Continue reading Sunday Cartoon Blogging – July 10, 2022
Category: Culture Wars
More Rights May Be Flushed By The Supremes
The Daily Escape:
Denali from Byers Lake, AK – June 2022 photo by Todd Salat
In his concurring opinion to the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Womenâs Health Organization, that dismantled Roe, Justice Thomas basically begged Red states to send the Court more culture war cases that they could dismantle.
The Houston Chronicle reports that Texas GOP AG Ken Paxton is ready to do just that:
âTexas Attorney General Ken Paxton last week seemingly expressed support for the Supreme Court potentially overturning past rulings on cases involving the LGBTQ community following the downfall of Roe v. Wade on Friday.â
Paxton, in an interview, said he would support the Supreme Court revisiting the cases mentioned in Thomasâ concurring opinion. Here are the decisions Thomas would like a shot at overturning:
He questioned a number of earlier Court rulings, including Obergefell v. Hodges, which established the right of same-sex couples to marry, and Lawrence vs. Texasâa 2003 decision in which the court ruled against the state of Texas regarding its 1973 law criminalizing the act of sodomy.
Thomas also mentioned Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the right of married couples to use contraception without government interference:
“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell….We have a duty to ‘correct the error’ regarding these established in those precedents.”
For those who donât fully understand legal shorthand, the judicial theory Thomas is pursuing is that these issues should be in the hands of state legislatures, and not be decided by the courts.
Conservatives in other states have also expressed support for Thomas’s opinion, including Utah Senate President Stuart Adams, who said he would support the Supreme Court reconsidering same-sex marriage. Utahâs constitutional ban on same-sex unions still exists and could be reinstated if the high court were to overturn its earlier decision.
We shouldnât forget that Obergefell was a 5-4 decision. Lawrence v. Texas was also a 5-4 decision. Since these cases were decided, the Court has moved three seats to the right. We should expect that both of these decisions will be overturned, assuming some state AG sends a case up to the Supremes.
After all, the Courtâs Conservatives havenât gotten more liberal on these issues in the last 10-15 years.
Some more history: Griswold v, Connecticut was decided 7-2, Loving v. Virginia was unanimous; and Brown v. Board of Education was unanimous. All of that said, while history shows that very few 5-4 decisions get overturned, in this time of Conservative Justice grievance, thatâs not the way to bet. Even if those cases had been 6-3, 7-2 or 8-1, it wouldn’t matter to the current Justices on the Court.
Pundits are talking as if they would be shocked if the Court reverses Obergefell and Lawrence. Thatâs because theyâre comforted that Thomasâs revolutionary concurrence wasnât joined by other Justices. But all of them voted to end Roe, and Alito said:
“…abortion is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Therefore, there is no right to an abortion.”
We should also remember that the Court used nearly word for word, the failed Robert Bork’s reasoning why there isnât a Constitutional right to privacy in Griswold v. Connecticut.
If thereâs no right to privacy because the Constitution does not explicitly state there is such a right, then according to the Courtâs Conservative 6, all of the rest of our privacy rights are in play. That means nearly nothing in the Fourth Amendment may remain, because you have no right to privacy in your home or in your vehicle.
But if you bet that the Courtâs Conservative majority will somehow find that the founders explicitly wanted corporations to have a right to privacy, youâll earn some folding money.
The naked desire by the Furious Five to achieve their ideological goals as quickly as possible is most likely, uncontrollable. Chief Justice Roberts is being increasingly sidelined because he wants to (at least) try to hide their ideological agenda. But the Furious Five doesnât have any interest in hiding what theyâre doing.
No more calling âballs and strikesâ as Roberts said during his 2005 Senate confirmation hearing.
In closing, the music world has reacted strongly to the Supreme Court ruling on abortion. NPR has a nice roundup of what artists are saying and doing in response. Check it out if you have time.
Saturday (Un) Soother, Supreme Court Edition – June 25, 2022
The Daily Escape:
North River, Marshfield, MA – June 2022 photo by Laurie France
Roe overturned. Gun laws on the books since the Taft administration overturned. Miranda weakened. The separation of church and state required by the First Amendment, no longer Constitutional.
