horrors of yet another slaughter of innocents, most people who follow politics don't expect much of anything to change. No new laws will pass the Senate, or if something does manage to be worked out, it will be weak and watered-down and likely ineffective at stopping such outrages from regularly happening.

The Senate and the House are already on vacation, showing that they too know that any efforts to do anything meaningful are quite likely futile. This is not just shameful, it is an absolute disgrace.

But we're going to save all of those pent-up feelings for the talking points section of the program today. We're going to channel all this rage we feel into a rant on how Democrats should really talk about and approach and campaign on the fact that a lobby of extremists has highjacked our federal lawmakers into refusing to do anything to stop this senseless and never-ending slaughter.

Before we get to that (and to this week's awards), let's take a quick look at the other big political stories of the week. We're going to do so in abbreviated fashion, for obvious reasons.

The biggest story of the week was the primary results from the South, but before we get to all of these, we have two updates on previous primaries to mention:

The Oregon House race from the previous week was finally called, after overcoming technical errors with the ballots that prevented a quick tally. Progressive challenger Jamie McLeod-Skinner emerged victorious over incumbent Representative Kurt Schrader, whom she attacked with the (entirely justified) label: "the Joe Manchin of the House."

In Pennsylvania, a recount has officially begun for the race for the Republican nominee for Senate. Mehmet "Dr." Oz prematurely began calling himself the "presumptive nominee," since he's ahead by roughly 900 votes before the recount began.

That's it for the old news, here's the news that was made in this week's primary cycle:

Donald Trump got badly spanked in Georgia (on what Chris Christie notably called Trump's "vendetta tour" ), seeing the three statewide candidates he had endorsed over the Republican officeholders who refused to "find 11,780 votes" for him (and illegally throw the state for Trump) all go down in flames. Governor Brian Kemp, who has especially angered Trump, beat his challenger by a whopping 50-point margin. That's pretty embarrassing!

One Trump-backed candidate did win the Republican primary is ex-jock Herschel Walker. You can see why Trump likes him so much, just by reading his answer -- given a full two days after the slaughter happened -- of what the government's response should be:

Yeah, that's the ticket! We need a federal "Department Of Looking At Young Men That's Looking At Women That Looking At Social Media." Needless to say, the late-night comics had a field day with that one. No wonder his campaign has been keeping him away from the media!

One other Georgia race is worth mentioning, as Marjorie "Three Names" Taylor Greene easily won her primary, dashing the hopes of establishment Republicans to remove another embarrassment to the party (after successfully doing so with Madison Cawthorn).

Democratic news from the Georgia primaries: Stacey Abrams has secured her spot on the general election ticket, while in a member-versus-member Democratic race (made necessary due to redistricting), progressive Representative Lucy McBath beat the centrist Representative Carolyn Bourdeaux, chalking up another progressive win.

However, down in Texas, progressive candidate Jessica Cisneros may have fallen painfully just shy of successfully challenging another Blue Dog Democrat, Representative Henry Cuellar -- the only anti-abortion Democrat left in the House. As of this writing, Cuellar is only 175 votes ahead, so it may be a while before the official winner of this contest is announced.

Tuesday may have marked the end of the vaunted Bush dynasty, both in Texas and elsewhere, as George P. Bush (son of Jeb) lost badly in his attempt to secure the Republican nomination for Texas attorney general.

Amusing footnote: it seems that the new Texas laws designed to suppress the Democratic vote actually rejected more Republican votes than Democratic. Whoops!

Sarah Huckabee Sanders will continue her own family's dynasty, as she easily secured the GOP nomination for governor in Arkansas, meaning it is quite likely she'll be following in her own dad's footsteps.

In Alabama, the candidate Trump first endorsed and then unendorsed has forced a runoff election, meaning Mo Brooks may emerge from the shadow of Trump's rage after all. This isn't guaranteed, though, he's got a long way to go to win (he only pulled in roughly half the votes as the first-place finisher).

In future primary news, a bombshell landed in Michigan as the state board responsible for authenticating the signatures on candidate petitions discovered a massive elections fraud attempt and chucked out almost 70,000 signatures as a direct result. This will keep half of the Republican candidates -- five of them, including two frontrunners -- off the primary ballot.

Trumpian footnotes to the week: Trump lost his bogus case in federal court and his appeal in state court, so it's looking more and more like he's going to have to sit for a deposition in his New York tax fraud case, which should provide some amusing moments (if the past is any prologue, when it comes to Trump depositions).

Trump this week reposted a "Truth" on his laughably inferior Twitter-clone social media site which called for "Civil War," and it was revealed that on January 6th Trump spoke approvingly of the violent mob after they chanted: "Hang Mike Pence!" Nothing like some more proof of what a downright dangerous person Trump truly is, eh?

And finally, according to Michael Cohen, Trump had a crippling fear of being pied in the face. Which we suppose is understandable, seeing as what a delight it would be for tens of millions of Americans to see someone hit Trump in the face with a pie at some point.





Before we get to the Democrats, we have two individuals who aren't technically eligible for this award who deserve mentioning nonetheless.

The first is Representative Liz Cheney, for the speech she gave while accepting a "Profile In Courage" award. She refuses to back down from warning the country about the dangerous path the Republican Party is taking, which is why she won the award in the first place. And she absolutely lit into Donald Trump in her speech (which is well worth watching, it's only a little over 10 minutes long):



The second person worth noting favorably this week was Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr, who gave an emotional pre-game speech before a playoff game this week, right after the Uvalde shooting. Kerr's own father was killed by gunfire, so the issue is personal for him. Here's part of what he had to say:



But this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week goes to two Democrats who did exactly the right thing in response to the massacre. They expressed their outrage in highly emotional terms. This is rare in Democrats, while being much more common in the Republican Party. But Democrats really should strive to do this sort of thing a lot more, because it is authentic and it resonates with the public in a way a well-reasoned white paper never can.

The first of these is Senator Chris Murphy, who was presiding over the Senate when the news broke. He turned over the gavel to someone else and took to the floor to make a heartfelt speech excoriating his fellow senators for their continued inaction:



When the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre happened in Newtown, Connecticut, Murphy was the sitting House member from that district, so this is an incredibly personal issue for him, and he has been championing gun control legislation ever since.

Our second MIDOTW goes to Beto O'Rourke, who is running to beat the current Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott. O'Rourke crashed a press conference (that all the sanctimonious Texas Republicans had thrown together to offer up all their meaningless "thoughts and prayers" ) in order to express his own heartfelt rage at their inaction. Here is part of what he said:



After security ejected O'Rourke from the press conference, he continued his remarks outside:



This is what genuine emotion and outrage looks like, and sometimes that is exactly what is needed to break through -- some righteous and heartfelt emotion. If a politician can't get emotional and outraged after the needless slaughter of innocent schoolchildren, then something is very wrong, to put this another way. Both Murphy and O'Rourke captured what millions of Americans were feeling this week, which is why they are the winners of this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week awards.

[Beto O'Rourke is a private citizen and a political candidate, and our blanket policy is not to provide links to campaign websites, so you'll have to search his contact information for yourself. But you can congratulate Senator Chris Murphy on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]





Senator Joe Manchin deserves at least a (Dis-)Honorable Mention this week, for a pair of statements he made after the shooting. Here's the story of what he had to say:



You would think... but you'd be wrong. And the "total insanity" is to believe such obvious nonsense in the first place.

But we have to look beyond the massacre of innocents this week for our Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week. Because we have yet another item for the "With Democrats Like These, Who Needs Republicans?" file:



It looks like overriding his veto isn't going to be possible, either, so the citizens of Delaware will just have to wait until they get a better governor before they can join the other states who have ended the War On Weed.

Thanks for nothing, Governor. You've more than earned this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week.

[Contact Delaware Governor John Carney on his official contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]




Volume 664 (5/27/22)

It's another one of those weeks where we just have to vent our rage in a rant rather than provide enumerated talking points. Yesterday, we admitted that we feel rather powerless to change anything, since we've all become so used to seeing slaughter after massacre after mass killing. But this shouldn't be the "new normal," and we really should be able to change things, so today we had to let our own outrage flow.



How Democrats should talk about gun safety laws

I am sick and tired of seeing young children's lives sacrificed on the altar of the Second Amendment. I am sick and tired of hearing about parents who have lost their 10-year-old to gun violence. And I am more than sick and tired, I am outraged at the Republicans in Congress who refuse to consider changing anything because the extremist gun lobby pays them not to. This is an absolute outrage, it is shameful and indefensible, and the vast majority of the people of this country agree.

