Just a Sweet Kid

On Tuesday, three candidates backed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani for the United States House of Representatives representing New York City districts swept to victory in their respective primaries. This did not sit well with James Carville, co-hosting his regular podcast with very veteran journalist Al  Hunt. And

“I have the quote right here, I’ll get to it. She has attacked interracial relationships and the American flag. Lady, I ain’t in the same party as you. I’m sorry,” Carville said. “I’m just not, and I actually do think it’s time for Democrats to talk ‘the S-word.’ ‘Schism.’ I really do.”

“Everybody’s always said, ‘No, no, we’re coalition. We’re a big tent,’” he said. “And there’s some – there’s just some s— that I can’t be in the same tent with.”

Carville suggested that many of the recent far-left candidates do not actually like the Democratic Party, but are nonetheless running as Democrats, and proposed, “Let’s negotiate a terms of a schism here. Maybe we can part under some kind of advantageous terms for both of us, but I’m done. And I’m not in that f—ing political party.”

In turn, this sort of thing did not sit well with Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York:

AOC: I actually think the more important advice that I would give would be to my incumbent colleagues, which is: you will create a self-fulfilling prophecy by deciding who these young women are before you’ve met them.

And if you are already panicking and sending little messages… pic.twitter.com/xj8CN0xE7F

— Acyn (@Acyn) June 27, 2026

Which of these individuals is correct.... or are they both wrong? One of the two candidates, Darializa Avila Chevalier, is a 32-year-old investiagor at a public defender's office in NYC and doctoral student. She also is different than the other two. Three weeks before the primary, CNN revealed that it had undertaken a

review of hundreds of deleted posts and reposts found ones that called for abolishing police, prisons and borders; tweets about communism; calls for open borders and zero deportations; and expletive-laden attacks on Democrats….

In a statement to CNN, Avila Chevalier said the posts did not reflect who she is today and accused Espaillat of trying to distract from issues facing the district. Three weeks before the primary, CNN reported that it had undertaken a "review of hundreds of deleted posts and reposts (and) found ones that called for abolishing police, prisons and bordrs, tweets about communism, calls for open borders and zero deportations, and expletive-laden attacks on Democrats."  In response, Avila Chevalier explained "I have grown considerably since in the years since these tweets and I am focused on our community and our community's future"...

The Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine saved more than 3,600 tweets from Avila Chevalier’s account between 2018–2022. It’s unclear when the account was deleted but the last archived tweet is from May 2022.

In August 2020, Avila Chevalier reposted a tweet responding to a social media prompt that asked, “Israel suddenly disappears, your third emoji is your reaction.” The reposted tweet replied, “Trick question – Israel doesn’t exist!”

“A world without borders—just like a world without prisons or police—is possible, necessary, and the only moral way forward,” read one deleted repost from September 2021.

During a three-day period in September 2021, Avila Chevalier also reposted now-deleted messages declaring, “Yes, literally, abolish the border” and that “all deportation is wrong.”

Her Twitter profile biography also at one point included the phrase “how communist of you,” the hashtags “#BlackLivesMatter” and “#FreePalestine,” and described her location as “Occupied Lenape Land” and later “Lenapehoking (NYC)” — an acknowledgment to Indigenous claims to New York City….

During the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, Avila Chevalier reposted a message calling for a sweeping government takeover of large parts of the economy. The repost advocated nationalizing utilities, hospitals and pharmaceutical companies; suspending rent and mortgage payments; dissolving private health insurance companies; and “seiz[ing] all properties from landlords.”

Other deleted posts and reposts included references to communism and anti-capitalist politics. In one April 2020 post, Avila Chevalier wrote that while most of the political theory she had read was communist, “the pyromania associated with anarchism is very intriguing to me,” adding a laughing emoji.

“Seize the means of production,” she wrote in a since-deleted 2019 post, the phrase commonly associated with Marxism.

The deleted posts also included repeated calls for abolishing police.

During the nationwide protests in 2020 following the killing of George Floyd, Avila Chevalier responded to a user asking what a better slogan would be than “defund the police,” by posting, “F**k you. We’re gonna defund and abolish. You don’t get to water down our movements.”

Two days later, Avila Chevalier rejected an argument that abolishing police meant ending policing only “as we know it.”

“No. It means ending policing full stop. Period. No more police at all ever,” she replied, adding several clap emojis.

In another deleted post, she captioned a selfie showing her wearing a face mask with the slogan “Defund Police.”

“Felt cute. F**k 12,” she wrote, referring to a slang word for the police.

She also reposted a message stating, “In New York they don’t say ‘I love you,’ they say ‘NYPD suck my dick’ and I think that’s beautiful.”

In another repost from 2021 she shared a message declaring that “ALL PIGS EVERYWHERE ARE HARAM,” an Arabic term used in Islam to describe something that is forbidden. Avila Chevalier is a Muslim-convert.

The deleted posts also reflected hostility toward prominent Democrats couched in profane terms after Bernie Sanders ended his 2020 presidential campaign.

“This is for 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐍𝐂 u big 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐮𝐝𝐮𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 white nasty 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐬 𝐪𝐮𝐨 bitch why u took 𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐞 off the muhfuckin 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐞 with ur trifflin dirty 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 ass u 𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐝𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚 𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐜 ass bitc,” read an April 2020 repost.

“I have no nuance to add. Fuck Kamala Harris,” she posted after Harris told Guatemalan migrants in September 2021 not to come to the United States illegally.

Lovely. Of course, Carville is wrong to recommend that the Democratic Party and some of these more outrageous candidates "negotiate a terms of schism." That would, obviously, result in Republicans being elected almost everywhere. 