Remember when Republicans railed against âunelected, activist judgesâ? They always meant judges appointed by Democrats. Hereâs a quote from the National Review:
âThe Left views the judicial branch as no different from the executive or legislative branches. To them, judges are supposed to âtake sides,â making sure that some political interests win and others lose.â
Or, this from a Baptist minister in 2014:
âUnelected liberal activist judge delivers Michigan to Big Faggotry.â
As always, Conservatives were projecting their actual views as the views of their opposition.
Today, we do have unelected activist judges running America, and they are Conservatives. Weâre living in an ahistorical time: There are six justices who are practicing Catholics. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and Brett Kavanaugh.
Five routinely vote as a bloc. There have only been 15 Catholic justices (out of 115 justices total) in the history of the Supreme Court. Forty percent of all Catholic justices are now sitting on the Court.
The Conservative majority on the Court has walked away from Stare Decisis, the doctrine that courts will adhere to precedent when making their decisions. Stare decisis means âto stand by things decidedâ in Latin.
Hereâs how stare decisis has evaporated: On Thursday, the Court said that the individual right to bear arms is an inviolable fundamental right, meaning states cannot infringe the right to carry a gun. Clarence Thomas held that a NY statute enacted during the Taft administration was not part of the American tradition of regulating firearms.
The right to an abortion, in place for 50 years, was overturned and sent back to the states because itâs just not as fundamental as the God-given right to have a gun which you can use to shoot up elementary schools.
The NY gun law dates from 1913. The right to abortion was decided in 1973. But the radical judges tout the notion that the former violated a fundamental right, while the latter isnât even a thing.
Also on Thursday, the Conservative justices voted 6-3 to block lawsuits against police who neglect to read the Miranda warning, (“You have the right to remain silent”). It also includes language about Constitutional protections against self-incrimination. From Alitoâs opinion:
âA violation of Miranda does not necessarily constitute a violation of the Constitution, and therefore such a violation does not constitute ‘the deprivation of [a] right…secured by the Constitution,'”
Miranda was decided in 1966, but Alito now says itâs a âprophylactic ruleâ, meaning that Miranda warnings arenât required by the Constitution, but are instead judicially-crafted rules designed to protect peopleâs core Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. His signal to prosecutors is clear: Miranda is suspect, and weâre willing to entertain arguments that we should do away with it for good.
So the Conservative wing has knocked off three âsettled lawâ items in one week, despite each â John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh â all saying under oath some version of what Roberts said during his confirmation hearing:
â…[Roe] is settled as a precedent of the Court, entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis. It is settled.â
You should know that Alito and Barrett didnât lie quite so egregiously about Roe during their hearings, although with hindsight, both were disingenuous. Obviously, a judge who lies under oath should be removed from office, but that wonât happen since âeveryoneâ knew they were lying.
These Conservative unelected activist judges are placing ideology above precedent.
That elections have consequences was the key takeaway from the 2016 presidential election won by Trump. Democrats didnât turn out for Hillary Clinton as much as they had turned out for Obama or that would turn out for Biden. Trump won because he got 78,000 more votes than Clinton in just three counties in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, and thus got to appoint three reactionary justices.
Reactionary justices will issue reactionary rulings. And there are many more to come.
But itâs time to forget (if you can) about the Supreme Court gutting legal precedent for ideology. Itâs time for your Saturday Soother.
Our long-term lawn guy has decided to close his business. Itâs a combination of higher costs that couldnât be passed along to customers and getting too old for outdoor physical labor. So weâre scrambling at the height of the season.
It will be a warm weekend in the Northeast, so grab a seat outdoors in a shady spot, put on your wireless headphones and listen to âAs steals the mornâ composed by Handel in 1740. “As Steals the Morn” is adapted from Shakespeare’s âThe Tempestâ. Amanda Forsythe and Thomas Cooley are the soloists, and their voices are beautiful:
Lyric:
As steals the morn upon the night,
And melts the shades away:
So Truth does Fancy’s charm dissolve,
And rising Reason puts to flight
The fumes that did the mind involve,
Restoring intellectual day.
Intellectual day is gone, my friends.