It's right there in the amendment, in the three words that somehow the extremist gun lobby always seems to skip over: "a well regulated Militia". The Founding Fathers put it right there in the text -- "well regulated". What does well-regulated mean? It means regulating -- passing rules. Passing laws. Laws which confine this right well within a militia. Why do all the extremists ignore this part of the amendment?

Republicans like to pretend that they are "originalists." This is supposed to mean that the Constitution can only be interpreted by considering what the original intent was at the time it was adopted. You know what? I am fine with that, I really am. Let's interpret the Second Amendment that way! Let's even ignore the "well regulated Militia" part, as the gun extremists want us to. Let's say that people are allowed to own guns without any exception or infringement. Great! What that means is that everyone in America should be free to own as many guns as they wish. Except, of course, we've got to only interpret that through the eyes of the authors of the Bill of Rights in the eighteenth century. You know what that means? Everyone is free to own as many flintlock rifles or muskets as they wish.

I don't have any problem with that at all. I bet nobody else would either. You know how long it takes to reload a flintlock? A long time -- several minutes, in some cases. It's a complicated process, with multiple steps. And there's no guarantee it will fire correctly after you get done, either -- look up the original meaning of "flash in the pan" for proof. Some muskets can be reloaded slightly faster, but even the fastest, most experienced shooter could only reload and fire maybe four or five times a minute, at best. An inexperienced user might get off only two shots per minute, if that.

That -- and only that -- is what the people who wrote the Second Amendment were talking about. That was their "original intent." So I'm fine with making such weapons available to all. Anyone using such a weapon can get their first shot off -- which will probably miss, these guns were astoundingly inaccurate -- and then they'll have to spend the time to manually reload it with powder and shot. While the person is in the midst of this complicated process, they will not be firing off 40 or 50 more shots. They can be tackled. They can be restrained. They can easily be killed by a law enforcement officer with a more-powerful modern weapon. So I'm fine with allowing people to own all the flintlocks they want.

That, again, was the original intent of the Second Amendment. Nothing more. But hewing to original intent means we cannot ignore the "well regulated Militia" phrase. Modern America does indeed have a well-regulated militia. It is called the National Guard. Everyone is free to join, if they measure up to the physical standards required. The right to do so has never been infringed by Congress. Want to exercise your right to bear arms? Join the Guard. They'll even pay you to do so!

The Second Amendment demands the militia to be well-regulated. This means any other group with delusions of grandeur calling themselves a "militia" are simply not constitutional, period. And the original intent of the authors of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with private citizens bearing arms outside a well-regulated militia. So Congress can regulate that too, since such a right isn't even mentioned.

This is what the American people so desperately want to see. The polling numbers on this stuff are just off the charts. In a country where the two political sides can't seem to agree on anything, the public agrees that new gun safety laws should be passed to try to prevent the mass slaughtering of children from being the "new normal."

A poll taken just after the senseless massacre of innocents in Uvalde, Texas proves this. You know what the American people want Congress to do?

They want background checks to be required on all gun sales, period -- with absolutely no loopholes. An unbelievable 88 percent of the public wants to see this happen.

They want to prevent people who have been reported as dangerous to law enforcement by mental health professionals not to have access to guns -- again, over eight-in-ten Americans want to see this happen, because who could possibly be against such a commonsense rule?

Three-fourths of the public wants to see a national database of all gun sales created and maintained by the federal government.

Two-thirds of the public wants a ban on so-called "assault" weapons. These are weapons of war, not hunting rifles. Look at any advertisement the gun manufacturers run -- it is obvious what these weapons are designed and intended to do. The only ones who should have access to such weapons are those in the "well regulated Militia," period -- and they should not be able to take them home at the end of the day. Part of regulating the militia means such weapons need to be under the control of the militia.

The public gets all of this. And in politics today, those numbers are astounding. Eighty-eight percent of the public probably wouldn't even agree that the sky is blue if you told them one political party or the other swore that it wasn't. But that's precisely how many Americans want universal background checks with absolutely no loopholes.

Democrats need to stop being so frightened of this issue. With numbers like that, it is a wonder that they don't make it the centerpiece of every political campaign. The Republicans are bought and paid for by the extremist gun lobby. The Democrats, on the other hand, are terrified of the ads the extremist gun lobby might run against them -- which is almost even worse than the paid-off Republicans.

Republicans have absolutely fetishized guns, for their own political gain. They take Christmas photos with their entire family -- down to the smallest of their children -- brandishing semi-automatic rifles and other weapons of war. They pose with guns in their television ads. They feed the extremist gun fetishists by such propagandistic techniques. They proudly speak at the convention of the extremist gun lobby, mere days and a couple hundred miles from the most recent slaughter of innocents -- a slaughter this extremist group has fought so hard to make possible.

This is disgusting and shameful, and it is high time Democrats stood up and said so. It is high time for Democrats to point out that a photo of an eight-year-old pointing an AR-15 at the camera is not what Christmas is supposed to be all about. It is borderline child abuse, and Democrats need to start saying so. Photos like these are why we have to watch the funerals of other eight-year-olds, plain and simple. Republicans are -- quite obviously and quite publicly -- grooming their own young children to be extremist gun fetishists. There's really no other way to put it.

Republicans are fighting against all these commonsense measures. They are fighting hard to keep the loopholes in the background checks intact. They don't want background checks to be universal. Why? How does that make any sense? They want terrorists to have easy access to high-powered guns? That is precisely what these loopholes allow for. That is why I say the gun lobby is extremist, because that is an insanely extreme position to take.

And somehow they want the public to think of them as being "pro-life." That is absurd, when they fight for the right of people to kill as many innocent lives as technically possible.

Don't believe me? This week alone, the Republicans in the Senate filibustered a bill which would have tried to address the issue of domestic terrorists. Remember back when 9/11 happened, when Republicans would call anybody who didn't want to take any measure possible against terrorists "un-American" or "traitors" or even worse names? Yeah, all that has changed. Now Republicans refuse to vote for an anti-terrorism bill. This is shameful, and Democrats need to point it out at the tops of their lungs. How can the Republican Party get away with being pro-terrorist? Have they really sunk that low?

Republicans are fighting hard to allow mentally disturbed people -- people mental health professionals consider dangerous and report to the authorities -- to not only keep all the guns they've already amassed but also to be able to buy more of them if they wish. That is disgraceful. It is beyond dangerous. And yet, that is precisely what Republicans are fighting hard for.

Republicans counter with soporific feel-good suggestions to "improve mental health treatment" in this country. These are the same Republicans who gut their states' budget for mental health treatment and won't even allow Medicaid expansion in their states (which would bring in millions and millions of dollars in mental health aid). They are stone-cold hypocrites when they try to somehow be the champions of mental health treatment after slashing the budget for such treatment, and it is high time someone pointed this out.

Republicans are even against the sale of "ghost guns" -- kits to make guns that have no serial number and are not even able to be traced. This hamstrings law enforcement -- just ask any cop on the beat. And yet Republicans are fighting hard to keep the pipeline of untraceable weapons flowing to the public.

Nobody in their right mind would allow private individuals to possess or use hand grenades. Or missiles. Or nuclear weapons. Because that would be insane. Weapons of war should be limited to those trained in their use, and they should be controlled by the state, period. It's easy to see why, and the American public gets that. But for some reason the extremists want full access to the guns of war to all. They want everyone -- even a disturbed 18-year-old -- to be able to own and use the same weapon a soldier is issued. That is just as insane, and the public overwhelmingly agrees.

The only way any of this is going to change is if the public starts treating this issue as a prime consideration when they enter the ballot box. And the only way that is going to happen is if the Democratic Party makes it a honkin' big deal in every single political campaign. Vote out the extremists who are fighting hard for deranged terrorists to buy even more guns without any background check at all. Vote out the extremists who refuse to read the first part of the Second Amendment and refuse to understand what it meant to the people who actually wrote it. Vote out extremists who care more about profits for the sellers of death machines more than they care about the lives of innocent elementary school children.

I am sick and tired of the status quo. I am sick and tired of Congress being held hostage by the extremist gun lobby. I am sick and tired of seeing politicians unable to pass laws that 75-to-90 percent of the public wants to see passed. I am ashamed that more people in America have died from guns since 1975 than every soldier who died in every war America has ever fought in from the American Revolution forward. That is shameful. It is not right.

And you know what? I am not the only one. There are millions more Americans who feel exactly the same as I do.

This is a disgrace, it is shameful, and it only happens here in America. The rest of the world considers us barbarians, and rightly so. It has to stop. It has to end. Because I refuse to believe that this "new normal" where innocent children are offered up on the altar of a misreading of the Second Amendment is all that is politically possible.