But there is a way around this. Hunt (at 6:54 of the podcast) told Carville "They are a great gift to Donald Trump and, uh, unless other Democrats stand up, certainly people like Obama but also some of the younger Democrats, to say "this is not us...."

As he obviously realizes, it wouldn't help much for Carville and other veterans of the Democratic establishment to explain that much of vile invective is going to offend a great many voters. Barack Obama, who for some reason, remains extremely popular with Democrats, and the relatively young figures in the party do need to "stand up."

Reading out all the progressives- or even most- in the party is unnecessary and unhelpful. Hunt and Carville themselves cite Ocasio-Cortez as a reasonable figure, though that was before the congresswoman made it clear she believes that if candidates are "young women,"  all manner of wacky, hateful rhetoric is excused, even celebrated.

The worst offender, Darializa Avila Chevalier may herself deserve a little grace.  On 12/23/19, she boasted on Twitter "I forgot to get napkins so I wiped my hands on the Amrican flag before me."  To her, we should wish "Happy Independence Day!"

Share |

Steps Toward Decency

I've thought for a long time that, short-term, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is running not for President but for the United States Senate. Senator Chuck Schumer's term is up in January of 2019, and Ocasio-Cortez proably would have a glide path to the nomination if the Minority Leader were to bow out gracefully. Schumer, a supporter of Israel but critic of Netanyahu, would be more likely to call it quits if he weren't being opposed for a fifth term by a strongly anti-Israel candidate. And so:

AOC: I personally do not trust somebody like Marjorie Taylor Greene—a proven bigot and anti-semite—on the issues of what is good for Gazans and Israelis. I don’t think it benefits our movement to align with white nationalists. pic.twitter.com/ufGwW6q6Mv

— Acyn (@Acyn) May 8, 2026

 An outraged Cenk Uygure of The Young Turks tweets

This is just terrible. She sounds just like the establishment. She's attacking an opponent of Israel as an antisemite. This is exactly what israeli supporters want- split the anti-war movement and the critics of Israel's genocide. Deeply counterproductive. And selfish.

Marjorie Taylor Greene is an anti-Semite.  If a member of Congress came out and said "I hate Jews,"  Uygur would claim that he or she was talking only about Israelis. If the individual stated that Israel is no worse than Nazi Germany, he probably would agree. You know the type: Israel is nothing but evil and it doesn't matter whether it's the Prime Minister, one of Netanyahu's Cabinet members, a settler on the Wesst Bank, or a resident of Israel itself; they're all the same.

Ocasio-Cortez has herself accused Israel of genocide, a strange charge to level against a country whose military could wipe out Gazan Palestinians if it chose to do so, though it still would have to contend against Palestinians in Jordan and elsewhere, with whom it has no quarrel. In May of 2021, the New York congresswoman accused Israel of "apartheid," though Arabs and Muslims in Israel proper have rights exceeding those in several Arabic and Persian nations. Nine months later, she voted "present" on an amendment to provide funding for Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system, though evidently she opposed the outlay.

Representative Ocasio-Cortez has had a change of heart, at least outwardly, toward Israel, while remaining one of its critics. In July of 2024, she earned the scorn of Democratic Socialists of America when she hosted a panel on anti-semitism. (Oh, the humanity!) A year later, she voted against an amendment, co-sponsored by Greene, which would have cut drastically the funding for Iron Dome.

This may have been a conversion of convenience, behavior common among politicians and not unknown across the professions. And she still rejects funding from AIPAC, let alone not joining the Netanyahu Can Do No Wrong Caucus headed by President Donald Trump. 

Rejecting collaboration with Marjorie Taylor Greene may or may not prove wise in advancing Ocasio-Cortez's preference for a significan change in Israeli policy. Nor is it certain to last; the hostility toward "Zionism" and "Zionists" on the far left is gaining steam weekly and pressuring Democratic politicians. But the congresswoman appears to have learned from the fictional Martin Dooley of "trust everybody but count the cards".and from the Russian proverb,  "trust, but verify" And that not everything should be blamed on Jews.

Share |

Jew/Zionist

Mr. Hasan, please say "Zionist" is a synonym for "Jew" without saying "Zionist is a synonym for Jew."

Mehdi Hasan on Hasan Piker: “The idea that he is the single biggest threat to American jews right now is insane when you have a card-carrying antisemite in the White House. The reason they don’t like Hasan Piker is not because of antisemitism, it’s because of his anti-Zionism. If… pic.twitter.com/IYVJyp0FTo

— Marco Foster (@MarcoFoster_) April 7, 2026

Hasan Piker, described by Politico as a "far let political streamer with millions of followers," is more significant than Mehdi Hasan lets on. He currently is campaigning with Abdul El-Sayed against State Enator Mallory McMorrow and Representative Haley Stevens for the Democratic nomination for an open US Senate seat from Michigan.

There is no compendium of quotes from him, a sort of "Greatest Hists of Hasan Piker." However, according to The Detroit Jewish News

Piker has previously referred to Orthodox Jews as “inbred,” compared Israelis to the Ku Klux Klan and defended Hamas, writing in a post on X in January that the terror group is “a thousand times better than the fascist settler colonial apartheid state.”

On one of his shows aired days after Oct. 7, Piker told off a listener who condemned the massacre, saying “Bloodthirsty violent pig dog, suck my d–-k.” In a May 2024 stream, Piker also minimized reports of the prevalence of sexual assault during the Oct. 7 attacks, saying “It doesn’t matter if rape happened on October 7th. It doesn’t change the dynamic for me.”