Normalizing Violence Will End Democracy
The Daily Escape:
Bodie Island Lighthouse, Nags Head, NC – June 2022 photo by Jordan Hill Photography
Americaâs in a dark period, and itâs becoming increasingly difficult to see how we can come out of it.
Writing in Foreign Affairs, Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way say:
âThe Republican Party…has radicalized into an extremist, antidemocratic force that imperils the US constitutional order. The United States isnât headed toward Russian – or Hungarian-style autocracy…but something else: a period of protracted regime instability, marked by repeated constitutional crises, heightened political violence, and possibly, periods of authoritarian rule.â
They say weâre heading into a period of protracted instability. They arenât saying we face a civil war. Itâs more subtle: a future of intermittent armed conflict, something like âThe Troublesâ in Ireland.
Youâve probably seen the campaign ad by Missouri Republican Senate candidate Eric Greitens, where he struts into a home after some camo-clad associates have broken in, saying their purpose is âRINO huntingâ. After the team busts into the house, Greitens walks in through a cloud of smoke and says:
âJoin the MAGA crew. Get a RINO hunting permit. Thereâs no bagging limit, no tagging limit, and it doesnât expire until we save our country.â
Hunting down oneâs political enemies with guns hasnât been the American way, but it sure is becoming so now. Itâs only a matter of time before racial, sexuality and politically-based violence occurs at scale in America. The Brennan Center found that 17% of Americaâs local election officials have been threatened during the 2020 election cycle. There’s a growing domestic terror threat to civil servants.
But it was only two weeks ago that Republicans found it easy to have moral clarity when authorities arrested a man and charged him with the attempted murder of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The suspect turned himself in before anything happened. However, Republicans were outraged and questioned why Biden and other Democrats did not condemn what happened.
Candidates say outrageous things all the time in the heat of the moment and lately, hitting below the belt is often rewarded. But that is a far cry from a call to hunt down your political enemies in order to âsave the country.â
The GOP is normalizing violence, and it became clear after the Republican response to J6. From Robert Hubbell:
âThe Republican National Committee described the events of January 6th as âlegitimate political discourse.â Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde said that video of the attack on the Capitol looked like âa normal tourist visit.â Mike Pence, whom rioters wanted to hang, said on Monday that Democrats were using the January 6th hearings âto distract attention.ââ
Republicans try pretending that they have no idea whatâs happening (âI havenât seen the ad, so I cannot commentâ). But the right thing is to take the risk that someone will yell at them on Facebook and Twitter and condemn it by saying loud and clear, âThis isnât the way for a candidate to conduct himself.â
Unless Republicans change their act, the normalization of violence will move toward its logical conclusion â election officials and politicians will be wounded or killed by someone who believes that violence is a legitimate political tool.
GOP candidates are posting ads about killing us in our homes. The Texas state GOP party wrote a campaign platform calling for the repeal the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and seceding from the US, while saying that gay people should get back in the closet. They passed a resolution declaring that Biden’s election was illegitimate.
This is the platform of the governing party of the nationâs second largest state, and no non-Texas Republican has complained.
Pundits keep saying that Democrats have no chance in the 2022 mid-terms because of Bidenâs low approval ratings. Wrongo has repeatedly said that there are âpersuadableâ voters who can be reached before the Fall. Proof of that is in the 6-point increase in public support for indicting Trump since the start of the J6 hearings.
If pundits argue that Bidenâs unpopularity will affect the 2022 races despite Bidenâs absence from the ballot, they must also agree that other issues not on the ballotâ the J6 conspiracy, the Supreme Court abortion decision, Texas secession, and yes inflation, will also affect the 2022 races.
The 2022 election (not the 2024) will determine our future. Will people vote this Fall based on the price of gas? Or the threat of a recession? Or, will they understand that thereâs a real possibility that democracy as we know it in the US could vanish?
Democracy is whatâs on the ballot in 2022. Inflation comes and goes. Recessions come and go. If we lose our democracy, it wonât be returning any time soon.
Americans understand democracy. Theyâve fought and died for it. Dems can make voters see that democracy is on the ballot this year, while inflation and other issues sadly need to take a back seat.