We are better than this. Or we should be, at any rate.




Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com

May 21, 2022

Friday Talking Points -- The Blunderful Blizzard Of Oz

We were reminded of the whole Wonderful Wizard of Oz metaphor early this week, when we saw Mehmet "Dr." Oz at a last-minute Pennsylvania campaign rally, holding up his smartphone to the crowd, as the disembodied voice of the great MAGA Dear Leader bellowed forth bombast and nonsense to the crowd. All it needed was some smoke and fireballs at the sides of the stage, really. It seemed to us (but then we do have a rather warped sense of humor...) that Oz was begging the crowd to please pay lots of attention to the man behind the curtain.

We must admit, we haven't seen the ads that ran in the Keystone State during the Republican primary, but we wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them has just had to go with an L. Frank Baum-inspired metaphor. It's there for the taking, with his last name, right? So why not?

However, it is now Friday, and even though we have no idea who will emerge the victor of the Senate GOP nominating contest, Donald Trump is already teeing up a new round of "I wuz robbed!" on Oz's behalf. We do have to wonder if this blizzard of bovine excrement is going to have any repercussions in the fall, though -- repercussions which could wind up helping the rather-impressive Democratic candidate in the race. Could this be a gigantic blunder in the making? One can only hope....

The margin of the race, as of this writing, is now within 1,100 votes -- out of over a million cast. And there are still tens of thousands of votes to count. What this guarantees is that no matter which candidate is proclaimed the winner, there will be an automatic recount which will take weeks. During this period, the fierce internecine battle will rage on between Trump's "Big Lie" universe (where any election that didn't come out your way is automatically illegitimate) and the saner members of the Republican Party. This will likely happen no matter who eventually wins. Since it was a multi-candidate race, the winner will be crowned with not even one-third of the total Republican votes (the final percentage will likely be below 32 percent). All this squabbling will tarnish both candidates, meaning whichever one does eventually emerge from the recount rubble will be operating at a disadvantage from the get-go in the general election campaign.

Consider: if Oz wins, Trump will be happy. But Oz already -- even before Election Day -- had the highest rates of Republican-voter disapproval of any of the GOP candidates in the race (by far). His numbers were badly underwater, with many Republicans expressing a strong dislike of Oz. He is just seen as "too Hollywood" by too many, or a carpetbagger from New Jersey, and/or only a very recent convert to Republican politics (much less MAGA politics). In a word: a phony. And all these attitudes were present before the tense counting and recounting had even begun. With Trump blundering onto the stage already, it looks like everyone in Pennsylvania is in for an epic weeks-long tantrum -- and if Trump is leading the baseless claims of fraud and a rigged election, you can bet your bottom dollar that plenty of his acolytes will be banging the same drum as loudly as possible. Even if Oz emerges as the winner at the end of this process, it's going to leave a very bad taste in the mouths of a lot of Republican voters. This could depress turnout in November within the Republican ranks.

Now consider the flip side -- what if Oz loses? What if David McCormick is proclaimed the winner? Will Trump graciously accept the loss and urge all his followers to respect party unity and fall in line behind McCormick for November? Or will Trump continue his imitation of a 2-year-old who has been denied one more cookie? Which do you think is more likely? If Trump gets all pouty and petulant, and especially if he launches a second version of his Big Lie (call it the "Medium-Sized Lie," perhaps?) and insists that McCormick's nomination is illegitimate, what do you think that is going to do for Republican turnout in November?

The more the two Republicans fight -- and the nastier that fight gets -- the more it benefits the Democratic nominee in the race, John Fetterman (more on him in a bit). And ("because, because, because, because... be... cause!" ) that could be the most wonderful thing Oz does.

OK, we will stop, we promise (before we break out into song and start skipping down a canary-colored adobe pathway). After all, this was just one race out of many, and the primaries weren't the only political news of the week.

The most amusing news from Tuesday's primaries, though, came out of North Carolina, where the voters rejected sending Madison Cawthorn back to Congress for a second term. So we can all now start to refer to him as: "Madison Cawthorn... LOSER!" His fellow Republican Adam Kinzinger responded to this news with: "It's good for the country, it's good for the party, it's good for the 11th District of North Carolina... it's good to see him lose." No, really -- we can all feel free to indulge in some schadenfreude at Cawthorn's expense, seeing as how if anyone deserved such a fate it was definitely him. Just think, come next January, he'll move over to Fox News or someplace even more rabid, and we can all start to totally ignore him forever! So there's that to look forward to....

Kidding (and snark) aside, though, Cawthorn then threw a hissy fit and started issuing threats to his fellow Republicans, but we're going to save that part of the story for the talking points section.

But we would like to adopt Cawthorn's term "Dark MAGA," since it is so fitting and appropriate in so many circumstances these days. A horrendous racist hate-filled terrorist attack on a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, put the focus on how dangerous White supremacist rhetoric has become mainstream Republicanism. From a Washington Post article:

"We have met the enemy and he is us," as Pogo Possum famously remarked. The article then goes on to track the insidious "Replacement Theory" which used to be the province of only the fringe -- only White supremacists, in other words -- but is now being spewed by almost too many Republicans to count:



Precious few Republicans are denouncing this, however, which should really come as no surprise. Tucker Carlson flat-out asserted that the shooting had nothing whatsoever to do with "hateful right-wing rhetoric," all evidence to the contrary. One Republican immediately trotted out a "false flag" theory to explain it, accusing the federal government of somehow orchestrating the massacre. Donald Trump tried to distract everyone with a blatant (and easily-proven-false) lie, when the subject came up: "In 18 months in Afghanistan, we lost nobody."

Far too few Republicans are denouncing what has happened to their party. The Republican Party has become dangerously infected with hatred and violent rhetoric. One such voice crying in the wilderness was Michael Gerson, who used to write speeches for President George W. Bush:



We should mention that this isn't even the only danger emanating from the Republican Party these days, or (as we'll get to in the talking points) the "Dark MAGA Party." We also learned this week that the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote to Arizona legislators urging them to just flat-out ignore the will of their voters and instead magically (and unconstitutionally) declare victory for Donald Trump in the 2020 election. A "Christian nationalist" and fervent spouter of Trump's Big Lie just won the Republican nomination for governor in Pennsylvania. And it turns out those rumors may well have been true; that Republicans in Congress were actually conducting personal tours (to better coordinate the attack) to rightwing groups on the day before the January 6th insurrection attempt on the United States Capitol (and United States Congress, and United States Constitution).

The dangers are there, for all to see -- right out in the open. The only question is whether enough people will realize it before it is too late, or not.





Before we get to the actual awards, we do have to offer our congratulations to Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who just confirmed her engagement to longtime partner (they met in college) Riley Roberts. Our best wishes for the happy couple!

We have to begin by handing a well-deserved Honorable Mention to all of the progressive candidates who won their races this Tuesday, many of them fighting an avalanche of PAC money spent against them. Most prominent in the news were Democrats like Summer Lee, Andrea Salinas, and Jamie McLeod-Skinner (who beat "the Joe Manchin of the House" in Oregon). But there were others as well, although some will have very tough races in November (instead of skating to victory in a very blue district). All of these brave and successful candidates are moving the Democratic Party further away from the hangovers of its cozy Democratic Leadership Council corporate love-fest, and thus a whole lot closer to the issues that average voters actually care about and want to see Congress achieve. Or, to put it another way, it looks like The Squad is going to have a few new members come next January (we wrote about what a good night progressives had earlier in the week).

But the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award this time around clearly must go to Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman. Just for grit and endurance alone -- Fetterman suffered a minor stroke last weekend (right before Election Day) and then had to get a pacemaker implanted on the day of the election. That might have tanked the chances of any normal political candidate, right there -- voters are always leery about choosing someone with health problems, after all. But it didn't.

Fetterman's victory in the contest for the open Senate seat from Pennsylvania (Republican Pat Toomey is retiring) was impressive for other reasons as well as just overcoming medical adversity. His margin of victory was incredibly impressive, in fact -- he pulled in 59 percent of the vote to opponent Conor Lamb's 26 percent. That is a whopping 33-point margin, in a race that many expected to be a whole lot closer.

The thing that most impressed us, however, was Fetterman's campaign style. We cannot believe we haven't been regularly hearing this as a theme or constant comparison, but the politician Fetterman most reminds us of is Jesse Ventura, the ex-professional wrestler and ex-governor of Minnesota. The most obvious reason is physical resemblance, of course. Fetterman stands either six-foot-eight or six-foot-nine-inches tall (accounts vary) and sports a bald/shaved head and a goatee. He is physically imposing and easily might be mistaken for a former professional wrestler. Adding to this image is his distaste for formal clothes -- or even long pants. He campaigns in gym shorts and a hoodie. This is not a typical Democratic candidate for the Senate (or any office), in other words.