Piker once stated "America deserved 9/11" and has called critics "rabid ultra-Zionist pigs." The Daily Mail maintains that in one of his videos

he joked about pedophilia with the phrase: 'old enough to count, old enough to mount', suggesting with sick humor that a child who can count is old enough to have sex.

In the same video he added: 'I always knew Hannah Montana was a little sl*t', after referencing a story about an outfit giving a 'cameltoe' to singer Miley Cyrus who played child star Montana.

'Look this is a classic example of what happens when your father doesn't pay attention to you. You turn out to be a sl*t who's craving for attention, and then I tend to pick you up at a bar late night and bang you out on the first date,' he said.

Piker was accused online of calling police for an unwanted 'wellness check' on his ex-girlfriend, porn star Janice Griffith, after they broke up, allegedly because she wasn't returning his calls.

Seems nice.

Last year, Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, as part of their Fighting Oligarchy tour, sat for a freindly interview with Piker. So did prominent anti-Semitic New York City councilman, now mayor, Zohran Mamdani. This past Saturday, Sanders, El-Sayed and former US Representative Nina Turner (D-Ohio) participated in a livestreamed rally, intended to raise money for progressive candidates, with Piker and others. Sanders joined Piker at a rally the following day.

Mehdi Hasan is correct that the threat of bigotry posed by Piker is not as big as that of President Trump. However, that may change. Cameron Kasky, described in the South Florida Sun Sentinel as "a Jewish Gen-Z progressive who recently dropped his bid in New York's 12th District race," has tweeted "Yeah, no sh-t big politicians are talking to Hasan Piker. More of them should be. God forbid a candidate actually work with new media, which the Right has used to dominate us."

Whether the "us" she is speaking of is Democrats, progressives, or anti-Semites is not clear. Piker thus far has been criticized by Representative Ritchie Torres of the Bronx, NY, Representative, New Democrat Coalition Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) and Third Way president Jonathan Cowan. 

That''s not enough. Last September, a New York City-based Jewish newspaper reported

During a Twitch stream, Piker said any “Zionist entity” should be “treated in the same way as a rabid neo-Nazi, and you shouldn’t even let someone be the local dog catcher if they’ve ever exhibited any positive feelings about the State of Israel.”

At the 2025 People’s Conference for Palestine in August, he said “some of the worst people” in the world include “the Michael Rapaports of the world, the Amy Schumers of the world … Satan-yahu.” Both Rapaport and Schumer are proud Jewish celebrities and “Satan-yahu” is a clear reference to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

"Zionist entity?" Really?  There are many American politicians who are legitimately anti-Israel.who manage not to be obsessed with "Zionism" or "Zionists." or Jews.  Unfortunately, Hasan Piker and Mehdi Hasan are not among them. Piker's influence is growing and as with cancer, must be denounced and eradicated.

Share |

Leadership Myth(s)

Crudely, tastelessly, and without redeeming social merit, Representative Jasmine Crockett of Texas' 10th Congressional District

mocked her state’s governor during a weekend appearance, referring to Greg Abbott — who uses a wheelchair — as “Gov. Hot Wheels” while speaking at a banquet in Los Angeles.

“You all know we got Gov. Hot Wheels down there. Come on, now,” Crockett, a Dallas Democrat, said about Abbott, a Republican, while addressing the Human Rights Campaign event. “And the only thing hot about him is that he is a hot-ass mess, honey.”

Abbott was paralyzed in 1984 after a tree fell on him while he was running. The accident severely damaged Abbott’s spinal cord. Abbott, now 67, was elected in 2014.

The day before Crockett's remark, according to CBS News

An estimated 34,000 people gathered Friday evening at Civic Center Park in Denver to hear Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York push a number of progressive policies.

Just hours later, they spoke before a crowd of about 11,000 at the University of Northern Colorado in Greeley.

The two stops for the progressive leaders in Colorado were part of what they dubbed the "Fighting Oligarchy Tour."

The figure of 34,000 is not objective because apparently it originated with a tweet by Ocasio-Cortez herself. Still, a lot. A heck of a lot, a number Donald Trump circa 2016 would have been happy about. And then, there is Scott Jennings, a regular on CBS NewsNight (Usually) with Abby Phillip

Jasmine Crockett will learn no lessons from the “Hot Wheels” episode because the Left’s angry mobs eat this stuff up. Trust me: the unquestioned head of the Democratic Party thinks is a winning vector. pic.twitter.com/egtZIbPyDV

— Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) March 26, 202

"I don't know how the Democrats," Jennings says, "came to appoint Jasmine Crockett as the unquestioned leader of your Party But thank God...."

Let's not play the How About Game. Of course, we remember Donald Trump when he mocked a disabled reporter.

   

:

But that happened several years ago, and we know that if Donald Trump were videotaped shooting someone in the back on 5th Avenue, most of his supporters would respond with something akin to "it was a Democrat and he stuck his tongue out at the greatest President ever."

However, this is 2025. Now, strategist Jennings is a CNN contributor and may end up running for the GOP nomination to succeed Kentucky senator Mitch McConnell, who is retiring and for whom Jennings once worked. 

It is not up to Scott Jennings to anoint someone as leader of the Democratic Party. Nor is it necessary for there to be one leader for the entire Party at this time. Hakeem Jeffries is the leader in the House of Representatives and Chuck Schumer, whatever his worth, in the Senate. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are now the de factor leaders of the activist wing of the Party, to whatever extent there is an activist wing and it has leadership.