Let’s not make the mistake of selling Americans short. Democracy is more important than our pocketbooks. People will vote for democracy.
The slogan should be âVote Democratic And Save Democracyâ.
Monday Wake Up Call – June 13, 2022
The Daily Escape:
Sunset, Safety Harbor, FL – June 2022 photo by Jacqueline Faust Photography
A new study by the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights (IREHR) shows that 875 state lawmakers (11.85% of all state lawmakers in the USA) representing all 50 states, have been engaging with far-right Facebook groups:
âAfter insurrectionists tried to overthrow the presidential election on January 6, 2021….Several state legislators took part in state-level efforts to undermine the results of the 2020 election.…Forty-eight state and local officials, including ten sitting state lawmakers, were outed as members of the far-right paramilitary group, the Oath Keepers.…â
IREHR has identified 789 different far-right Facebook groups, ranging from militia and sovereign citizen groups, antisemitic conspiracy groups, militant COVID Denial groups, Stop the Steal groups, and others:
âThese 789 groups were joined 2,115 times by the 875 legislators identified in this report, an average of 2.4 groups per legislator. Some legislators are members of as many as 24 different groups.â
When will we decide that Facebook must be reined in? This is a clear sign that extremism is making its way into elected office everywhere in the country. And that extremism is thriving due to the role played by the internet and social media.
But this didnât all begin with Jan. 6. Weâre dealing with a challenge that began 60+ years ago with a group we rarely hear about, the John Birch Society (JBS). From James Mann in the NY Review of Books:
âThe John Birch Society may be little remembered today, but in its time it had a dues-paying membership of at least 30,000, a staff of 240 people, and more than 400 bookstores across the US.â
The JBS was founded by Robert Welch in 1958, along with a group of 11 conservative business leaders. They had been complaining that America was moving toward socialism and that President Eisenhower, the first Republican president in a quarter-century, was doing little to reverse the drift. But the JBS went further than earlier anti-New Deal activists. They portrayed them as the result of foreign conspiracies.
Mann, reviewing Edward H. Millerâs new biography of Welch, A Conspiratorial Life, says that many of the issues, themes, and causes the Birchers seized upon six decades ago are still alive and well on Americaâs political right today.
Welch complained that department stores didnât have enough âMerry Christmasâ decorations, saying that they were trying to take Christ out of the holiday. The Birch Society called for defending the police against charges of brutality. They opposed water fluoridation with the same fervor as todayâs anti-vaxxers. They vigorously fought efforts at gun control, which they said was a preliminary step for confiscation of guns and a Communist takeover of the US.
Sound familiar?
Birchers opposed FDRâs New Deal reforms. Mann says that when Nixon signed into law the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Welch called it âthe worst piece of tyranny ever imposed on any people by any government.â
Maybe a bit over the top? They opposed the Brown v. Board of Education decision integrating US public schools. Welch wrote about Brown:
âThe storm over integration….has been brought on by the Communists.â
Welch also enlisted doctors who were opposed to the establishment of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. His conspiracy theories suggested either that Communists had orchestrated these changes in American society, or that the changes were themselves a form of creeping communism.
For the Birchers, âcommunismâ became a term used to smear liberalism and Democrats. Doesnât this sound familiar 64 years later? For example, Trump spokesperson Liz Harrington said this on Friday about the J6 Committee:
âThis is a communist committee that has shown that thereâs nothing they wonât do.â
Much like Trumpâs base, the Birchers refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of political opposition, suggesting that those who disagreed with them were acting in bad faith, or were part of a conspiracy. And like Trumpists, Birchers had considerable influence upon Republican politics. Republican politicians worried about alienating the Birchers in much the same way that Republicans today worry about running afoul of Trump.
Back then, Republicans used the same type of evasion as do todayâs Republicans. Barry Goldwater called the Birchers âthe finest people in my communityâ and said they were âthe kind [of people] we need in politicsâ, something very much like when Trump said that there were âvery fine people on both sidesâ after the 2017 riots by neo-Nazis and white supremacists in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Time to wake up America! In many ways, J6 was the coming-out party for a new coalition of far-right groups, aimed, as was the John Birch Society, at undermining our democracy.
