The Explain Game

 Conservatives don't seem to be very good at explaining things. They dismiss things they don't like as "too woke" without articulating what that means. I'll see someone on Twitter/X or Facebook post something about how Joe Biden was the worst president ever, but when I ask why, I get ghosted. That's just one example.

When Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson paused an order requiring the reinstatement of SNAP benefits during the six-week government shutdown, she used the delay to get a conservative lower court decision --and thus, the Trump administration-- to justify their reasoning. The shutdown was resolved with an ungainly truce by a split U.S. Senate; SNAP was reinstated, but Democrats couldn't deliver or concur on retaining ACA subsidies. The concession highlighted growing concerns about Charles Schumer's abilities as Senate Minority Leader.

Granted, the fissures aren't limited to the Dems. The Epstein files remain a canker sore in the GOP's mouth, and rather than explain why they can't be disclosed, President Trump begrudgingly allowed this MAGA grovelers to vote for the files' release on Monday morning. After months of fighting, he caved and signed the Epstein Act on Wednesday night; throughout all this, he tried desperately to change the subject. 

If anyone reading this disagrees with me, you're welcome to explain in your own words in the comments. It's always appreciated.

Next week: thanks and no thanks.

(759)

Random Notes, July 2023

 Four hot takes for a happy Fourth:

+ If any one person is at fault for the WGA strike (and a possible SAG strike) it's Warner Brothers Discovery head honcho David Zaslav. WB is desperate to hide his buffoonery, though GQ magazine may have potentially flubbed an expose of Zaslav. To call him unpopular in the entertainment industry is generous. 

+ I really want to care about this submarine thing. Schadenfreude is oversimplifying most people's reactions; it was a doomed joy trip by the idle rich, augmented by mistakes that would've been satirical 20 years ago. Somehow, though it was a better financial decision than Elon Musk buying Twitter. 

+ I am disappointed but not surprised by the recent SCOTUS decisions on college debt and affirmative action. Nothing will change will Clarence Thomas retires, and he'll likely hold out until after Biden leaves office. Even then, our best shot is still a 5-4 conservative majority, and Chief Justice Edwards has not been a reliable swing vote. 

+ Stu News is turning 10 next month! That's about 3,100 total jokes, published six or seven times a week without stopping since mid-2013. How will I celebrate? More details soon. 

(715)

Bad Decisions

 We've taken a remarkable step backwards. 

In a head-spinning 28 hour stretch this past Thursday and Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court (in ascending order of concern) struck down the strictest concealed-carry law in the country, protected police officers from lawsuits if they forget to read the Miranda rights, and overturned Roe v. Wade. While this doesn't completely outlaw abortion in the US, it will allow 26 states to ban any form of pregnancy termination, while possibly overwhelming clinics in the other 24 states. 

This is a rallying point for Christian and social conservatives, a dwindling but obnoxiously vocal minority. Otherwise, this is the most unpopular SCOTUS decision in recent memory. This is the culmination of a brick by brick Republican takeover of SCOTUS, one that began in early 2016, when then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said it too close to a presidential election for President Obama to appoint Merrick Garland to succeed Antonin Scalia. That lead to three straight Trump appointees, stacking SCOTUS to the right by a 2:1 margin for the first time since the Reagan era. 

A short history lesson: even though there were over a dozen consecutive Republican SCOTUS appointees between 1969 and 1993 (Carter had zero) justices like John Paul Stevens and Sandra Day O'Connor proved more moderate or pragmatic than the average tighty righty. That time period included Roe v. Wade in 1973, where a court with five Republican appointees voted 7-2 to legalize abortion as a right to privacy under due process. No one expected Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, or Amy Coney Barrett to make a surprise flip. This ulterior motive was nakedly obvious. 

As a cisgender white male, I can't personally articulate the pain and anguish that I've seen from friends and acquaintances on social media over the last few days. I'm distraught, but I'm letting those directly affected speak first. There are no viable solutions in the short term, which is disheartening. All I can personally do is protest, show allyship, and wish that maybe 15-20 years down the road, a SCOTUS that tilts left can strike down Dobbs v. Jackson.