After Mitt Romney followed in John McCain's footsteps by losing a presidential race to Barack Obama, the Republican National Committee launched an "autopsy," the "Growth and Opportunity Project." It cited the need for the rudderless GOP to become more inclusive, including welcoming racial minorities and immigrants. Four years later, the Party nominated for President a reality television star who filled a vacuum by condemning immigrants because "they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists." He won the election and the Republican Party lost fewer seats in the Senate and the House of Representatives than expected. 

So much for the importance of leadership the year after a presidential election.

In the wake of the Signal fiasco, the lies are coming fast and furious from the Trump Administration, with some officials acting as if trying to undo Donald Trump in mendacity. Scott Jennings is a serious Republican operative who may become something even more prominent and significant. His guile must not go unchallenged, and the Democratic Party must not go undefended. 

Share |

"Voters Have Outright Rejected Dean Phillips"

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez believes she is making sense, telling Jake Tapper

Right now, when it comes to the President's age, folks are talking about how he's 81 but first of all we have to look- first of all, Donald Trump is around the same age- he's 77 years old, they could have gone to high school together.

They didn't. Middle class Joe was in Delaware and attended a private (Roman Catholic) preparatory school in Delaware  and Donald J. Trump attended New York Military Academy, a private boarding school 60 miles north of NYC.  If they had gone to the same high school, Trump probably wouldn't have been even a freshman while Biden was a senior. Today, they are both seniors. And a lot can happen to an individual between age 82- when Trump would be completing a second term- and age 86, when Biden would be completing a second term. A lot.

The New York congresswoman continues

.... and beyond that, Donald Trump has ninety-one indictments.  And I know who I'm going to choose. It's going to be one of the most successful Presidents in modern American history, that passed the Inflation Reduction Act, that got us the American Rescue Plan, that ensured we could pass one of the largest investments in climate change in U.S. history.

(Sarcasm ahead.) It's heartening to learn that Ocasio-Cortez is going to vote for Joe Biden over Donald Trump. Hopefully, it's not a close call for her. She deserves no argument on assessing Biden "one of the most successful Presidents in modern American history." No doubt, justifiably, she would not suggest a Republican President has been more successful. Therefore- depending upon her definition of modern- the young congresswoman may be comparing the incumbent against Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter. If so, she could have omitted "one of" from her evaluation.

That may be nitpicking but it's not nitpicking to inform the congresswoman that Donald J. Trump is facing nor 91 indictments but four indictments. Presumably, she was referring to the 91 total counts with which he is being charged. By going with ninety-one indictments, Ocasio-Cortez was off by nearly 2300%. A rudimentary understanding of criminal justice is not one of the strong points of the congresswoman who, not coincidentally, was one of the most prominent and ardent supporters of the misguided Black Lives Matter movement.

Ocasio-Cortez added

And as far as we know, as we know, virtually all of the filing deadlines have passed. There's already been a primary, voters have outright rejected Dean Phillip. President Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee.

in which AOC describes Biden as "one on most successful presidents in modern American history" -- a statement that shouldn't be controversial on the left but is, sadly https://t.co/Tf1Kd3EHay

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 14, 2024

Well, of course, they have done so. The Democratic National Committee, in defiance of tradition (and why would tradition matter to a 77-year-old who has spent his entire career in politics), moved the primary in the Republican state of South Carolina. ahead of votes in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada. President Biden explained that race was the explicit rationale for the move when he wrote the DNC

For decades, Black voters in particular have been the backbone of the Democratic Party but have been pushed to the back of the early primary process. We rely on these voters in elections but have not recognized their importance in our nominating calendar. It is time to stop taking these voters for granted, and time to give them a louder and earlier voice in the process.

This is what can happen when individuals, including the President of the USA, prioritize race over everything. The will not level with the public.

The Democratic Party does not rely on South Carolina in elections. The last time a Democratic nominee captured So. Carolina in a presidential election was in 1976 (remember disco? bell bottom jeans?) and Joe Biden lost the state in 2020 by 11.7 percentage points. Knowing he won't win it in 2024, he won't campaign there in the general election. Democrats do not "rely on these voters in elections" nor have they "not recognized their importance in our nominating calendar." Biden gained the nomination in 2020 because of South Carolina's voters, and only because of South Carolina's voters. If he- like most of the Party movers and shakers- didn't recognize that, they wouldn't have maneuvered the state into first place in this cycle's process.

Joe Biden is going to be re-nominated (unless he expectedly withdraws) the Democratic nomination. However, it's not going to be because of the impressive record cited by Ocasio-Cortez in brief. As he realizes, he was nominated in 2020 because of African-American voters and, whatever his mental state now, he was smart enough four years ago to buy himself insurance against rejection by Democratic elites or Democratic voters (of whatever race). Vice-President Kamala Harris may have been a mediocre Senator and bad state Attorney General (both) and is very unpopular but her status as first in line to the presidency has scared away Democrats otherwise considering a challenge to Joe Biden.. Veteran Democratic strategist and Harris supporter Karen Finney was quoted by NBC News last September as warning

When you had people who were trying to test the waters, the party rose up and made it clear to those individuals- who were mostly white men- that to disrespect the vice president would not be well received by women and people of color within the party. They got a little bit of a smack in the face.

Notwithstanding the congresswoman's claim to the contrary, Joe Biden could, and would, be replaced on the ballot if the Party's power brokers wished. They do not, and it's not because of whatever filing deadlines have passed, because he has governed far better than the last Democratic President (never acknowledged), or because he won big in a Democratic primary against a United States Representative no one outside of Minnesota has heard of. Party establishment could replace Joe Biden on the ballot if it chose but the affront to the vice-president is more important than defeating Donald Trump. 