To help you wake up, listen to U2 and Mary J. Blige perform âOneâ, their song about the search for unity. We featured a 1997 version of this tune in 2021, and this one is from 2009:
âThe concept of oneness is of course an impossible askâŠ.Maybe the song works because it doesnât call for unity. It presents us as being bound to others whether we like it or not. âWe get to carry each otherâ â not âWeâve got to carry each otherâ.â
Sunday Cartoon Blogging – June 12, 2022
The WaPo reports that Facebook is allowing marketplace buyers and sellers to violate its ban on gun purchases 10 times before being kicked off the platform. They reported that Facebookâs guidelines also include a five-strikes system for gun sellers and buyers who call for violence or voice support for a âknown dangerous organizationâ before they lose Facebook access.
Five years ago, Facebook banned the private sale of guns on its website but it hasnât previously explained how the company enforces the ban. Apparently, they really donât. On to cartoons.
The GOPâs #1 strategy:
GOP strategy #2:
Kids understand:
Liz Cheney, another guided missile:
Wrong argument in the wrong court:
Twisted logic by Republicans who defied the J6 committee:
FOX knows its audience:
How Democrats Should Message The Midterms
The Daily Escape:
Sunset along the Last Dollar Road (from Telluride to Ouray), CO – photo by Rich Briggs Photography
Democrats are messaging like mad about the Jan. 6 attempted coup public hearings that start tomorrow. The NYT is asking whether the âJan. 6 Hearings Give Democrats a Chance to Recast Midterm Message.â
The NYT thinks the real question is whether the âmessageâ of the Jan. 6 hearings will âresonateâ with voters. We know that the Republicans now deny that Jan.6 was an attempted coup. We know that the Big Lie, the Great Replacement Theory, and the idea of the Second Amendment uber alles, are mainstream views of the GOP. The Times shouldnât be covering the mid-terms and the hearings as if they are sporting events â the future of the American experiment is on the line.
Along the way to becoming a Party that totally supports violence, for years, Republicans have been a Party of Senators who do nothing to solve Americaâs problems.
And it isnât simply their position on government spending. Once upon a time, Wrongo considered Republican concerns about government spending and budget deficits a serious viewpoint. But since they give tax cuts to the wealthy and to corporations whenever theyâre in power, they have lost all credibility on spending.
Under Republican rule, the US left the international consortium to blunt climate change. They walked away from an Iran nuclear deal that leaves the world in a much less safe place. They politicized the pandemic and mocked efforts by public health officials to prevent Covid from becoming the endemic disease it is today.
Going back five decades, they steadfastly opposed national health insurance for the millions of Americans who had none. Their opposition continued by causing the Clinton plan for health insurance to crash on takeoff. Republicans fought the ACA during the Obama administration, although it passed without a single Republican vote in 2010. They fought to overturn it throughout the Trump years.
Today, the Senate is in a position to act on multiple measures, including gun control, that would improve the lives of millions of Americans. They could vote tomorrow. But they wonât because neither Party can muster a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.
The 2022 mid-terms provide a moment for all Americans, including Democrats, Independents, and a few Republicans to do some serious soul searching. They need to answer the question: Do you want a government that does nothing or a government that tries to solve problems?
Do you want to elect representatives who despise government, or do you want men and women who bring informed views and respect for our Constitutional democracy to the House and Senate?
Wrongo was in high school when the book âProfiles in Courageâ came out. It was ghost-written for then-Senator John Kennedy (the original JFK, not the current empty suit from Louisiana). The book profiles Senators who defied the opinions of their Party (and constituents) to do what they felt was right. Most of them suffered severe criticism and losses in popularity because of their actions.
Today, no one expects to see a Senator of either Party act solely on the basis of moral courage. It is a terrible shame that it takes more courage for a politician to say or do the right thing than they can muster.
But thereâs no public mandate for do-nothingism. And the structure of the Senate empowers a minority who doesnât want anything to get done. When legislators refuse to legislate, theyâre telling the American people that they couldnât care less about urgent issues like gun violence, fair wages or voting rights.
