From The Ethics Alarms Archives: “Cool It”

Ruined Lincoln momument

As I promised as a follow-up to the linked post from Frontline, here, from the Ethics Alarms archives, is a post I wrote on March, 23, 2010. It had just two comments, but then fewer than 200 people have ever read it, according to my blog’s statistics. I guess that means it’s all my fault: if I had just been prominent and successful enough to justify anyone paying attention to what I wrote, maybe the last decade’s rot could have been averted.

I guess we’ll never know.


At least the old post can serve a purpose now, as perspective, or perhaps to remind us that we really have no excuse if our marvelous experiment is brought down by hate and dead ethics alarms.

It was all there to see long ago, and there was plenty of time to stop it. All it took was leadership.



To listen to the conservative talk radio circuit and read the Right’s wing of the blogosphere, one would think that the United States is in the midst of a coup right out of “Seven Days in May,” or a foreign take-over like the one portrayed in “Red Dawn,” or even an alien infestation by disguised lizards, as in the sci-fi mini-series “V.” Hysteria is everywhere. Dark threats of revolution are not being whispered, but shouted. “I really think civil war is inevitable,” one blogger wrote yesterday….

Cool the rhetoric, guys. This is irresponsible, and completely unwarranted. It is also dangerous, because it takes what is at its core a principled disagreement about national policies and recasts it as a sinister plot. If Republicans and conservatives really think this is the way to regain power, they are both wrong and deranged. This is destroying the country to save it.

I know, I know. The Angry Left paved the way for this kind of toxic distrust. For eight years it shouted that the Bush administration was some kind of evil empire run by evil geniuses (but stupid evil geniuses) that gleefully stole two elections, engineered a fake terrorist attack to take away our rights and a fake war to enrich their oil baron pals, and intentionally let New Orleans suffer because, you know, they all hated black people.

Writing about this in 2006 [on the Ethics Scoreboard], I said…

“There are many Americans who now believe all of these things, and many more who believe at least one of them. …Fanned by intemperate bloggers, abetted by an irresponsible and slovenly news media and given what passes for credibility in our celebrity-worshiping culture by celebrity loud-mouths (“I hate the President!” screams Rosanne Barr to a cheering crowd on her current HBO special), the tenor of public opposition to the Bush Administration is hateful rather than critical. There is less trust in the national government than at any time since Watergate.

…The Democrats have now spent six years chipping away at the public’s respect and trust of their elected government and its institutions. It has done this not simply by challenging the policies, performance and governing philosophy of the party in power, as a responsible opposing party should and must do, but by exploiting rumor, innuendo, class and race divisions and ignorance to plant doubts about the Bush administration’s motives, dedication to the public welfare and commitment to democracy…This unconscionable picking at the fabric of the public’s faith in our system of government was successful at eroding support for the Bush Administration and Republican Party, but with disastrous consequences…

Many Democrats have pointedly used the old ironic description of the U.S. policy in Vietnam to describe the war in Iraq: “Destroy the country in order to save it.” If the nation the Republicans are willing to “destroy in order to save” is Iraq, the country the Democrats have risked destroying by planting and cultivating the contagions of suspicion and cynicism is the United States of America. One certain benefit of the Democrats gaining power will be that the party will have to begin building faith in our system of government rather than tearing it down.”

Barack Obama promised to rebuild that faith, but it has continued to crumble, aided by recklessly arrogant politics practiced by the empowered Democrats and their adoption, predictably, of the kind of corruption that the Republican wallowed in during their time in the sun. It is not too late, but conservatives and Republicans must realize, as the Democrats did not during the Bush years, that picking at the fabric of democracy and exhausting our nation’s spirit by demonizing fellow Americans is destructive and foolhardy. They will prove themselves unworthy of the power they attain by their method of attaining it, and will find themselves in charge of an ungovernable country.

Stop the fear-mongering, name-calling, race-baiting and personal epithets. Condemn the intemperate and uncivil. Show respect for the President, and for your colleagues. Have some humility. Work to bring the country together, not tear it apart.