The reason is fairly obvious but cannot be uttered in polite company. Joe Biden appears to be (politically, anyway) dead man walking. But to many Democrats, some things are more important than defeating Donald Trump. 

Share |

Promoting Government

I think they do know.

So let me get this straight: Republicans are threatening to remove their own Speaker, impeach the President, and shut down the government on September 30th - disrupting everyday people’s paychecks and general public operations.

For what? I don’t think even they know. Chaos vibes https://t.co/qJyR3e4JWk

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) September 12, 2023

The motivation isn't the same with each member of the House Republican caucus who is inviting chaos.  Many represent districts which are extremely conservative, in which the incumbent faces greater danger of losing his or her seat from a primary challenge from an even more ridiculous Republican than the member does in a general election. And most welcome the additional campaign contributions they know will come their way if a reckless, radical, and ruinous (alliteration day!) proposal is made or path followed.

Nonetheless, there is an additional reason.  They believe impeachment proceedings and shutting down the government makes government look dysfunctional and incompetent. And they know that government, especially on the national level, is associated with the Democratic Party. When government is seen as ineffectual, the default position is to conclude Democrats are responsible (or, rather, irresponsible). If Congress and the presidency are controlled by the GOP, blame can be credibly laid at the feet of Republicans. However, if power appears split in Washington, Democrats must do a yeoman's job to convince voters that it is Republicans who are disruptive and destructive. 

It's almost inevitable that Democrats would be held responsible in the short term or the medium term for the perception of failure or success of government. Therefore, it's critical that the public recognize that government is both desirable and necessary.   "The era of big government is over," President William Jefferson Clinton once insisted, thereby suggesting the superfluousness of government. 

Chris McGreal of The Guardian recently traveled to Dayton to understand the problems Democrats face in appealing to the voters, especially those of the working-class, in the once-swing state of Ohio. Among those he spoke to were Fred Strahorn, once a member of the Ohio House of Representatives and minority leader of the state's General Assembly.  Strahorn 

said there would be no quick comeback for the party in Ohio and that ultimately winning voters’ confidence was a long game. He wants the Democrats to have the courage to embrace what he regards as one of the party’s greatest strengths, defence of government as a means to improve people’s lives.

He said the party had become afraid of doing it in the face of relentless Republican attacks blaming people’s problems on “big government”, a strategy reinforced by Democrats in Congress who serve the interests of corporations.

“One of the failures, multi decades long, is not telling people what government does for them and remind them on a regular basis, so they’re not so easily turned against it. We’ve not defended government, not really explained all the things that government does that you actually like, want and use,” he said.

“Therefore when somebody comes along and takes a swack at it, it’s easy for people to believe because they never hear anything but that. If you don’t counter that it really makes it hard for that electorate to see you as somebody who’s trying to help them because you haven’t explained how that works. That’s your battleground.”

Republicans have a narrative, which they consistently tout and the media finds agreeable, that government only interferes with the initiative, productivity, and general wonderfulness of individuals. Individual Democrats boast, as they should, about what they individually have done to improve the lives of individuals and families, or what the President of their party has done. However, they recoil from the thought of making clear that government has in any way improved their lot in life and avoid contradicting GOP claims of the evil it doe.

They even occasionally slam Donald Trump by lauding President Ronald Reagan, he who undermined the public's faith and trust in the federal government with the famous "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help,'" 

Aside from- possibly- his own family, there are three people Kevin McCarthy cares about: 1) Kevin McCarthy; 2) Kevin McCarthy; and 3) Kevin McCarthy. So McCarthy is trying to save his own skin by threatening to shut down the government. But he also knows he does it against a backdrop of nearly forty years of one side tearing down government and the other side refusing to fight back..

Share |

In An Upset, I Disagree With Bill Maher

Can someone, somewhere, please introduce Bill Maher to the concept of the Overton Window? In what was only a small portion of Friday evening's Overtime- a sitcom episode better named "Three Men Without a Clue," the conversation among Maher, journalist Sam Stein, and linguist John McWhorter turned to the benefit the guys believe the third party of Andrew Yang would be. Maher argued (at 4:28 of the video below)

Well, I think what would happen= my prediction is you could have it like a sensible middle party. And then what would happen is it would force the Democrats to go back to being the sensible middle party. And they would because they would see that's where- you know, Biden reminds me of some grandfather and when AOC and the woke people come into his office, he just goes along. He doesn't really understand it. It's like "grandpa, can we have money to go play Fortnite? And he's like "I don't know what Fortnite is. I don't know what Tik-Tok is, just get out of my hair."

The only good part of that is that, as Maher prepared to say "because they would see that's where most people are politically," he stopped himself, perhaps aware that would be inaccurate. Instead of trying to emulate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Cori Bush, President Biden has tried to emulate Lyndon B. Johnson and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Instead of trotting out his public relations team to excoriate Joe Manchin, Krysten Sinema or any Republican, he oversaw White House communications director Kate Bedingfield remarking "Joe Biden's goal in responding to Dobbs is not to satisfy some activists who have been consistently out of step with the mainstream of the Democratic Party."

And that is where Joe Biden is: the mainstream of the Democratic Party, and not only the mainstream of the Democratic Party today, which Maher believes has gone dangerously left, but the mainstream of FDR, LBJ, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama.  The President recently struck (but not enacted) a deal on climate, taxes, and health care, the deal was struck not with the dreaded "AOC' of New York City but with centrist Joe Manchin of robustly conservative West Virginia.  The Biden Administration confirms the critique "Republicans refer to their most involved voters as 'the base,' and deliver for them, while Democrats refer to theirs as 'some activists' and ignore them. That is why they lose."