It's not just looks or dress, either -- Fetterman is brash, he speaks in working-class language, and he is not polished or groomed by consultants or focus groups. He tells it like it is. And in the age of Trump, that is exactly what the national Democratic Party needs a good jolt of. Which is why, as we said, it absolutely mystifies us that more pundits haven't begun noting the similarities between Fetterman and Ventura.

But all that aside, the most impressive thing about Fetterman all around (and his victory Tuesday night) is what he chose to campaign on against his centrist opponent. Conor Lamb is a former darling of the Democratic establishment. He achieved this status by pulling off an improbable victory in a special election for a Pittsburgh-based House district. This was a very Republican district, but Lamb squeaked out a victory nonetheless. So some Democrats saw him as the wave of the future -- a moderate Democrat who could win over Republican voters.

Unfortunately, these days when you think of conservative Democrats, one name springs to mind -- Senator Joe Manchin of neighboring West Virginia. Manchin actually endorsed Lamb in this week's race. Fetterman, on the other hand, explicitly promised not to be a Manchin-style Democrat, swore he would vote to toss out the Senate filibuster, and urged his party to get some stuff actually done instead of endlessly talking (or, worse, squabbling) about it all.

And that's exactly what the voters of the Keystone State responded to. In a big way. Fetterman is a fighter. He is looking forward to taking on not only Dr. Oz or the establishment GOP guy, but to eviscerating the entire MAGA agenda during the campaign. This has left some in the Democratic Party scratching their heads wondering why the candidate they favored -- despite being endorsed by Joe Manchin and raking in millions in Wall Street donations -- could possibly have lost. This is a gigantic wakeup call for any Democrat who is wondering anything remotely like that, to be blunt.

The Democratic Party could use a few more candidates like Fetterman in a whole bunch of places nationwide. Which is why there really wasn't any question this week -- John Fetterman was the easy and obvious choice for Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week. We wish him well on the campaign trail, and we will be following this race closely right up to November.

[Congratulate Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman on his official contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]





Representative Sean Patrick Maloney caused quite a stir this week. New York state tried to heavily gerrymander their House district map, but unfortunately the courts took a dim view of the attempt and threw the map out. Instead, a court-appointed "special master" drew up an alternate map, and Democrats are now figuring out how to deal with it. In this new map, Maloney's district (NY-18) moved slightly to the right, but his home was redrawn into the district next door (NY-17). Maloney then announced he'd be running for his new home district's seat.

Unfortunately, NY-17 already has a Democratic member of Congress, Mondaire Jones. Maloney made his announcement in a tweet, without taking the time (or courtesy) of informing Jones of this beforehand. That was rude, obviously. But what's even ruder is that he encouraged Jones to run for a different district, NY-16, instead. Which is currently represented by incumbent Jamaal Bowman, who successfully primaried a longtime incumbent Democrat last year. Bowman is a staunch progressive who immediately joined The Squad. Jones is also a solid progressive, and one of only two Black L.G.B.T.Q. members of Congress.

What this all means is that Maloney is essentially telling two Black progressive incumbent members that they should run against each other, while he coasts to victory in his chosen district. Maloney is White (as you've probably already guessed, considering his very-Irish name). He's also a "No Labels" Democrat, meaning he's a centrist (or a corporatist, take your choice).

Now, this all might seem like some technical intraparty fight that might have flown beneath most people's radar (people who didn't live in one of these districts, in other words). But Maloney has another responsibility -- he chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the partisan group which is designed to elect as many Democrats to the House as possible. This is supposed to mean investing in prominent candidates who might flip Republican seats, but mostly it means protecting incumbents, since getting re-elected is almost always easier than flipping a seat.

But here Maloney is, trying to force two progressives to run against each other -- which would necessarily mean one fewer of them in the new Congress, no matter what. And that has bred a lot of resentment within the progressive wing of the party, to put it mildly.

Here's how Bowman put it:



Ouch. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has now called on Maloney to step down from chairing the D.C.C.C. So far, she's the only one to say so publicly, but there are reportedly a whole lot of other House Democrats who feel exactly the same way.



Double-ouch.

For causing all this consternation, and for being a corporatist Democrat trying to pit two progressives against each other, we have to agree that Sean Patrick Maloney is the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week. Nothing about this is final -- he could change his mind (the map won't even be finalized until today) -- and we strongly urge him to consider doing so, either by running in his current district or by taking A.O.C.'s advice and passing the D.C.C.C. baton to someone more neutral.

[Contact Representative Sean Patrick Maloney on his House contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]




Volume 663 (5/20/22)

We've got a rather full plate in the talking points department this week, which includes several excerpts which are longer than the average soundbite. But we felt it was important in each case, so you'll have to excuse the length (if you've read this far in this column, then maybe this isn't too much to ask... ahem).

In fact, we didn't even have room for a traditional humorous last item to end the list, so we'll provide one here as a bonus. This is kind of a "make your own" talking point -- one that all the late-night comics already had a field day with, last night.

George W. Bush gave a speech the other night, where he tried to condemn Russia in no uncertain terms. He condemned them for their sham elections and for the brutality of Vladimir Putin's warmongering. But in what some are calling the biggest Freudian slip of all time in American politics, his subconscious sidetracked him: "...it was the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq."

Dubya quickly realized what he had just said, and quickly added: "I mean, of Ukraine." Then, under his breath he sighed: "Iraq too, anyway."

Again, we leave this as an exercise in political messaging (and ridiculing) for the reader. [Hint: It is a rarity to hear someone admit to war crimes in such a fashion and then joke about it.]



Fetterman's got the right idea

We expect that John Fetterman's campaign -- from now right up until November -- is going to provide us with many talking points that other Democratic candidates would do well to imitate. Today, we begin with a general encouragement along these lines.

"John Fetterman won the nomination for the open Senate seat in Pennsylvania by being authentic. By being an average Joe. By talking straight to the voters, without all the consultant-speak or focus-group-tested nonsense. There's a big lesson in all of this for other Democratic candidates to take heed of. Fetterman won by over 30 points -- over a moderate centrist who had been endorsed by Joe Manchin. But that is not what Democratic voters are looking for right now. They want to see someone who will fight for them. They want to see someone who will light a fire under all the other Democrats in Washington to get something done. They want someone that talks to them like they are not idiots. They want to believe in someone who won't just ask for their votes every re-election, but will actually care about and fight for the things they believe in. Elections are not just about good policy ideas and white papers -- they are first and foremost about emotion. John Fetterman knows this, and I would hope plenty of other Democrats learn this lesson as well."



"Replacement theory" is White supremacy, period

Obviously, this is all in response to the hate-inspired racial massacre in Buffalo. And it's about time that Republicans are called on what they've been saying and brushing under the rug on their side of the aisle.

"The Buffalo shooter -- a domestic terrorist -- was a believer in what is called the 'Great Replacement Theory.' Joe Biden is right -- this is nothing more than racist White supremacy, folks. And what is truly shocking is how the Republican Party either embraces this dangerous hate-filled idiocy or allows it to fester within their ranks. We're not just talking some fringe members, either. The number-three ranking Republican in the House has openly espoused this. You remember her, the woman who replaced Liz Cheney in GOP House leadership? Well, here's what Cheney had to say about her own party, in a tweet after the shooting:"



"Other Republicans are calling on their party to do the same thing -- either denounce these members or just expel them from their ranks. White supremacy has no place in American politics. Or, it shouldn't, at any rate. Unfortunately for us all, this is not true now, because one American political party just looks the other way when their own members spout such hate-filled incitement. I agree with Liz Cheney: this has to stop."



What Republicans are against will stun you

This was a notable week for votes. So point it out!

"A jaw-dropping 192 Republicans in the House just voted against money for the Food and Drug Administration to help fix the infant formula shortage problem. And we're talking relative pennies, when it comes to federal spending. They voted against 28 million dollars -- that's million, mind you, not billion or trillion -- because they would much rather have the issue to bash Democrats with than to help babies get their food. They've been making lots of political hay by accusing Joe Biden of causing this problem, but then they won't lift a finger to help fix it. This isn't the only shocking vote, either. Remember when Republicans were the party of law-and-order and the party against terrorism? Yeah, those days are long gone. Now they are the party that is actually soft on terrorism. A stunning and disgraceful 203 Republicans voted this week against bolstering federal resources to combat domestic terrorism, in the wake of the lone wolf Buffalo terrorist attack. Republicans also voted against banning price-gouging by gas companies -- think of that the next time you fill up your car or truck. And more and more Republicans are voting against aid to Ukraine as well. The Republican Party is telling voters everywhere exactly who they are, by what they vote against. I hope the voters are paying attention -- and even if they don't, I hope Democrats do a good job of pointing it all out in the midterm campaign."