Theyâre happy to sit on their hands despite Americans needing their help.
This is anti-democratic. If there was strong public support for do-nothingism, at least our governing institutions would reflect public opinion. But the Senate doesnât reflect what the public wants.
The Senate has changed drastically since its âProfiles in Courageâ days. It was conceived as the body that would cool the passions of the House and consider legislation with a national perspective. But today, the Senate has become a body that shuns debate, avoids legislative give-and-take, proceeds glacially, producing next to nothing.
Wrongo worries that in the mid-terms, Democrats will run mainly against the Big Lie, and their sparse record of legislative achievements. They should run against the âDo Nothing Republicansâ in the Senate.
The Democratic Party is more diverse ideologically than the Republicans. This is a messaging challenge for them. The Republicanâs coalition is narrower. Itâs more ideologically homogenous. Given the Senateâs skewed geography, Republicans need only appeal to their base and little else, to succeed. That allows them to use simpler messages.
In âThe Cause, The American Revolution and its Discontents, 1773-1783â by Joseph Ellis, he says that before the revolution, colonists didnât think of themselves as Americans. They described their fight for independence as âThe Causeâ, an ambiguous term that covered diverse ideas and multiple viewpoints. It succeeded in unifying them against the British.
Running against âDo Nothingâ Republicans would also use an ambiguous term covering multiple viewpoints. It would allow Democrats to move away from the idea that they have to sell a wider array of ideas to a wider group of voters.
It might also energize both Dems and Independents at a time when they are dispirited.
Saturday Soother – May 28, 2022
The Daily Escape:
Memorial Day, Arlington National Cemetery â May 2013 photo by William Coyle
Welcome to Americaâs Memorial Day weekend, when we remember those in the military who died in service to the country. But this year, we must also honor those who have died from mass murder by gun right here at home.
We need a three-day weekend. We need a break from the slowly unveiling and depressing news out about how shamefully the police of Uvalde, TX reacted to the killer. We also need a break from listening to the tepid responses by both political Parties.
The Republicans are saying the same as always: The country should not have stricter gun control. Why do Republicans refuse to act? Beyond the fact that many believe stricter gun control would not prevent such mass shootings, recent polling data reveal that thereâs less political pressure on them than you might have thought.
Letâs examine the public mindset on the gun control debate as shown in Gallupâs polling conducted in October 2021 and January 2022. Both polls found a slight decrease in support for stricter gun laws compared with the prior year’s measures. Here are the top line results:
Last October, 52% of Americans indicated they wanted stricter gun control, while 46% either thought laws should be kept the same (35%) or made less strict (11%). The headline is that Americans’ support for stricter gun control fell five percentage points from October 2020 to the lowest since 2014.
That decline was driven by a 15-point plunge among independents, while Democrats’ desire for more restrictive gun laws ticked up six points to 91%. Republicans’ views were essentially unchanged, at 24%, (after dropping 14 points in 2020).
Of course, these numbers can be hard to understand when polls also indicate that north of 80% of Americans want universal background checks for guns, which Democrats have been pushing for in Congress and which most Republicans wonât go along with.
Why? There’s no sign that the polling on background checks holds up when its on the ballot. CNNâs report (March 2021) showed that ballot measures for background checks have appeared on ballots in California, Maine, Nevada, and Washington.
In all four, the pro-gun control side’s vote margin was worse than the Democratsâ baseline in the same state. In 2016, Clinton won California by 30 points, while gun control won by 27 points. In Maine, Clinton won by 3 points, while gun control lost by 4 points. In Nevada, Clinton won by 2 points, while gun control passed by a single point. Lastly, Washington passed its gun control law by a little less than 19 points in 2018, while Washington stateâs House Democratic candidates won by a bigger margin in the same year.
The question is: Why would Republicans feel political pressure to support more gun control, when something that polls as well as universal background checks doesnât draw as much support as the Democratic presidential candidate?
And here are a few more depressing thoughts. First, before the assault weapons ban went into effect in 1994, there were about 400,000 AR-15 style rifles in America. Today, there are 20 million.