That "breakthrough" deal includes a 15% minimum corporate tax, when most Americans pay more in federal income tax; environmental reform with little resemblance to the Green New Deal; and severely limited health care reform in a nation whose ongoing coronavirus pandemic has laid bare the need for universal health care.  That's not nothing but it is not sweeping, historical change, and nothing which will set Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's heart atwitter. 

Democrats seem liberal, even progressive; but that is only because Republican Party officials have lurched rightward.  Now, Democrats hail the daughter of Dick Cheney for her integrity, seemingly accepting a congressional voting record 92.9% in support of President Trump.

When President Biden proposed the ambitious Build Back Better plan, it included the following:  universal and free pre-school; investments in child care and eldercare; expansion of Child Tax Credit; promotion of clean energy, especially in disadvantaged communities; initiatives to combat climate change; reduction of prescription drug costs; strengthening the Affordable Care Act; expansion of Medicaid; promotion of affordable housing; extending the Earned Income Tax Credit; increasing access to higher education, academic and vocational; immigration reform. 

That was the President's major, arguably only, bold initiative. And yet, Bill Maher and other liberal or center-left individuals unnerved by what they perceive as a rush to the left were noticeably silent on components of Build Back Better. Often, they failed to identify even one component of the proposal with which they disagreed. And yet, they're apoplectic that Joe Biden is morphing into Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or, in Maher's case, unwilling to resist any of the congresswoman's demands.

Nuances, details, even sometimes mere facts are to be avoided in favor of the broad, sweeping generalization. Honest and thoughtful disagreement should be encouraged, but has become unfamiliar territory for individuals criticizing Joe Biden from the right.  Nuance, detail, sometimes mere facts are avoided in favor of the broad, seeping generalization. We should expect more from our professors of linguistics, journalists, and comedians.

 

  

Share |

Tweet of the Day- Resisting Arrest

This tweet from Pe/ is two days old but well captures a contradiction

Weird how the "comply with police or die" crowd is suddenly criticizing people for complying with a common police order.

— Pé🌻 (@4everNeverTrump) July 20, 2022

: 

The police officer didn't handcuff Representative Ocasio-Cortez because there was no need to do so. Unlike roughly 99% of individuals who are arrested, the congresswoman actually wanted to be arrested, the better to publicize the cause. The officer either ordered her to put her hands behind her back or was at least relieved that she did so, the better to get her away from the scene of the obstruction and toward the police car. It's difficult to believe that Fox News' Brett Baier is so ignorant as not to understand this.

 

Share |

Tweet Of The Day- The Taking Over That Isn't

Responding to a tweet from US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, one individual- no doubt meaning well- has tweeted

The public has moved more left for good reason. Things like canceling student debt, police/prison reform, homes for the homeless, ubi, being more open and supportive of the lgbt etc. And the government moved more to the right. Pretty obvious observation imo.

Under a Democratic President, student debt has not been cancelled. Criminal justice reform negotiations on the federal level ended with no action taken while some municipalities have enacted police reform and others have increased law enforcement budgets.  Despite the value experienced of sending checks to people during the pandemic, there has been no movement on a universal basic income and there still is no federal law against discrimination against sexual minorities (or "LGBTAIA+, if you prefer)., 

Nor has the federal minimum wage been increased and reproductive freedom, wiped out in some states and hanging by a thread in some others, is likely to be eviscerated soon by the US Supreme Court.  The Overton Window has moved right and Ocasio-Cortez has noticed:

Billionaires be like “the extreme far left is taking over” when the “extreme far left” in the US is “medicine shouldn’t bankrupt you,” “wages should cover rent,” & “maybe it’s bad that Wall St companies profit off mass surveillance, manufactured housing crises, and caging people”

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) April 29, 2022

Early in the report below. the NBC station in Philadelphia shows the top three (of four total) candidates for the Democratic nomination for an open seat in the US Senate in the swing state of Pennsylvania. The report is lacking journalistically but is telling when we learn that the two leading candidates. Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman and US Representative Conor Lamb, are stressing that they can attract votes of moderates and conservatives, independents and Republicans, in the general election. 

Neither Fetterman- the more liberal/left of the two- or Lamb professed support for Medicare for All, even after a pandemic in which millions of Americans lost health care as they lost their job. If they had done so, they might have been identified with progressive policies, and they didn't want to risk that in a Democratic primary  race. Any interest- in a Democratic primary- in energizing their own party's base is abandoned.

If this is how "the extreme far-left is taking over," it would be disturbing to see what it would look like if moderates have been taking over. Which, truth be told, they have.

 

Share |

Beyond Smollett

On January 29, 2019 gay actor Jussie Smollett had

told Chicago police he was physically attacked by two men in downtown Chicago while out getting food from a Subway restaurant at 2 a.m. The Black and openly gay actor tells authorities the men used racial and homophobic slurs, wrapped a rope around his neck and poured an "unknown substance" on him. Police say Smollett told detectives that the attackers yelled he was in "MAGA country," an apparent reference to former President Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" campaign slogan. Police say Smollett had scratches on his face and bruises but no broken ribs or serious injuries.

There was no broken bone while there were scratches and bruises. Scratches and bruises, self-inflicted or otherwise, can heal and police unavoidably were skeptical there was such an attack.

Nonetheless, prominent celebrities and politicians were seemingly certain there had been a serious assault.  On the 29th, the tweet from national Democrats went up the political food chain, in chronological order from Representatives Eric Swallwell, Rashida Tlaib, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; to Senator Cory Booker; then from Senator Kamala Harris and, finally, former Senator and Vice President Joe Biden.  The attack, the account of which smelled like four-day old fish, was promptly and uncritically accepted (video below from 3-4 weeks later).