Going to the extremes

This is getting downright frightening.

"Republicans in state legislatures across the country are in a race to see which state can outdo all the others in passing the most extreme abortion ban imaginable. Oklahoma just passed a bill that would outlaw all abortion from the instant of fertilization -- which would mean in-vitro fertilization options would also disappear from the state. Other states are passing abortion bans which would force victims of rape or incest to bear their children -- no matter how traumatic that might be for these victimized women. This will lead to a rash of suicides from women without the means to travel to blue states, mark my words. Republicans don't care about 'life' -- if they did, they'd have already voted to help pregnant mothers or mothers get formula for their babies or help mothers live above the poverty line. They're against all that, though. The only thing they care about is forced and compulsory birth, period. And some are already thinking about going further -- some Republicans openly admit they'd ban all birth control too, if they get the chance. Don't let them -- vote blue if you care about women's rights. Or human rights. Because if you don't, we're going to see these extreme laws devastate the lives of countless Americans."



Are you there, Congress? It's Judy Blume.

The following is from an extraordinary letter sent to Congress (currently holding hearings on book banning) by well-known and award-winning author Judy Blume -- and about a zillion other children's and young adult authors and illustrators. It is a powerful statement, which is why we felt an extended excerpt from the letter was appropriate (the whole letter is only a page-and-a-quarter long, followed by over eight pages of the names of the cosigners, so it is well worth the time to read in full):





Thanks, Madison!

We wrote a whole article about this yesterday, in case anyone's interested.

"President Biden is right to call out how extreme the Trumpian base of the Republican Party has become, but freshman Congressman Madison Cawthorn came up with a much better way to put it -- after he lost his primary to an actual sane Republican. Here was his petulant and angry reaction to getting spanked at the polls:"



"This is the Republican Party of today, folks. Right here. As the late great Molly Ivins famously said of a Pat Buchanan speech 30 years ago, it 'probably sounded better in the original German.' This is the new 'Dark MAGA' -- people who are threatening to 'take command' from their own fellow Republicans. Cawthorn actually warns them that 'their days are numbered.' I mean, has anyone contacted the F.B.I. about these overt threats -- from a man who has been stopped twice while trying to bring a gun onto an airplane? And please remember, this is what Dark MAGA politicians say about their fellow Republicans. If they're this threatening towards their own party, then one shudders to imagine the violent and dangerous things this trend towards Dark MAGA might mean for Democrats. Your vote is important this time around, because everyone needs to send a clear message: vote against might-makes-right and vote against naked fascism -- vote blue in November."



Calling all sane Republicans... anyone? Hello?

The Las Vegas Sun published a rather stark plea for some sanity from Nevada GOP candidates this week. The editorial goes on at length about the rot infecting Republican thought in their own state, where it came from, and why they reject it. All while pleading for some sane Republicans to step forward that they could possibly endorse. This is an extraordinary commentary on how extreme the party has become as a whole, which is why it is worth excerpting at length:






Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com

May 14, 2022

Friday Talking Points -- Overreach And Backlash

Of all the different types of cycle that exist in politics, the one of overreach and backlash is one of the most interesting. We may be about to see one of these cycles happen in very accelerated fashion (since it usually takes years or even a few subsequent elections to fully materialize), although since we're at the beginning of the cycle it is impossible to now know how it will all play out.

This cycle began with the leak of the Supreme Court draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito which would entirely overturn Roe v. Wade and send the question of abortion back to the state legislatures to grapple with. Conservatives have had this as a goal for at least four decades, so it was seen by many as the last step on a very long road.

But it's not a last step at all, because it will usher in an entirely new era of each state choosing what laws to accept when it comes to abortion. And like it or not, the whole "laboratories of democracy" theory will play out -- some liberal states will have extremely liberal abortion laws, some conservative states will have Draconian laws against abortion, and other states will choose some sort of middle route. This process has not only already begun, it has actually been going on for a long time, as states anticipated the possible end of the Roe era.

Republicans now have the "dog who caught the car" syndrome, though -- they have achieved their overarching goal and are now left unsure what exactly to do about it or what comes next. All of a sudden all those state-level laws are not just going to be vehicles for political posturing any more, they are going to directly affect women's lives. All of a sudden, things have gotten very real, because the courts will no longer save them from the worst of their own excesses. Their rhetoric is now going to become a new reality, in a matter of weeks.

This is where the overreach is already happening. Back when Republicans tried to pass antiabortion laws that they thought might stand a chance of being acceptable to the Supreme Court's interpretation of Roe, certain safeguards and limitations were written into the laws. Things like exceptions for rape and incest victims. Or bans on charging the women seeking abortions with violating any laws.

That was then, this is now. Now more and more states aren't even bothering with rape or incest exceptions, and some would even do away with the exception for saving the life of the mother -- meaning a pregnancy that threatens the mother's death cannot be aborted even to save her life. Louisiana's legislature just contemplated (and then stepped back from the brink of) passing a law labelling all abortions "homicides," which would have meant not only the doctor but the woman seeking the abortion could have been charged and thrown in jail for doing so.

These are extreme laws, but they all follow from the central idea that if aborting a baby is "murder," then how can you have any exceptions which legally allow it? If you start with that moral position (as many Republicans do) then morally the rest follows.

Red states are currently in a frenzy of lawmaking, and to some extent they're each trying to outdo each other in their condemnation of abortion. They no longer just want to restrict it, they want to outright ban it. Restraint and consideration for nuance is being left by the wayside. But, as mentioned, these are no longer just "messaging" laws passed to entice the Supreme Court into paring Roe back anymore, they are going to be reality in these states, as soon as July.

Abortion is, of course, a polarizing political issue. Many support abortion rights wholeheartedly and many condemn it without exception. But there is a huge mass of people in the middle who have somewhat mixed feelings over it. This is where the political messaging war will be fought, this summer and this fall.

Republicans are hoping mightily that this battle doesn't even materialize, so they can just sweep the whole subject under the rug and run the campaign against Joe Biden that they were planning on running. "Nothing to see here, folks, let's talk about inflation instead," in other words. Or they're going to try (as they're already beginning to) to paint Democrats as the "extremists" on the issue, by pressing Democrats to state what limitations on abortion they support -- and then turning around and accusing: "Democrats want abortion-on-demand right up until labor starts!"

Democrats are going to be pointing out the fact that the Republican Party now clearly stands -- and has for a long time -- for abolishing all abortion nationwide. "They will not be content with banning abortion in red states, they are going to do so everywhere, first chance they get!" will be the line of attack. Democrats will also go after the extreme nature of the state laws either being proposed, passing, or sitting dormant on the books already.

Democrats have the advantage here, since what they are warning against is indeed the reality of the situation, whereas what Republicans are warning about is nonsense that no Democratic politician supports. But having the truth on your side doesn't always mean you win the messaging battle (see: Donald Trump's entire term of office).

The key demographic here -- the battleground where this will mostly be fought out -- isn't just women. The real key is suburban women. Because suburban women know all about abortion. My uneducated guess is that the vast majority of all suburban women have personal experience with abortion, either firsthand or through someone they know. Whether in high school or college or through friends or coworkers, most of these women have at least seen someone they know go through it. It is personal to them, no matter their beliefs about it.

These women think about abortion in the context of: "What would have happened to that girl if it hadn't been available -- her life might have turned out radically differently." They also think about it in the context of their own daughters.

Republicans have recently had an enormous attrition problem with suburban women, pretty much ever since Donald Trump took office. Democrats have capitalized on this, but everyone knows it might just be a temporary effect -- they might all go back to being reliable Republican voters if Trump's name is not on the ballot. The GOP thought it had made inroads by fearmongering over schools ("Your children are being brainwashed by lefties!" ), but this could now be at risk.

We can probably expect to start seeing more articles exploring this, which take the time to ask some suburban women what they think of Roe being overturned and whether they'll be voting Republican in November. Because in their rush to outdo each other, the state-level Republicans are in the midst of a rather large political overreach.

Democrats have already started pointing it out. Senate Democrats released a new ad this week that puts the issue front and center. It's a pretty simple equation to draw -- a vote for Democrats is a vote to preserve women's rights, while a vote for Republicans is a vote to burn down women's rights. Similar ads will soon be appearing in races all over the country, assumably.