(695)

Dispatches Part 10 / Random Notes, September 2020

 I thought I was going to have time to post three blogs in September. I guess not:

+ Fall is on the horizon in the American Midwest, and I wonder how restaurants that had to ret-con outdoor seating will recalibrate and survive. We slowly felt comfortable going outside again, and now we have to go back in. A rough Spring and Summer will give way to an equally formidable Fall and Winter. It makes sense to hoard supplies again. Alas, I am reminded of Aesop; we aspire to be a nation of ants, but in reality we're a bunch of grasshoppers.

For liberals and progressives alike, the death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg we both anticipated yet we feared when it would happen. She was sharp and resilient as ever, but her body failed her. It doesn't make sense to appoint anyone before the election --six weeks away, friends-- but Trump and his cronies will push it through. Amy Coney Barrett is the most moderate of Trump's three picks, though that's not saying much.

+ What becomes of the U.S. Supreme Court remains to be seen. Jimmy Carter was the last president to not appoint anyone, so from 1969 to 1992 all the justices were appointed by Republicans. Some, like Sandra Day O'Connor and William Rehnquist, proved to be more moderate than others. Today's GOP clearly doesn't want centrists. At the same time, Clarence Thomas is "only" 72 years old but approaching 30 years on the court, and could easily be succeeded by a progressive judge. 

+ Both Chicago teams made the MLB playoffs this year, only the third time that's ever happened. How fitting of 2020 that both teams could beat the odds and face each other in the World Series... in Dallas.

(660)

Random Notes, July 2020

COVID-19 is undeniably the dominant news story of 2020, but that doesn't mean I can't give credence to other news:

+ Remember when I gave Bush 43 a C-/D+ when he left office? The appointment of Chief Justice John Roberts validates my grade. Several key Supreme Court decisions are not indicators of a liberal shift per se, but that the center is struggling to relate to Trump conservatives. As of Monday the 1st, any chance of Roe v. Wade ever getting reversed just took a serious blow. To de-fang the electoral college didn't hurt, either. Roberts is no liberal, but at least he's deciding with his conscience.

+ For the second year in a row, I don't feel up to writing out an entire Fantasy Emmy ballot. I have downtime, but not enough to keep up with the phalanx of quality shows on cable and streaming right now. I am hoping that the TV Academy selects (among nominees, anyway) the Hulu series "Ramy," Ben Mendelsohn for "The Outsider," and Janelle Monae for "Homecoming." Message me for more of my thoughts.

+ It was weird not having any concrete plans for Independence Day. I drove out to my sister's, I hung out with the dogs, then I drove back in time to see my roommate ignite fireworks that he bought in Wisconsin two days prior. I did not mind the laid-back feel, but I miss drinking with friends.

Next Week: at long last, my 2020 MLB preview. Stay safe and stay home.

(653)

Cinder Block on the Gas Pedal

The day before the inauguration, I replied to a Twitter hashtag about the proposed wall at the US-Mexico border. Though I hadn't implicitly said it before on social media, I gave the response I normally give in mixed conversation: the wall will serve as a metaphor and not much else; its just a pipe dream for xenophobes. The tweet received nearly a dozen hearts over the span of a week, but it also dragged me into a conversation I wasn't preparing myself to get into. I spent the better part of two days arguing the point and purpose of the wall, how much it would cost, and how the preexisting laws are allegedly not being enforced. I was dismissed at least twice as just another aloof liberal. The whole encounter was a massive headache.

In other words, welcome to Trump's America. The man who spent the better part of 18 months hijacking the Republican Party to cater his own desires has launched the mother of all culture wars. Bigots, homophobes, reactionaries, and the generally under-informed now feel more entitled than ever to throw their weight around. Immigration hardliners now believe their $20 billion* pipe dream is becoming a reality. The quick and prolific succession of executive orders has been bewildering, and the nationwide protest of the temporary ban of Middle Eastern refugees was a justified rebuke. Though I am deeply concerned about Chief of Staff Steve Bannon's influence in Trumps's inner circle, I am more afraid that this new president will be a patsy of the party. The fact that Trump is still squabbling with CNN and the New York Times indicates Bannon has at least one hand on the steering wheel. If former President Obama had to work around gridlock for most of his term, then President Trump is fueling the loggerheads.