The incident was condemned by these individuals as "vile and tragic" (ES); "racist and homophobic" (AO-C); an "attempted modern-day lynching" (CB); an "attempted modern day lynching" of "one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know" (KH); "hate" given "safe harbor" (JB).

On Thursday, December 9, 2021 a Chicago jury found the actor guilty "on five of six felony counts of disorderly conduct for making a false report to Chicago police that he was the victim of a hate crime in January 2019 ." It evidently took the jury a little over nine hours to conclude that Jussie Smollett was, literally, unbelievable, an observation most Americans probably made upon hearing of the alleged attack.

It doesn't take a genius to realize- notwithstanding apparel that is worn- that supporters of Donald Trump and of "Make America Great Again" do not refer to themselves as from "MAGA country."  Critics may- they don't. And it didn't take a genius to realize that two pro-Trump right-wingers, racists, or any such persons who would wrap a rope around a man's neck, yell out a political slogan, pour an unknown substance on the victim, would manage to break no bones. Few people are so inept at the art of violence.

This thing obviously was a hoax from first report. Yet, several of the most well-known Democrats seemingly failed to recognize that Smollett's account deviated substantially and materially from objective reality. It may have been naivete, a rush to judgement, or combination thereof; or something even worse, a sorry impulse characterizing today's Democratic Party.

It's unclear why these politicos decided to jump in and endorse the story of an individual so obviously a huckster and unclear they'll be asked, given the lack of serious journalism in the USA today. However, in a time when the Republican Party has disturbingly made clear what it is all about, the public deserves to know the same about the other Party.

 

Share |

Punishing Nothing By Punishing Everything

The House of Representatives has punished two of its GOP members, Paul Gosar of Arizona and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, for what Daily Beast reporters Sam Brodey and Ursala Perano label "their own insulting moves." Now House Democrats are considering penalizing Republican Lauren Boebert of Colorado because of bigoted remarks about colleague Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota.

Yet Brodey and Perano maintain

But this time, Democrats are weighing how to respond knowing full well that very response could serve as exhibit A in the GOP case to retaliate should they, as is expected, take control of the House in 2023....

But the dynamics of taking such a step have shifted since Democrats took the rare step of doling out consequences to Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Paul Gosar (R-AZ) for their own insulting moves. The party voted to remove both of them from their committees and to censure Gosar.

Assuming they regain control of the House, Republican won't "respond" at all.  These are people who voted overwhelmingly against investigating an armed insurrection against the United States government, and they won't be responding. They will come after Democrats- and not only members of the "Squad"- in one of their first moves to end representative government.

Nonetheless, Alexandria Ocasi-Cortez was wrong, albeit not as naive as the reporters, when she

told The Daily Beast on Thursday she was “saddened” by Democratic leadership’s delay in calling for action. “This should not take a long time,” she said.

“We have to have even enforcement against these things, because having that consistency is what actually draws the line. When we enforce and make these actions on some of these offenses, but not others, it actually encourages an increased frequency of them trying to test this boundary,” said Ocasio-Cortez.

“Because they think that, you know, if one of every four times you can get away with it, then they’re going to roll the dice,” she added.

There is no consistency when your target is "these things." Nor can your opponents, radically hateful Republicans, be testing a boundary when your boundary is unknown.

Ocasio-Cortez has set no boundary, nor does she intend to. "When we enforce and make these actions on some of these offenses," she states, urging a Democratic response to whatever may offend. That is a whole universe of things, especially (not exclusively) for the New York congresswoman. Congress can set boundaries, of course, if it chooses to disregard her standard that whatever offends at the time is forbidden. 

Trying her hand at stand-up, Boebert ridiculed Islam and implied that a Muslim colleague was a terrorist.  Gosar threatened the life of one colleague, Greene the lives of two colleagues. There is a difference from Boebert's stand-up act, which should impel House Democrats to establish boundaries, in which some acts are within, some outside.

The importance of Democrats' establishing those boundaries is only highlighted by their disinclination to do so. If they wished to take a stand against political violence, they could do so most effectively by denouncing bigotry but recognizing that tolerance requires acceptance of speech that is reprehensible, even insensitive and biased.

By contrast, there should be consequences if members commit or encourage violence against colleagues or other elected officials.  That can be clearly distinguished from speech that is antithetical to decency and respect for others. One is awful; the other, dangerous. It shouldn't be hard to understand nor to explain to the American people. Consistency established; boundaries set.

 

Share |

Hey, Look Me Over

Crashing a MET gala in New York City, NY,  Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez "wore a white off-the-shoulder gown by Brother Vellies, designed by founder and creative director Aurora James, with the words "TAX THE RICH" emblazoned down the back in bright red letters."

Lest we be tempted to assume that social conscience and tax policy was her motivation

On social media, Ocasio-Cortez said Brother Vellies created the dress. "The medium is the message, "Ocasio-Cortez captioned the photo. "Proud to work with Aurora James as a sustainably focused, Black woman immigrant designer who went from starting her dream at Brother Vellies at a flea market in Brooklyn to winning the CFDA against all odds - and then work together to kick open the doors at the Met."

That was previously recognized that as commercialism or, alternatively, drawing attention to oneself in order to draw attention to oneself.  A mere ten days later, as the House of Representatives voted to approve an additional one billion dollars in new funding for the multi-tiered, air defense Iron Dome system, Ocasio-Cortez

a member of the liberal group known as the Squad, was one of two members who voted “present” as the measure to help Israel replace missile interceptors overwhelmingly passed the House on Thursday on a vote of 420 to 9. She was seen weeping on the House floor after she switched her vote from “no” to “present.”