Will a backlash against Republicans materialize at the ballot box in November? No one can say, at this point. Will it be big enough to save Democrats in the midterms? Again, it is impossible to say. But it is a whole lot more possible that Democrats might not be in as bad a position heading into those midterms now than they were before that opinion leaked. Because, once again, these are no longer just "messaging" laws being passed. They will have real-world consequences, starting this summer, and some of those stories are going to start being told by the media. Women will have the chance to see the results of this Republican overreach before they vote. It is no longer a hypothetical exercise, it will be reality.

But enough future speculation, let's take a look at the week that was in politics. America passed a grim milestone this week, reaching one million COVID deaths. There is a slow surge in cases happening, but so far it appears not to be anywhere near as bad as Omicron or Delta were, which is good news.

Senator Rand Paul pulled one of his signature hissy fits by singlehandedly blocking a new round of aid to Ukraine. Remember when Republicans were all incensed that Joe Biden wasn't sending military aid to Ukraine fast enough? Yeah, those were the days.... The bill will pass next week, but the delay might interrupt the pipeline of aid, which would all be Rand Paul's fault.

We were heartened to see that the punk group Pussy Riot successfully escaped Russia and are now planning on touring, outside of Vladimir Putin's petulant reach. Also to see First Lady Doctor Jill Biden meeting with Ukrainian First Lady Olena Zelenska in a surprise Mother's Day visit to Ukraine -- because it is so good to see an American presidential wife care about people other than herself once again, obviously. But the most heartwarming news from the region this week was seeing bomb-sniffing dog Patron getting a medal from Volodymyr Zelenskyy and then falling asleep at his own press conference.

In primary season news back here at home, a Trump-endorsed candidate lost in the Nebraska governor's contest, while Trump's pick in the Pennsylvania Senate race appears to be faltering. So there's that to look forward to, next Tuesday.

On the Democratic side, the biggest primary news this week was the announcement of the 20 entries for early-voting states in the 2024 presidential primary calendar. We wrote about this earlier in the week, if anyone wants to read a wonky dive into the contenders' chances.

In legal news, a new federal grand jury has already issued its first subpoena in its investigation into those piles of boxes Trump hauled off with him to his Florida resort -- you know, the ones that contained classified material? Meanwhile, the House January 6th committee issued subpoenas to five prominent Republicans (including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy), to compel their testimony about what they knew before and during the insurrection attempt against Congress. Seeing as how Republicans have now given up all pretense of being the "law and order" party, it is not expected that any of them will show up to answer questions under oath, however.

In economic news, inflation may have already peaked. Last month's number ticked down from the month before, the first such reduction since late last year. Nobody's sure whether this will continue or not, especially with the price of gasoline spiking back up, but it was a lot better news that "inflation continues to skyrocket," that's for sure.

And finally, in the "things we never in a million billion years thought we'd see" file, we have the news that Rick Perry is now apparently a champion for the therapeutic use of psychedelics. First it was John Boehner becoming a lobbyist for cannabis and now this? Rick "Oops" Perry, erstwhile Dancing With The Stars contestant and Republican presidential candidate, is now advocating for psychedelic mushrooms?!? There's really only one proper comment to make, upon hearing this news, so we'll just end with it and move on:

Wow, man. What a trip!



One historical note before we get to the current awards: Ten years ago this week, then-Vice President Joe Biden got out in front of his boss Barack Obama on the subject of gay marriage. Up until that point, Obama had not publicly embraced the cause (likely because he thought it was too controversial a position to take). But Biden forced his hand, and within days Obama also "evolved" into supporting marriage equality. We wrote about this way back in Friday Talking Points, Volume 210, in case anyone wants a stroll down Memory Lane. And yes, it has been only ten short years since many Democrats shied away from the issue and wouldn't publicly state their position, or else flat-out opposed gay marriage. Somehow it seems like it's been longer than that, but maybe that's just us.

This week we'd like to give a sort of "thank you for your service" Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award, to White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki. Today was Psaki's last press briefing, as she moves on to a new (and more lucrative) career path in life.

Psaki was a breath of fresh air after the stench of all of Trump's press secretaries and the three-ring circus the pressroom became under them -- one of whom didn't even bother to hold a single press briefing during her entire stint. Psaki, on the other hand, brought intelligence and sanity back to the job.

Psaki is obviously whip-smart and feisty enough to take on all comers. This included all the right-wing media "reporters" who gibbered and whined all their pet conspiracy theories on a daily basis. She became known for her epic takedowns of such idiocy, delivering her signature "Psaki bombs" with delightful regularity. She even managed to charm the recipient of many of these Psaki bombs -- Peter Doocy of Fox News -- so much that today he issued his first tweet in two years' time, posing amicably with Psaki (who knew she was so short?!?) and wishing her good luck.

Psaki brought charm and wit to one of the toughest political jobs in Washington. She has a first-rate mind and a brilliant way with words, and we look forward to seeing her on television in a different role in the near future. As we look forward to also hearing that she finally has enough free time on her hands to learn how to play Wordle.

[Full disclosure: We admit that we have been previously accused of being partial to redheads, to which we plead nolo contendere. Ahem.]

For over a year of service to both Joe Biden and the nation, for being a breath of fresh air in the White House briefing room, for all those hilarious Psaki bombs, and mostly for bringing intelligence and honesty back to the job after so long, we hereby award Jen Psaki this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week on her way out the door. You will be missed, Jen, by millions.

[Congratulate White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on the official White House contact page, to let them know you appreciated her efforts.]





While the Senate did vote this week on the Women's Health Protection Act, which would have not only codified Roe v. Wade but also swept aside all the unnecessary and punitive red-state laws restricting abortion access, and while one Democrat did not vote for it (Guess who? We'll give you precisely one guess....), in anticipation we already handed Senator Joe Manchin a Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week last week for the same thing, so we're not going to repeat ourselves.

Other than that, however, we find we just weren't that disappointed by any Democrat this week. Of course, as always, we might have missed or forgotten about someone, so feel free to make your own nominations in the comments.




Volume 662 (5/13/22)

Happy Friday the 13th! Except for friggatriskaidekaphobes, who would obviously cringe at the use of that word "Happy," there....

Whether you're superstitious or not, though, here are this week's talking points for you. As always, use responsibly!



$30 a month internet

This was a piece of little-noticed good news this week.

"I'd like to thank President Joe Biden for getting the internet providers to agree to offer reduced-cost high-speed internet service to low-income households. Soon families who qualify will be able to get this service for thirty dollars a month or less. There will be a website -- GetInternet.gov -- which will allow people to easily see if they qualify and what providers are near them. Because as we all saw during the COVID pandemic lockdowns, if a child can't access the internet from home it drastically limits their ability to participate in modern life. For the first time, low-income families will be able to get high-speed internet for a reasonable price, due to President Biden's actions."



America's daughters will have less freedom than their mothers

This one we're taking directly from a letter Nancy Pelosi sent out to her Democratic House members, since it states the case for people to vote this year so well.

Overwhelmingly unpopular

Hammer this home, because Republicans are already afraid of it.

"Poll after poll after poll all show how overwhelmingly unpopular the Republican Party's position on abortion truly is. Something like two-thirds of the nation thinks abortions should be legal for all, perhaps with some reasonable and medically-appropriate restrictions. Republicans want to make abortion illegal for everyone, with no exceptions. They want to throw women and doctors in jail. The draft opinion that leaked cited one legal 'expert' from the eighteenth century who later presided over a trial where he sentenced two women to death for being 'witches.' It also -- astonishingly -- cited a legal 'expert' from the thirteenth century! That's right, Republicans don't just want to take us back to the 1950s, they want us to return to the 1250s. I wish I were making this up, but sadly, I am not."



Violence is not the answer

When they go low, don't follow them.

"I would also like to take this opportunity to denounce the firebombing of an anti-abortion group's office in Wisconsin this week. A group calling itself 'Jane's Revenge' took credit for this action and threatened more such actions across the U.S. They cited the antiabortion movement for its own violent tactics, which have indeed included firebombings and even assassination in the past. But two wrongs don't make a right. Violence from either side is absolutely unacceptable, period."



Poor Susan....

Got your pearls all ready to clutch? Then here we go!

"Senator Susan Collins who somehow believed all the Republican nominees to the Supreme Court when they lied their faces off to her about Roe v. Wade during their confirmation process is now in a tizzy because some of her neighbors are reminding her that she is somehow supposed to be pro-choice. Someone drew a very polite message in chalk on the sidewalk in front of Collins's house asking her to please vote for the Senate bill which would have codified Roe into federal law. Not only did Collins vote against this bill, she actually called the police on the people who had written her a message in chalk. She apparently demanded that the local public works department spend taxpayer money to wash off the free speech from the public sidewalk in front of her house, and that someone be charged with some sort of crime for doing so. We hereby award Senator Collins with the Snowflake Of The Year award, for her microscopically-thin skin."



More (Republican, of course) voter fraud!

Here we go again.

"Why is it that pretty much every time an actual case of actual voter fraud happening is reported, it turns out it was perpetrated by Republicans? You'd think there's some sort of pattern here or something, right? This week it was revealed that some GOP operatives in Pennsylvania were filling out voter registration cards with their group's own post office box listed as the address on it. Sounds like someone was getting ready to do some ballot-box stuffing in next week's Republican primary, right? I mean, I'm just sayin'... every time you hear about something like this, it almost always seems to be Republicans doing it. I wonder why that is...."



Hurricane gun

Hoo boy. It's been over a year since he's been in office, and the tell-all stories just keep right on coming!

"It seems that Donald Trump was somehow convinced that China had a 'hurricane gun' that they could use to create massive hurricanes and then somehow point them at the United States, in order to cause chaos. Trump asked about it several times, wondering if it was somehow an act of war that we could retaliate against. This is during the same period he was also reportedly wondering if he could use nuclear weapons against hurricanes. No word on whether he actually thought the Chinese guy with the hurricane gun operated it from his lair inside a dormant volcano or not, but at this point it seems Trump would believe just about anything, so it wouldn't really surprise me."




Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com

May 7, 2022

Friday Talking Points -- Time To Get Angry, Democrats

We're going to write our introductory weekly wrap-up in reverse this week (since it was a week for reversals). Then after we get the lesser political stories out of the way (in accelerated fashion), we'll get to the big bombshell scoop that drove the rest of the political world all week -- and will continue to do so for months to come.

So, as quickly as possible, let's run through the minor stories from the week:

The White House Correspondents' Dinner was held, and just as host Trevor Noah predicted in his speech, it was indeed a COVID superspreader event.

The White House announced that Karine Jean-Pierre will be replacing Jen Psaki as press secretary. She will be the first Black gay woman to ever hold the job.

A special grand jury was selected and seated in Georgia this Monday, whose sole focus will be to examine Donald Trump's attempt to interfere with the 2020 election results (that whole "I just want to find 11,780 votes" phone call).

The Trump campaign agreed to pay $750,000 to Washington D.C. to settle a case against it for financial shenanigans surrounding its use of Trump's hotel.

Madison Cawthorn is still wheeling wildly out of control, and this week's video link is truly N.S.F.W. It's really not safe for anywhere, so be warned before you watch it -- you'll never be able to unsee a naked Cawthorn forcibly face-humping another guy in a bed.

Primary season is underway, and Trump's big pick in the Ohio Senate race won -- even though Trump can't even remember the guy's name.

In a rematch, liberal House candidate Nina Turner lost again (and by a much worse margin) to the establishment Democrat, Shontel Brown.

Norm Mineta passed away -- Requiescat In Pace.

President Joe Biden and the Democrats are doing better in the polls of late, and Biden's handling of the pandemic in particular is ticking up.

Biden got the good news that over 400,000 jobs were added last month, making it a full 12 months in a row of 400K-plus months -- the best record since World War II. The unemployment rate is only 0.2 percent higher than its lowest point ever, as a result.

And a state GOP committee member in Michigan resigned his party seat in disgust this week, saying "feckless, cowardly [Republican] party 'leaders' have made the election here in Michigan a test of who is the most cravenly loyal to Donald Trump and re-litigating the results of the 2020 cycle." And he was just getting started. Here's a few other choice excerpts from his resignation letter (where he also called Trump a "deranged narcissist" ):

Intraparty, Republican-on-Republican violence aside, however, this was really a one-story week in Washington.

That story was the immense scoop of Politico publishing an almost-100-page draft opinion from Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. This is virtually unheard of -- such a major leak from the Supreme Court. But it's easy to see why someone decided it was time to tell the public what was about to happen.

The draft opinion would completely overturn Roe v. Wade and leave what has been a fundamental constitutional right for American women for almost 50 years up to each individual state. Call it Alito's response to Barack Obama's declaration that: "There are no red states or blue states; just the United States." In Alito's brave new world, we will indeed be two nations, red and blue, at least as far as basic human rights for half the population are concerned.

The draft opinion is stunning. But savvy court-watchers weren't exactly surprised by it. The really stunning thing is that it appeared roughly two months before it normally would have. But the court was going to rule this way even if the leak had never happened, whether they used Alito's first draft or not. Roe was either going to be overturned or completely gutted to the point where it was legally meaningless to women in states led by Republicans -- that was really the only question, whether they'd do so blatantly or in a more sneaky fashion.

This is the end of a very long fight, of course. Since the 1980s, at least, the anti-abortion movement has slowly taken over the Republican Party and then whatever seats they could get in the federal judiciary. With Donald Trump's election (and Mitch McConnell's unprecedented refusal to even consider a Supreme Court nomination from Barack Obama), this was the inevitable end of the road.

The anti-abortion activists see this as the day they've been dreaming about for decades. The pro-choice activists see this as the day they've all been warning us was going to happen for roughly the same period.

Alito tries to do two things in his draft that need pointing out. The first is to somehow excuse his radicalism by pointing to a bunch of Supreme Court decisions which overturned earlier decisions. "See? It's not like this is unprecedented or anything!" he is essentially saying. Here's David Cole, who used to be the national legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union, ripping that argument to shreds:



The second thing Alito tries to disavow is that this decision could ever possibly be cited by future decisions on other subjects. Alito specifically states that it shouldn't, but that would in no way tie the hands of any future Supreme Court -- or the current one, for that matter -- on all sorts of issues grounded in the right to privacy. Paul Waldman of the Washington Post destroys this argument, as he warns that liberals are not panicking enough [Links preserved in this excerpt, because there are so many important ones presented]:



This is really an all-hands-on-deck moment for the Democratic Party. Both parties started (back in the 1970s and 1980s) with a mix of positions along the abortion spectrum (Joe Biden was first sworn in as a senator 17 days before the Roe v. Wade decision was announced, and used to be fairly anti-abortion, for instance), but slowly the anti-abortionist Democrats and the pro-choice Republicans have all but disappeared (or changed their position on the issue, as Biden did). It is now a partisan issue. And if the Democrats don't treat it as an existential crisis for their party, then they deserve everything that is coming.

Republicans, in victory, are actually weak and on their back foot. They are vulnerable because their extremism on abortion is not popular with the public at large. They really liked having Roe around as a political issue, because it worked so well in firing up certain segments of their base. With Roe gone, they will have to actually defend not only their unpopular position, but the actions that red states have already taken or soon will be to criminalize abortion.

Their initial responses have been to flat-out lie about everything, and to make as big a stink as they can about the leak itself.

First, the lies. From a Republican talking points memo circulated this week comes this jaw-dropping instruction to Republican politicians: "Be the compassionate, consensus-builder on abortion policy." Consensus-builder? You must be kidding. Later in this document comes the lie that Republicans somehow aren't going to throw doctors and women in jail. This, while Republican state legislatures are busily enacting laws to do precisely that.

As a segue, here is Mitch McConnell apparently trying standup comedy:



"Substitute mob rule for the rule of law"? You mean, like what happened on January 6th, Mitch? You know, when an actual mob tried to halt the peaceful transfer of power? You think that was "the radical left"? I don't. To equate a leaked document with an insurrection is just laughable. Also heavily ironic is the fact that Republicans from Chief Justice John Roberts on down are bemoaning the Supreme Court's loss of privacy. To which we reply: "Boo freakin' hoo."

So Republicans have nothing but lies, as time goes on it will become painfully apparent precisely how far they are willing to go in state-level legislation, and they don't want to talk about it in the campaign. In other words, it is time for Democrats to launch a relentless attack on the subject. Which we'll be doing ourselves, in lieu of this week's talking points.





We have to give an Honorable Mention to Senator Elizabeth Warren, for showing some righteous anger about Alito's draft opinion this week. Warren has not been timid, and she's right not to be. Democrats need to show anger right now, especially Democratic women in office.

But by that metric, we have to award the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week to Vice President Kamala Harris. Fortuitously, this week she was scheduled to address the annual gathering of Emily's List. It was a pretty friendly crowd, obviously. Harris gave a great speech, leaning heavily into the fact that Democrats need to express some anger right now.

From her speech (which is well worth watching in full):



It is a time for Democratic righteous anger. Kamala Harris showed exactly what that looks like: "How dare they?!?" For immediately getting out in front of this issue and showing some real leadership, Vice President Kamala Harris was the obvious choice this week for Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.

[Congratulate Vice President Kamala Harris on the White House contact page, to let her know you appreciate her efforts.]





This one's pretty easy, too. Round up the usual suspects, in other words.

Oh, and a footnote: since we don't give awards to Republicans, we will leave it to others to scathingly heap all the derision and scorn on Senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski that they so richly deserve. Instead, we look to our side of the aisle.

Our two winners of the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week are (once again) Senators Kirsten Sinema and Joe Manchin.

Now, Manchin has always been anti-abortion, so we can't get too upset that he's not on board in the vote Chuck Schumer has called next week -- a repeat performance where a bill to codify Roe v. Wade will be voted on, and fail. And we can't even get too upset that he won't vote to amend the filibuster rules to allow bills which deal with basic constitutional rights to pass on a majority vote, since he's done so previously on the subject of voting rights. So instead, we're going to give Manchin the MDDOTW award for endorsing a Republican in a West Virginia House race. Seriously? Is this guy still even a Democrat? Maybe someone should check....

As for Sinema, well she gets her MDDOTW award for saying she's pro-choice, but then choosing not to do anything about it. Which means she could vote for the bill codifying Roe next week, but she's already announced that she still won't vote to reform the filibuster to give the bill an actual chance of passing.

This will adversely affect her own constituents, mind you. Arizona is one of those states with laws already on the books criminalizing abortion -- which would put doctors in jail for years -- meaning that the instant the Supreme Court does issue its final opinion, all the women in Arizona will lose this right. You know, the women Sinema is supposed to be representing in the Senate.

We would be interested in seeing a poll of Arizona women which asked: "Do you support Senator Sinema's strong stand to uphold the Senate filibuster, even though you will lose your right to an abortion as a direct result of her stance?" Because that is the reality of the situation.

So for "standing up" for the right to choose, by choosing to do absolutely nothing, Senator Sinema also wins another Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week. Women of Arizona, take note -- and remember, when you next vote in a Democratic Senate primary.

[Contact Senator Joe Manchin on his Senate contact page, and Senator Kyrsten Sinema on her Senate contact page, to let them know what you think of their actions.]




Volume 661 (5/6/22)

We've already written one rant this week on this subject, but we truly felt it was a two-rant kind of week. We don't know about anyone else, but we feel one overpowering emotion about the Alito draft leak. So what follows (instead of our usual discrete talking points) is the speech we would strongly urge Democratic politicians to start using or adapting, because now is the time for an emotional appeal to voters.



It Is Time To Get Angry

I don't know about you, but when I heard the Supreme Court is on the brink of jettisoning Roe v. Wade, my immediate reaction was to get angry. Five unelected activist judges -- some of whom blatantly lied under oath during their confirmation hearings -- have decided it is now up to state-level politicians what constitutional rights people will have.

That is not America -- at least not the America I believe in. I believe the Constitution protects all Americans, equally.

This is an "all hands on deck" moment, folks. This is not some hypothetical fear of what "could happen" in the future, this is going to happen or indeed already has happened in something like half the states. It is happening now. It will continue to happen all summer long. And the only way to stop is if you get angry about it and vote in November to give Democrats a chance of forcefully fighting back against the only Supreme Court in history to take fundamental rights away rather than expand them to all people. This isn't just extreme -- this is a radical change in the way this country is governed. And we've only really got one chance to right this horrible wrong -- by voting in federal legislation that codifies into law the rights that Roe gave to every American woman. But before we can successfully pass such a law, we need your vote, to make it possible.

Republicans will not stop at this. Don't anyone believe that they will, because you are deluding yourselves if you do. They are, as Joe Biden said, the most extreme political organization in modern American history. The next thing they'll come after is the right to contraception. This is obvious -- the Republicans have already attacked this right as forcefully as they can elsewhere, and once Roe is gone the anti-abortion activists are going to train their sights on birth control methods they consider -- wrongly -- to be "abortifacients." Got that? They will make this medical decision -- wrongly -- for all women.

The exact same reasoning Justice Alito used in his draft opinion could be applied to any right of privacy any citizen now thinks he or she enjoys. Which definitely means they'll try to get their zealots on the court to overturn the decision which made contraception a right for all women.

Next up will be gay marriage, since that decision was also based on the fundamental right of privacy too. I mean, just look at how cruelly they are going after L.G.B.T.Q. kids right now! This shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone, really. They could even successfully argue -- using exactly the same reasoning Alito used -- that interracial marriage should properly be each state's business to decide upon.

That is the new world we are entering into, folks. Those are the stakes of this fight. What will stop Republicans from pushing the most extreme and anti-freedom policies on their agenda? Nothing. Except a strong majority of Democrats in Congress. That's the only thing that would stop them.

In this new dystopia, parents in blue states will have to think long and hard about paying for their sons and daughters to attend universities in states which deny basic rights. Corporations will have to think long and hard about the quality of employees that will work for them in such states, when they consider where to build factories or headquarters. Crossing a state line will mean travelling from a modern democratic state to a repressive and theocratic one, where doctors and women can be sent to jail even on the suspicion that a miscarriage was actually an abortion. These states will be scrutinizing the mail to try to prevent abortion medication from entering, and they will try to throw women in jail who travel to blue states to get an abortion.

How un-American is that? What sort of insane logic leads to one state trying to make it illegal for any of its residents to travel to another American state and do anything under the sun that is legal in that state? Republicans used to say they were for "freedom," but that sounds like the farthest thing from freedom imaginable. What state would try to ban people from going to Las Vegas to gamble, even if gambling wasn't allowed in that state? Will New Jersey make it illegal for its residents to cross state lines and actually pump their own gas? Where does it end?

I don't know about you, but that is not the kind of country I want to live in. That is not what America means to me. That is the farthest thing from freedom imaginable. No state owns me or can tell me what to do when I'm not physically present within it, but that is exactly what they are trying to do.

To every Republican who is against abortion and wants to outlaw it, I ask: "Would you force a 12-year-old rape victim to bear the child of her rapist? Really? What would you say to her, to explain this? What would you say to an 11-year-old girl -- not a woman, mind you, a little girl for god's sake -- who was raped by her father and is now pregnant?"

These are not some hypothetical stories, either. Anyone who doesn't believe that this is sometimes the hard, cold reality of the situation should talk to some doctors or nurses who have to deal with these heinous crimes on a regular basis. Because this is exactly what Republicans want, when they remove any exemption for rape and incest from their Draconian new abortion bans. This is the new reality of what they want for America, folks.

Or maybe ask these Republicans why they are so strongly in favor of a fetal rights but after the baby is born they refuse to allow the government to do much of anything to make the mother's or the child's life easier and better.

Republicans are now using the same old "state's rights" argument that they used for so long to deny Black people their rights as American citizens to essentially say to women in blue states: "Don't worry, we'll just do this sort of thing in our states." Well, that will last about as long as Democrats hold the House and Senate. Cecile Richards, who used to run Planned Parenthood, called this one exactly right: "I fully expect that if the Republicans gain control of Congress as early as this November, that House Bill 1 will be some form of abortion ban." Yeah, so do I. This is not just an issue for red states -- sooner or later, they're going to try this nationwide. And the only way to stop them is to elect more Democrats to Congress so they never get the chance.

Some people thought it was just partisan rhetoric when Democrats started talking about the Republicans waging a "war on women." Think that's still just rhetorical? In Colorado, the Republicans are running a candidate for governor who was previously arrested for violently assaulting his pregnant wife. Need more? Here's a headline I read this week: "GOP Candidate Accused Of Murdering His Wife Wins Primary Election From Jail." That is today's Republican Party, folks. That is what they now support. That is precisely what you are voting for when you vote Republican -- a party that has so lost its moral compass that it allows such odious creatures to run for office using its brand.

So this November, I hope you all remember all of this. I hope you think about it when you go vote. For Congress, and for your own state's legislature and governor too. I hope you are just as angry then as I am now. We only have one chance to push back on this destruction of constitutional rights in this country, and that is to vote blue! Your daughters' rights are in danger -- so vote blue! Your own rights are either in danger or will be soon -- so vote blue! Don't let them get away with taking rights and freedoms away, vote instead for the party which will restore and protect those rights, in the name of American freedom.

Thank you. Vote blue!




Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com