Cool it. You’ll regret it if you don’t.

Cool it.

33 thoughts on “From The Ethics Alarms Archives: “Cool It”

  1. Sorry, Jack, but I will not “cool it” nor will I encourage others to do so. In Virgil’s Aeneid, as Troy falls, Priam has armed himself and is about to mingle with the combatants, rather than take refuge as a supplicant at the altar of Jupiter. As he debates, his youngest son, Polites, rushes in pursued by Pyrrhus, son of Achilles, and falls dead before him. Priam hurls his spear at Pyrrhus, achieving nothing. Pyrrhus sneers “non tali auxilio nic defensoribus estus tempus eget,” not such aid nor such defenders does the time require, before plunging his sword into Priam.

    We tried taking the high road, and what the hell has it bought us? The other side has proven that they are willing to use every dirty trick and brutal tactic in the book and more than a few that are not in the book to get power, keep it, and consolidate their grasp on it.

    The fact is that they want us gone. They want the food and energy producing areas of this country to continue to produce, continue to pay their taxes, and shut the fuck up when it comes to making policy. They want to put us conservatives in the same place that the Reds in Soviet Russia put what was left of the Whites. Judging from what went on this summer, they are more than willing to use violence to do it.

    As I have often said, bullies hate it, probably more than anything else, when their own tactics are used against them. The key now, assuming that all these lawsuits regarding this past election come to nothing, as they most likely will, is to hold the Senate and make certain that the other side is not allowed to do anything too crazy. It is very likely that the other side will find itself fracturing, since evidence is emerging of the establishment Democratic party double crossing the far left and shutting people like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders out of this administration. As the Democratic party did with the far out peace activists like Cindy Sheehan after 2006 so shall they do with the far left now. They don’t need them anymore and they know that a lot of their ideas are ridiculous. However, they sounded good and they were good for whipping up a lot of passion. However, that has done its work now. The key for us is to stay united long enough to also take back the house in 2022 which I think is fairly likely since the Democratic party is hanging on by the thinnest of threads and the president’s party traditionally does poorly in his first midterm election. Then the key is to dig into Biden’s wrongdoing abroad and produce a damaging report that the mainstream media will ignore at their peril. After that, if we have enough evidence he should also be impeached to send a clear message to the Democrats that you fucked with us and now we’re fucking with you.

    I don’t know about a civil war, but as I said, we may be headed for our own version of the Troubles. No matter what you may think about which side was right or wrong, for at least a period of time the IRA was the only active paramilitary force on either side. Eventually, the Protestants in northern Ireland got tired of being abused and targeted while trying to rely purely on the legitimate authorities for protection, and they started to form their own paramilitaries like the Ulster Defense League and the Ulster Volunteer Force. That leveled the playing field a little, and cost the IRA some support among the ordinary people who knew damn well that now if the IRA decided to randomly shoot Alan or Ian as he left the pub, within 24 hours the black car with the tinted windows would come prowling around to grab Sean or Patrick and take him on the kind of ride that ends up face down by the side of the road with a bullet in his head.

    The time has come to make the targeted areas for the liberals separate from them and unhealthy for them. That college professor can’t write yet more inflammatory articles against the white race if his car is stopped in the countryside and he is beaten to death. That organizer of the group that supposedly doesn’t exist can’t organize boo if he is shot dead while getting gas. That guy who gets up there in the dashiki and kufi to whip up yet another riot can’t whip up anything if while he’s at the African market somebody comes up to him to remark on how they admire him, and plunges a knife into his gut.

    For 4 years we had to hear about the resistance, now let’s see how the resistance feels when they’re the ones getting resisted against, by any and all tactics necessary.

    Keep calm and Carry on? No dice, it’s time to raise hell.

    • Now, you did notice that the post is ten years old, and was posted as a point of perspective, right?