In a letter sent the next day to her constituents, the congresswoman complained of "a lack of substantive discussion on this matter" and maintained "the process of bringing it to the House floor was deeply unjust." She claimed it

fueled the discussion to devolve to a point where it became clear that this vote would risk a severe devolution of the good faith community fabric that allows us to responsibly join in a struggle for human rights and dignity everywhere - from Palestine to The Bronx and Queens (and) I wept at the complete lack of care for the human beings that are impacted by these decisions,

The process, known as "suspension of the rules," created "panic and horror" and damaged human rights and dignity everywhere, from Palestine to The Bronx and Queens. But Ocasio-Cortez couldn't bring herself to vote against the measure. She opted for "present.."

It is unclear why Ocasio-Cortez did not vote against a bill she believed inimical to much of what she believes in.  However, she was captured by C-Span cameras speaking to an obviously engaged, arguably agitated, Speaker Nancy Pelosi before changing her vote from "no" to "present." They probably were not arguing over whether the NY Giants' quarterback Daniel Jones is better than the 49ers' Jimmy Garoppolo.

We do know, however, that the congresswoman successfully strove to be the center of attention at a gala to which she was not even invited. Soon afterward, she was shown crying about a bill she didn't vote either for or against. It's the sort of thing she does.

When John Lewis first campaigned for a seat in the House from Georgia, he described himself as "a workhorse (and) not a show horse," a "tugboat and not a showboat." Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: you're no John Lewis.

 

 

Share |

Joe Biden's Ally

To turn John Lennon's lyrics on their head, "he was a candidate in a million, my friend. She should have known he would not win in the end."

In a brilliant article, Shant Mesrobian reminds us

The problem with this strategy was never clearer than when Ocasio-Cortez, who by all accounts was Sanders’s most famous and influential surrogate, split with his campaign for trumpeting an endorsement it received from the mega-popular podcaster Joe Rogan. In any normal circumstances, that sort of mainstream, pop culture endorsement would be considered nothing short of heaven-sent for a political campaign. With one of the most influential media platforms in the country and a devoted following whose size rivals that of cable news networks, the impact of a Rogan endorsement is difficult to overstate.

But within the rarefied confines of the intersectional Left, Rogan had long been designated as a “problematic” figure for hosting guests whose views on social and cultural issues have at one time or another run afoul of woke pieties. Faced with choosing between the first genuinely left-wing contender for the White House in generations—someone who had devoted his life to economic and social justice—and her status and celebrity among social justice activists, Ocasio-Cortez chose the latter. As a disciplinary action for the Rogan endorsement, Ocasio-Cortez pulled back from her surrogate role, declining to stump for Sanders or appear at any more events during the crucial early-state period of campaigning.

According to a Quinnipiac poll released on October 14, 2019, 30% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents supported Elizabeth Warren, 27% backed Joe Biden, and 11% were behind Bernie Sanders.  Sanders' support rose steadily after his campaign revealed on October 9 that he had a heart attack and Ocasio-Cortez endorsed him fifteen days later- two days after CNN declared Warren the front-runner. By late November Biden reportedly had slipped to 28% and Warren to 14%, with Sanders up to17%, also among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. 

A few months later, Sanders and Buttigieg were reported to have roughly tied in Iowa but the Vermont senator emerged the victor in both New Hampshire and Nevada. He was likely to lose a primary three days later, probably narrowly, when Representative Jim Clyburn endorsed Biden and the former vice-president won overwhelmingly in South Carolina.

Recognizing that the race was very likely down to two candidates- Biden and Sanders- the Democratic Party establishment coalesced around the one remaining candidate not hostile to that establishment. Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar dropped out and endorsed Biden after former President Obama pushed one or both to recognize that their candidacy (like that of Warren) was all but over.

On Super Tuesday, Biden bulldozed Sanders. Warren soon dropped out, and it was Sanders vs. Biden, and it was no contest on Super Tuesday for Democratic primary voters, who decided that a vote for a candidate officially an Independent was a bridge too far.

As Ocasio-Cortez realized, Senator Sanders- with a large base and avid following- had an excellent shot with several candidates in the race.  She probably understood further that the Senator's chances would go down dramatically if he faced off with another candidate one-on-one. What she- presumably- did not expect was that the race would narrow down, relatively early, to two candidates. (Neither did I.)

That was the political death knell of Bernie Sanders.

It also was the death knell, short-term, of progressives in the Party. Ocasio-Cortez had faced the choice of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, and chose unwisely. She chose the candidate who unfortunately had earned the enmity of a sizeable portion of mainstream and institutional Democrats and thus could not carry the day when voters were left with the choice between him and an uninspiring, acceptable Democrat such as Joe Biden.

Her endorsement of Sanders had galvanized the latter's support and was critical in lifting him to victory in at least two, probably three, of the first three states. And then, according to Mesrobian, Ocasio-Cortez deserted him.

It's unlikely the congresswoman would have done that to Warren, had she endorsed her, because Warren simply would not have gotten the endorsement of Rogan. Warren clearly did not have the depth of support among primary voters as did Sanders. However, the breadth of her support was much greater and would have presented a far greater threat to the moderate Biden.

At first glance, Ocasio-Cortez is a loser for having backed the wrong progressive horse. However, her calculation may have included another factor- that if Elizabeth Warren had been nominated and elected, the congresswoman would not have been nearly the most powerful woman in the Democratic Party. Similar to the woman in the Lennon composition, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (her principles pushed aside) may prove to be a winner in the end.

 

Share |