Second, itâs doubtful that you were aware that there is an active group of school principals who have survived a school shooting. Itâs called the Principal Recovery Network, a support group of sorts that mobilizes to help principals in the immediate aftermath of a school shooting. Frank DeAngelis, the former principal of Columbine High School says:
âItâs like that club that no one wants to belong to,â
They provide support for a principal whoâs having his/her worst professional day. In every scenario, the goal is to help a principal in crisis. This is America: We put all this energy into dealing with the aftermath of a preventable trauma, and that now includes therapy for principals. Weâre in this dark place because we will not open our eyes.
And for the 21st time since a mass shooting in Isla Vista, Calif. in 2014, the satirical site The Onion republished its saddest headline:
“No Way To Prevent This,” Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
The best way to stop a bad guy from getting a gun is prevention.
Time for our long weekend Saturday Soother. The blog may be taking some time off, so donât expect to see another column before Tuesday.
In view of the Memorial Day observance, and to remember those who died in Texas, listen to Samuel Barberâs âAdagio for Stringsâ, played in the original version by the Dover Quartet. Barber finished the arrangement in 1936. In January 1938, Barber sent an orchestrated version of the Adagio for Strings to Arturo Toscanini. The conductor returned the score without comment, which annoyed Barber.
Toscanini later sent word that he was planning to perform the piece and had returned it simply because he had already memorized it! It was performed for the first time by Toscanini in November, 1938. Here, for the third time on the blog, is the quartet version of âAdagio for Stringsâ:
Free Speech Is About To Get Tested
The Daily Escape:
Lupine bloom, Beeks Bight, Folsom Lake, CA â May 2022 photo by Kaptured in Kamera
Weâre back from France where we had fantastic weather, wonderful food and wine, and a break from the loud drumbeat of dystopian American news. One issue that Wrongo followed from afar was the continuing assault on free speech by Americaâs Right Wing.
From Dan Pfeiffer:
âIt seems like every week, Republicans propose, pass, or enact another outrageous, authoritarian, retrograde policy. Book bans, abortion bans, efforts to turn back the clock on marriage equality and contraception. Each is a fleeting political firestorm and then itâs on to the next….amidst this parade of retrograde lawmaking, there is a pattern…â
Despite claiming to be for small government, the Republicans want to dictate the terms of speech in America.
Consider Florida where Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis had passed legislation taking away the rights of Facebook, Twitter, and others to ban people from their platforms:
âThe US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit on Monday ruled it is unconstitutional for Florida to bar social media companies from banning politicians, in a major victory for tech companies….the court rejected many of the legal arguments that conservative states have been using to justify laws governing the content moderation policies of major tech companies after years of accusations that the tech companies are biased against their political viewpoints.â
The 11th Circuit court found that tech companiesâ moderation decisions are protected by the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from regulating free speech. Interestingly, this comes after a different decision on the same issue by the Texas 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, that allowed a Texas law banning companies from discriminating against people based on their politics to remain in effect.
We now have completely opposite decisions by the 11th Circuit and the 5th Circuit courts on the issue of whether corporations must follow the Constitutionâs First Amendment. This will invariably lead to the Supreme Court weighing in on whether private social media companiesâ content moderation decisions are protected by the First Amendment. From the WaPo:
âSome lawmakers pushing for laws governing online content moderation and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas have argued that tech companies should be regulated as âcommon carriers,â businesses like phone companies that are subject to government regulation because of the essential services they provide.â
But Floridaâs court rejected those arguments, arguing states canât force such restrictions on private company social media platforms. While the phone companies cannot stop callers or calls that may be objectionable, or even illegal, social media companies have different rights. From the Courtâs ruling:
âNeither law nor logic recognizes government authority to strip an entity of its First Amendment rights merely by labeling it a common carrier…â
The “Terms of Service” (TOS) agreements between social media platform companies and their users are a contract. When someone agrees to the TOS, they are saying that they will abide by it. Violating the TOS, whether by Trump, Musk, or some random ideologue, is a violation of contract law.
When the TOS is violated and the violator is suspended or barred from the platform, it doesnât demonstrate bias, or a restriction in free speech. It demonstrates equal treatment. The TOS isnât there only to restrain Conservatives, despite their protests of discrimination.