      So if in 1861 I re-posted my 1851 blog post arguing that it was essential that the North and South work out a new compromise in which the South would agree to a timetable to eliminate slavery, you’d write me a comment saying, “We’re at war! It’s too late for compromise!”?

      • I was aware of that. I thought that toward the end you were saying it was time to cool it again, and I’m just not doing it.

    • Nice diatribe you got there, Steve. How many do you think you’ll have to kill before the others you oppose will start seeing things your way? And what will you become in the process?

      • I don’t know. We had to kill 24,000 Brits before they would give us our independence. 300,000 on each side had to die before the South finally was beaten into submission. The Anglo-Irish War cost 741 and the Troubles 5,200 before things stabilized in Ireland. Irgun had to kill 141 Brits before they realized it was time to let Israel have their own nation.

        So how many masked antifa thugs will we have to kill before they go running home to mom’s basement? Probably not many, since I don’t think we killed any yet. They might rethink things when they start seeing their people lying dead in the street or get their heads opened up with bats. How many BLM bullies will we have to take out before they stop their harassment and destruction? That might take a few more, since they are obviously more inclined towards violence. That said, if the thugs in the black berets want to go to urban war, let’s match them with our own paramilitaries in khaki, and get ready to rumble.

        Also key to victory is taking out the other side’s leadership. As ugly as the Armenian genocide was, the early part of it is a pretty good template for breaking a good part of the resistance before it can start. The Turks started arresting and disappearing Armenian clergy, officeholders, writers, scholars, anyone who could be influential. The Soviets also provided a pretty good template in the Katyn Forest. They made damn sure there would not be any Polish leaders to stand in the way of Soviet domination of Poland when the war was over.

        We are dealing with a lot bigger numbers here, so it might take more time, and it’s also a lot more spread out. However, when enough leftist leaders get pushed out windows, killed in “auto accidents,” or murdered in “robberies gone bad,” I think they will start to get the point.

  2. I think it was already too late.

    I was a liberal in 2008, and spent the Bush years buying what the left was selling. But between 2008 and 2010, the left changed. That’s when cancel culture and SJWs started to infest the academia-adjacent industries like publishing. I remember watching RaceFail ’09 happen in the Science Fiction community (Google it if you want to see the start of this mess) and thinking “…this is really weird. These people are anti-free speech. These are not people I want to be aligned with.” That’s when I started to shift towards libertarianism.

    These people were already there by then, and I don’t think Obama or the media could control them. They were a cancer, and their attack of labeling people as racist/sexist/misogynist/whatever and guilt by association was impossible to counter unless you were willing to accept the label. As soon as they infiltrated a space, everyone fell in line except those comfortable being called racist, whether out of anger or contrarian nature. But then, everyone is okay with attacking/banning/silencing racists, right?

    Your post was written when the cancer hadn’t hit the mainstream, but it was a matter of time. If anything, the mistake was that it took too long for the mainstream right to see what was happening and realize that this was war. Too many of them let the Tea Party be brushed aside. Too many supported Romney. Too many still trusted the New York Times and Washington post, and I promise you that journalism was corrupted as fast as the rest of publishing.

    2010 wasn’t the time to cool it. It was the time to scream bloody murder. And they didn’t until 2016.

        • These people were already there by then, and I don’t think Obama or the media could control them.

          I will not go so far as to claim that Obama endorsed this cancel culture. I will the making of leave baseless, evidence-free claims to others.

          Cancel culture has been with us for a really long time. There was a faction of the religious right that practiced cancel culture. a few people may have lost their jobs, local television stations may have dropped TV shows, and bookstores may have dropped certain books.

          The threat of today’s cancel culture is magnified by support from media and academic elites.

          Compounding this is magnifying the methods of cancellation. Jack has written about how WordPress deplatformed the Conservative Treehouse.

          And there has been this recent trend of financial services companies deplatforming people.

          Note that this could not be possible without tacit support from media and academic elites.

          Had a credit card company deplatformed someone due to support for gay rights, or an ISP had deplatformed a gay rights web page, such an action would have near been unanimously condemned. I am old enough to remember, and none of the media elites at the time would have said anything to defend the ethics of deplatforming people for supporting gay rights.

          It is frightening though.

          Had the media and academic elites have gave their tacit support to religious right cancel culture as they do to this new Woke cancel culture, the Handmaid’s Tale would have a much better chance of becoming reality.

  3. The Angry Left paved the way for this kind of toxic distrust. For eight years it shouted that the Bush administration was some kind of evil empire run by evil geniuses (but stupid evil geniuses) that gleefully stole two elections, engineered a fake terrorist attack to take away our rights and a fake war to enrich their oil baron pals, and intentionally let New Orleans suffer because, you know, they all hated black people.

    Stupid then, stupid now.
    Also see: wind, sewing, and whirlwind, reaping.

    Is it too late to reverse? Probably. Do we have to try anyway? Certainly.

  4. I think there is a middle ground. While I tend to agree with Steve that being asked to cool it for the sake of the republic seems only to occur when progressives are being installed as the ruling elite. No one demanded that progressives tune down the rhetoric so you are asking a great deal from only one side.

    We can however demand from them hard evidence to support every one of their propositions as they did to Trump. No longer should we accept claims of disproportionate impact .

    Push voter ID.
    No longer shall we accept the claims that votes are suppressed simply because they say so. These are all unsubstantiated claims without any hard evidence. If they deliver some people help them get ID and render the evidence invalid.

    We should demand that Obama prove his claims that Trump gained votes by convincing white men they are victims. Pure BS from a demagogue. React every time he speaks and give him no quarter and no deference.

    We must push back hard when Obama and others seek to divide Americans. Call it out every time and show the language of division they use.
    Demand that we eliminate all hyphenations such that we are all Americans only.

    Conservatives need to stop allowing the progressives from taking command of the narrative. Fight them not with powder and steel but with effective rhetoric and spines of steel.

    These are some fundamental things that are easy to do and cost nothing

    • Sounds like a reasonable middle ground Chris but “easy to do”?
      Pushing for voter ID may work, as for the rest, how do you propose to accomplish your strategy with proglibocrats in control of the MSM, academia, Hollywood, administrative state, and social media platforms?

      I suspect there are literally millions of citizens who feel the same way that Steve-O does. It is a thing…

      • I propose you fight back against the non profits and go from there. That’s where the illiberal left gets their money. Follow the money folks. It’s that simple.

    • “Fight them not with powder and steel but with effective rhetoric and spines of steel.”
      My sympathies lie with this approach.
      Effective rhetoric is not all that hard. Facts and arguments are readily available, given the sources at our fingertips.
      Spines of steel, aye, there’s the rub. Jack held back recently, probably out of a desire/need to preserve a neighborly relationship. I have held back most of the time from using effective rhetoric on a sister-in-law who is severely Trump deranged because she is a close relative and because my wife often agrees with her. Likewise, I have mostly ignored the antics of a couple of my offspring, wearing a ‘pussy hat, demonstrating for BLM, expressing solidarity with the ‘resistance, spewing Trump hatred,, and so on.
      So, how you apply that spine of steel and use effective rhetoric without alienating those near and dear is a problem I have not solved. I believe Chris stated the best strategy; I welcome suggestions for tactics.

      • I recognize that a spine of steel will impose a cost. Keep this in mind alienation is a two way street. If those near and dear are unwilling to meet you half way they are the ones willing to sacrifice the relationship. Acquiescing to them reinforces the belief within them that they need never to give an inch. That is what gives them the power.
        We don’t have to be violent just steadfast. There is no reason that we have to play their game of accusing us and forcing us to defend. Make them defend their claims and if they are made in a public manner take them to court.

    • Chris, perhaps the best advice I’ve read for a while.

      Looking at what has been happening in Pennsylvania and Georgia and Michigan and considering what some of the various alternatives might be is quite frankly terrifying for our country and civilization.

      While we may have lost an election, that doesn’t mean all is lost, unless we give up. We have to avoid the councils of despair and work to get our points across.

      I totally agree on your approach to voter ID — it’s a winning and a popular position as most of the country agrees with the concept. I get really, really tired of the phrase ‘without evidence’ used only to refer to Republicans.
      We should be asserting something like ‘Democrats in the legislature claimed, without evidence, that voter ID would suppress minority voting.’

      The Democrats have shown the way to push back against bad executive orders — get a federal judge to issue a nationwide restraining order or injunction to block them. With all the judges Trump has appointed, there ought to be a decent number willing to do so — sauce for the goose, meet Mr. Gander.

      Don’t you think that for too long Democrats have considered TRO’s their private property?

      • Who says we lost legitimately? Why should we accept all losses as legitimate while the other side accepts none as legitimate?

        • Because we’re supposed to be the good guys, right? We have the intellectual and moral capacity to understand that you don’t win them all.

          Democrats deluding themselves into thinking that their down ballot results were a good thing — works for me.

        • Steve
          I don’t believe for a minute that Biden won in a fairly run election. Far too many questionable events before and after the election makes the preponderence of evidence far more likely to reflect rigging.

          My approach is a get in their face every time they cry racism or bigotry. Make them prove a police officer racially profiled a specific person. Make them prove racial animus was a predicate to a police shooting of a suspect. Make them prove using real people discrimination. Deny them the ability to use statistics to argue disproportionate impact. The courts ruling against Trump claimed statistical anomalies are not evidence so let us rub their noses in those decisions when they try disproportionate impact.

          Use the very debate tactics they wield against their opposition.

    • 10 years ago I would have agreed with you, but when no one will listen anymore it is time to start talking with powder and bullets. If they will deny you the soapbox, the jury box, and the ballot box, then it’s time to turn to the cartridge box.

    • Why stop with demanding evidence about disproportionate impact? Why not add ‘diversity is our strength’ and the whole diversity narrative? What about when they say the ‘meritocracy is racist” and needs to be eliminated? What about ‘cops are racist’ or ‘racial profiling is rampant’? What about affirmative action? What about permanent welfare? What about the abuse of low-skills immigration? What about moderate-skills immigration?

      Why don’t we question all the narratives we are told to accept despite the fact that they don’t hold up under scrutiny? I know many people flinched when they read the list above. I know the first reaction was ‘racist!’. If that was you, check your Kool-aid consumption. When the things above are studied, the narrative tends to fall apart. The world is how it is. It doesn’t matter how you FEEL it should be or how you FEEL it should work. You have to work with reality and yes, that is another concept that is under attack.

  5. An update on the U.S. House of Representatives. It appears that all but one of the races has been called at this point. There is one race in Louisiana going to a run-off between two Republicans,

    There is one Democratic seat in New York that is in court right now. That one appears to be extremely close (maybe 100 votes) and the judge has ordered counties not to certify their results until he allows it. Evidently there have been a number of instances of — oh, probably incompetence — and there are ballots that no one is sure whether they’ve been counted or disallowed (or both). So I guess we’re going to extra innings on that race.

    But, without the NY race, the Democrats have 222 seats, Republicans 212. So the Democrats are going to end up with a 11 or 9 vote majority. Teensy weensy majority. If there are actually any Blue Dog Democrats left with the spine to stand up to Pelosi, they could have a huge influence next year.

    One other curious thing. The last Congress ended up with 232 Dems, 197 Republicans and 1 Libertarian. Looking on Real Clear Politics, it shows Dems 222 seats (down 10), Republicans 212 (up 11). The numbers don’t jibe — it is a zero sum game, and a gain for one party has to be a loss for the other. By my count, from the 2018 election the Democrats are down 12 or 13 (from 235) and the Republicans up 13 or 14 (from 199). The Libertarians lost their one seat. It’s the second consecutive time that the party winning the presidential race has lost seats in the House.

    One other note: Just for fun, I looked at delegations for the next Congress. Republicans will now have a majority in 27 states (up from 26), Democrats in 20 (down from 22), and 3 delegations are evenly split (up from 2). I don’t think that actually matters, except if a presidential election is thrown into the House, but interesting nonetheless.

  6. This re-post is an excellent prompt to reflect upon the changes of the last ten years. Back then, I was just starting to reevaluate why I had been a democrat. Though I had always been a fiscal conservative and pro-life, all my votes usually went to democratic candidates.

    It was the Left itself that began to change my mind. In 2009 Obama received a Nobel Peace prize while he was drone bombing (brown skinned) people in the Middle East. Being anti-war and anti-racist, I couldn’t see how he remotely deserved such an accolade. Worse, my progressive friends not only didn’t care about his war mongering, they couldn’t get why I spoke out against his behavior. It was at that time I began to experience “cancellation.”

    Back then I was on Facebook and expressed my displeasure with Obama. Suddenly I was called (by my white friends especially) a “wing-nut republican” and told that I shouldn’t criticize him after all he had done for “my people.”

    When I questioned green-tech and the ways some if it was actually worse for the environment, I was told to not to say anything because it would “muddy” the discussion.

    When I expressed my concerns over Obama’s anti-marriage equality stance, I was told to let it go and wait for “some day.” This came from my straight friends who married without hesitation and didn’t have to file taxes three times each year, including one tax form filed “as-if” we were actually married.

    It took hearing my anti-war friends and the anti-war politicians I had voted for, not care about expanded drone bombing. It took seeing the very things we all had claimed we despised about Bush, now being readily accepted by Obama’s administration. It took realizing that these people who said they honored my “struggle” as a “queer woman of color” not being willing to listen to me. Even though I had been perfectly consistent about all the things the Left at that time said they cared about, my voice didn’t matter anymore because I didn’t go along.

    Then our insurance costs went up 6000% thanks to Obamacare and having “Cadillac insurance” as union members. One of us got sick and that was it. No vacations and a lot of financial struggle that took years to rectify.

    In 2010 my wife and I had had it. We unregistered as Democrats and let the friends who no longer wanted to be in our lives (over politics only) go.

    This year, more minorities voted for Trump than I suspect the Left expected. Racial minorities and gays voted for a republican in higher numbers than the previous election in spite of democrat rhetoric that Trump hated them. Why?

    Because you can’t fool all the people all the time. Many of us had been cancelled or disrespected or ignored by leftists for one reason – we didn’t go along. We put our family, livelihoods, and country first. And that meant we not only had to vote to protect these things, we also had to deal with the fallout of going against the grain of a party that said it was for us, when clearly, at this point, it is for elites with severe superiority complexes.

    A fight may come, which may include violence. But before that needs to be a serious option, it is wise to understand the Left itself is doing a great job of turning the very people they claim to support, away. We will, I believe, see more minorities walk away and think for themselves because progressive tactics are not conducive to those who value results over utopian rhetoric.

    Blind partisanship to Republicans is not the answer either. Instead we all have the work of discernment to do, no matter who is talking. Standing up for our rights and against tyranny means little moments of reflection. It also means being willing to do what “they won’t” right now.

    This means listening fully. Picking battles. Handling conflict with grace (or at least trying to). Not disavowing loved ones for their sometimes erroneous beliefs. And not aquiescing to bullies.

    Though I recently moved to a more conservative area, I have made a fair amount of new progressive friends. The bias I encountered from them towards conservatives, has been an opportunity to have patience and love them. I refuse to treat them or any of my progressive friends/family with disrespect and outright dismissal.

    From this I’ve seen some of their hearts soften towards those they are blindly against. And when that happens, true unity and joy abound. This gives me cautious hope.

    • Mrs. Q., I think you and I are on the same page with regard to a lot of the things you mentioned. About four or five years ago here I know I mentioned several times that the left and the Democratic party, which, although close, are not always one and the same thing, don’t really care all that much about the minorities and other groups that they claim to care so much about. They also tend to claim to care about them so much more when they are out of power. That’s because in the end, their primary goal is getting power and keeping it, and to them, LGBTQ people and people of color are just handy pawns to use toward that primary goal.

      To those who really grasp the primary goal, idealists like Bernie Sanders are frankly not much more than useful idiots. They listen to him spout off, they give him a forum to spout off, they hope he brings people in, but in the end, they shafted him twice when it came to actually getting to the top as a leader. The same is also true of true believers in other causes. As I am sure you remember, Obama was against gay marriage when he was first elected. His position only “evolved” when it appeared to be beneficial to him for it to evolve. He did not a damn thing to pursue the goal of extending marriage to gay couples, but when it came, mostly because of Justice Kennedy, suddenly he lit up the White House in rainbow colors like he had been pushing this goal for a very long time. He hadn’t, but it was useful to pretend he had.

      Now let’s talk war and conflict. The left was out in force, sometimes in huge force, against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq during the administration of Bush the younger. Obama got into office, and spent his entire administration at war in Afghanistan and taking only a two-year hiatus in Iraq, where he only withdrew in the hopes it would help his re-election effort in 2012 (let’s also not forget the conflict he initiated in Libya), but, somehow all the antiwar groups like ANSWER and World Can’t Wait either disappeared or lost their funding, and focus figures such as Cindy Sheehan disappeared. They were neither needed nor wanted while the Democrats held the White House. In fact, the Democratic party would have preferred they disappear, because they didn’t want to deal with protests and troublemakers.

      The thing is, this wasn’t the first time. The left had also been out in force against the First Gulf War under Bush the Elder. However, they had fallen silent when Bill Clinton sent American forces into Haiti and into the Balkans. The Democratic party was not interested in principal peaceful people getting in the way of whatever it deemed necessary, and, like good little pawns, they went back in the box.

      The whole Occupy movement came, fizzled, and disappeared, all on Obama’s watch, and all without doing much. Again, the Democratic party didn’t want any part of them, because all they were doing was mucking up their important and significant work.

      I guarantee you, if there is more anti-police violence during the Biden administration, it will be swept under the rug by the media. If there is another person of color who dies either at the hands of or in the custody of police during the Biden administration, somehow the protests and craziness will not erupt again at the same level. If Biden decides that it is necessary for the United States to intervene somewhere in the world, you will not see mass peace marches or protests. The funding for these organizations will have dried up and the texts and emails that go out to tell huge numbers of people to make their way somewhere to create a mob will stop going out.

      The Democratic party leaders are not interested in peace, they are not interested in racial equality, they are not interested in gender equity, they are not interested in equal rights for all. The myth that every Democratic politician from the least significant councilman in a small village in Vermont all the way up to the Clinton family is a warrior for the oppressed is just that, a myth. The Democratic party is just a party interested in perpetuating itself and lining the pockets of its elite. They just figured out that using the allegedly oppressed as pawns and holding the other side to high standards of behavior while holding themselves to no standards of behavior was the way to get that power.

      I applaud you for walking away. Unfortunately, too many people either don’t see this or choose not to see it.

  7. Michael Tracey made a similar point nearly four years ago regarding the resistance.

    View at

    His concern at the time was that Trump’s opponents would reflexively oppose what Trump says or does at the expense of the public policy goals on which they campaigned.

    But Tracey could not have imagined that this Resistance would go all in on the Russian collusion hoax, aided and abetted by the media as well as elements of the law enforcement and intelligence communities.

    Nor could he have imagined that the Resistance, amplified by the network broadcast and print media, would push the “Russia hacked the election meme”, which led to eighty percent of Democratic voters believing that Russia altered the vote totals in 2016.

    Nor could he have imagined that intelligence and law enforcement would sabotage the peaceful transition- a completely unprecedented act.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.