Tonight's appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court, a prime-time spectacle that didn't have to be, was the closest thing to a bipartisan olive branch we might see in the next four years. Trump could've made a worse pick, but its tough to say which concerns me more: Gorsuch's originalist philosophy, which evokes a "Mini-Me" of the man he might succeed, Antonin Scalia; or that he's not even 50 years old, which could keep Gorsuch on the court for the next 30-plus years. Some Democrats are hoping for a Merrick Garland-type shutdown of the nominee, but I fear that it will not succeed.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are in for a bumpy ride.

(541)

*a conservative estimate, to be honest.

Somewhere Over the (Partisan) Rainbow

I don't believe I've ever intentionally spoken ill will of the dead. When Justice Antonin Scalia passed away a few weeks ago, rather than just say "RIP" on social media, I admittedly deferred the idea of criticizing a polarizing figure in American politics. I still received some flack from my Facebook friends, even though I didn't say anything specific about Justice Scalia. (I had my qualms, but so did a lot of other people.) One could argue, however that the Republicans that control both houses of Congress may have overreacted the most.

Judge Merrick Garland, a fellow Chicago native, is the third and likely last person that President Obama has nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court. His first two appointees, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, were left-leaning justices replacing fellow liberals on a court that tilted right. Garland's potential appointment will allegedly tip the scale to the left, or at least that's what the GOP fears; Garland has a history of being a moderate/centrist, a swing vote on a court that is now deadlocked at four and four.  In any other era of American politics, Garland would be a model nominee and have a swift confirmation. In a polarized Washington during an election year, he might not even get a hearing.

As of this writing, the only elected Republican to meet with Judge Garland is Sen. Mark Kirk, a fellow Illinoisan. It's an election year, and I can see why the GOP is trying to save face; they want to wait until Obama is out of office in nine months, apparently in total disregard of who might succeed him. At the same time, this group of senators was elected by their constituents to serve their country, and by refusing to give Judge Garland a hearing indicates a refusal to do their jobs. There is nothing to indicate that Garland is a liberal firebrand or would have any detrimental value to the nation's highest court, the GOP is simply being obstructive. A political party that is trying to vain to prove that they have ideas is doing everything but that. Whether they confirm or reject Garland, I'm not spending my tax money on a group of old men sitting on their hands because it allegedly compromises their principles.

(513)

Goin' to the Chapel

The judicial branch of the U.S. government is usually taken for granted. It doesn't command the hype and bloviating that the legislative and executive branches demand, especially in this day and age. The Supreme Court exists in a shroud of mystery, their discussions and arguments sealed airtight in their cozy Washington chamber. We don't think much of it, except when the judiciary season ends every late June and any political wonk worth their salt is scrutinizing the court's latest round of decisions.

For a Supreme Court that supposedly leans 5-4 in favor of conservatives, this year's round of decisions was an unexpected boost for a decidedly liberal president. Any conservative's hope of a lame duck presidency was quashed: the president's ambitious overhaul of our nation's health care system --er, "Obamacare"-- was kept intact in a narrow vote, and another slim decision legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states. The impact of Obamacare still remains to be seen, and kinks clearly still need to be worked out, but the opposition has been forced to surrender.

As for Obergefell v. Hodges, the president might attempt to take credit but this was a populist court decision. Barack Obama's legacy will be filled with milestones in social progress (mostly for LGBTQ rights) but the fight for gay marriage first gained momentum about ten years ago, when the president was still a freshman U.S. senator. He championed the cause, albeit belatedly, but he never led the fight. Like many Americans, President Obama will have to sit down, kick back, and be amused the sheer novelty of two men getting married in deep-red locales like Mississippi and Arizona.

(485)