Florida passes a “don’t say gay” bill to police free speech by public educators in schools. They then pass the law to prevent private companies from policing speech on their platforms. This irony is lost on those who claim theyâre against federal or state overreach unless itâs their Party thatâs doing the overreaching.
The First Amendment says the government cannot punish you for speech (with some exceptions). The same Amendment also protects free associationâmeaning that itâs perfectly legal for private organizations to exercise their freedom of association even while excluding some speech.
Networks like Facebook and Twitter exert a lot of power over the flow of information. They are a primary method of news and expression for millions. That means they must be broadly inclusive and promote healthy discourse. Their business model includes wanting to attract as many users as possible. From Nicholas Grossmann: (emphasis by Wrongo)
âThe big social networksâFacebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Twitterâaim to be the online mainstream, appealing to a wide variety of users and the businesses that sell to them. That requires stopping behavior that isnât illegal, but makes the platform inhospitable, such as hate speech.â
The large private social networks have a responsibility not to let the doctrine of free speech make them give a right of way to bad actors. There is zero reason to cede the concept of free speech to the trolls who are trying to drive people they hate off private social media platforms.
Now we wait to see what Alito, Thomas and the other Conservative Supremes have to say about the limits of Free Speech.
You shouldnât be optimistic about the outcome.
Florida State House Changes School Curriculum
The Daily Escape:
Cape Cod evening – 2022 photo by Alan Hoelzle
(This is the last column for this week as Wrongo and Ms. Right are heading to France for ten days. Itâs our first international trip since 2019. Posting will be light and dependent upon internet connectivity. Â Try to behave yourselves and keep your tray tables in the upright and locked position until told otherwise).
Bullies always complain that theyâre the victim, not the ones who got the beating. We see this with Putin and Trump.
Another example of that is what Republicans in Florida are doing with public school curricula. Gov. Ron DeSantis says that heâs saving kids from imaginary indoctrination in their schools, but this week he issued a government edict that requires school indoctrination. From the Miami Herald:
âPublic school teachers in Florida will soon be required to dedicate at least 45 minutes of instruction on âVictims of Communism Dayâ to teach students about communist leaders around the world and how people suffered under those regimes.â
DeSantis’ bill makes Florida one of a handful of states adopting the designation. More from the Herald:
âIt is, however, the first state to mandate school instruction on that day, as Florida Republicans continue to seize on education policy while placing school curriculum at the forefront of their political priorities ahead of the 2022 midterms….It would require teaching of Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and Fidel Castro, as well as âpoverty, starvation, migration, systemic lethal violence, and suppression of speechâ endured under those regimes.â
So kids, we learned today that teaching Florida students about authoritarian fascist slavery in other countries is necessary and mandated. But teaching Florida kids about authoritarian fascist slavery in this country is nothing but divisive critical race theory (CRT) that makes white kids feel bad. It must never, ever be mentioned.
This is a part of the Republican Partyâs effort to make public education their top campaign messaging issue in the 2022 Midterms. Despite the reality that all of the education-related âissuesâ they are focused on are non-existent â like claiming that the teaching of CRT is everywhere, or that teachers who educate students about LGBTQ+ issues are âgroomersâ.
Normally, local school boards would be left to decide what is taught in the schools under their control, including curriculum, and health and safety standards. But under Republican radicals like DeSantis, the local community isnât able to do that, because it might interfere with his goal of becoming Americaâs next Trump.
The irony of dictating school policy from the capital isnât lost on anyone. It proves that DeSantis understands the basic concept that got the very regimes he hates going in an authoritarian direction in first place. They play up the victimhood â Iâm the one being oppressed! â and then get their voting base, those who carry grudges against the Other, to go along with it.
The only âcritical race theoryâ that DeSantis cares about is the race heâs running in to be president one day.
Since Wrongo is leaving you without any musical interludes for a week or more, letâs have a travel-appropriate tune to help propel you forward into the news jungle.
Listen, and watch for sure, Dierks Bentley do his 2014 song âDrunk On A Planeâ. If only airplane rides were really like this! The video won Music Video of the Year at the 2014 CMA Awards: