I Think I Recall We All Enjoy Samantha Bee’s Talent-

laughter brings endorphins. She blends humor and current events the same as she’s always done, excellently! (And just look at that salad- )

Hold On, Hold On by Samantha Bee

Marathon conditioning with humor, salads, and Neko Case Read on Substack

Happy New Year, One 👏 Week 👏 Into 👏 The 👏 Trump 👏Administration 👏 And 👏 I 👏 Am 👏 Trying 👏 So 👏 Hard 👏 Not 👏 To 👏 Lose 👏 My 👏 Cool.

Here is the Serenity Prayer, as a quick refresh.

Wait, that’s the wrong one.

Anyway, you get the picture.

Oh believe me I could easily spend every moment of every day flaming the Trump administration for every single catastrophe they lob into the public sphere like tossing a grenade into a cellar full of Bubble Guppies.

Just not sure I’m ready for it, and it’s kind of twisting me up inside a bit.

Anyway, gonna go liquidate all my assets and I guess pour it into $Melania crypto tokens? Do I have this right? We just grift in full view now and that is just what we do? Instagram and Meta are blocking people’s access to healthcare information and it is NBD. This diva fired this woman DURING THE INAUGURAL BALL and a Fox News host runs the DOD now.

I guess…pace yourself? Don’t blow all your outrage in the first week out of…hundreds of weeks?

We must find humor where we can.

I, for example, was talking to my dad the other day about his arthritic hip, and I was like “what about just an aspirin every morning and some stretching and activity?” And he was like “Don’t be ridiculous, I think I’m going to go down a more natural path?”

Meaning?

“My friend has a naturopath and he got a prescription and he is going to give some of the pills to me.” (Which is not, to my understanding, naturopathy? In any case.)

“Well, what is in the pills? Are they unregulated supplements?”

“WHY ARE YOU SUCH A SKEPTIC.”

“I just don’t think it’s advisable to take other people’s medicati–”

*sound of father struggling with reading glasses and fiddling with another man’s bottle of pills*

“Here you go smart guy. It’s something called mi-…miso—…misoprostol??”

Yes, that is correct. MISOPROSTOL.

One man gave another man some Misoprostol, which can be used for ulcers I think, but is also used to procure a medication abortion.

My dad was like “do NOT write about this” and I said “unfortunately that is not possible.”

The elders are giving each other abortion pills for their hip pain. Everything is upside down. GIVE THEM TO ME, we need to stockpile those.

Speaking of open access to abortion pills for all – and not just my Dad, I must plug my most recent Choice Words with Amanda Skinner, who is the President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southern New England. We have a fascinating conversation about the many misconceptions surrounding Planned Parenthood’s mission and the breadth of healthcare services they actually provide for a variety of patients. Please check it out wherever get your podcasts.

We must nourish our bodies. For example I made Andy Baraghani’s citrus and caramelized date salad from his amazing book, and I swear to God I think about it ten times a day. I gave myself so many high fives for this dish even though I didn’t invent it, and merely followed his highly entertaining instructions. Uncrate the sun!

And we must nourish our minds, or at least distract them a bit.

For example–I am hosting a book event for Neko Case tonight in New York City and friends, I am here to tell you that if you read ONE book in the next ten years, please make it this one. I feel blessed that she asked me to participate in this event, and tbh I pray that I can get through it without crying that she is also writing the music for the Broadway adaptation of Thelma and Louise. Nope. Already misting over like a g-d baby.

I also highly recommend the distraction of rewatching Downton Abbey, which I am embarrassed to tell you I thought was DownTOWN Abbey for three FULL ASS seasons, since I didn’t watch it and never listened to anybody talk about it ever.

Anyway now I’m watching it, and it’s great of course–and gives me that uncomfortable squirmy feeling I used to get as a child from all the awkward misapprehensions of Three’s Company.

Somehow in a time of turmoil, watching people brutally misunderstand each other and demonstrate extreme emotional constipation is just the ticket to relax and unwind my brain! Agonizing!

And something I would like to remind everybody, as we venture forth into semi-uncharted waters: cleanse yourself of social media as much as you are able.

I have put myself on a strict diet of zero brain rot social media time. Sure, I miss all the videos of cats launching themselves into Christmas trees, but this is a price I am willing to pay.

Only for business, only when I have something to say, only when necessary. Watching all of those tech bro Dobby’s on the dais boot licking Trump was brain Ozempic for me; I lost my appetite to carry their water and give them my eyeballs and personal data.

Happy to keep the lights on for the socials and post occasionally on a few platforms, but a better use of all those precious brain cells is to put them toward Neko Case’s new book and rest up for the marathon we are already running.

Love to all.

Xo, Sam

(snip)

Peace & Justice History for 1/27

https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistoryjanuary.htm#january27

Letters From An American

January 26, 2025 by Heather Cox Richardson Read on Substack

On January 27, 1838, Abraham Lincoln rose before the Young Men’s Lyceum in Springfield, Illinois, to make a speech. Just 28 years old, Lincoln had begun to practice law and had political ambitions. But he was worried that his generation might not preserve the republic that the founders had handed to it for transmission to yet another generation. He took as his topic for that January evening, “The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions.”

Lincoln saw trouble coming, but not from a foreign power, as other countries feared. The destruction of the United States, he warned, could come only from within. “If destruction be our lot,” he said, “we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

The trouble Lincoln perceived stemmed from the growing lawlessness in the country as men ignored the rule of law and acted on their passions, imposing their will on their neighbors through violence. He pointed specifically to two recent events: the 1836 lynching of free Black man Francis McIntosh in St. Louis, Missouri, and the 1837 murder of white abolitionist editor Elijah P. Lovejoy by a proslavery mob in Alton, Illinois.

But the problem of lawlessness was not limited to individual instances, he said. A public practice of ignoring the law eventually broke down all the guardrails designed to protect individuals, while lawbreakers, going unpunished, became convinced they were entitled to act without restraint. “Having ever regarded Government as their deadliest bane,” Lincoln said, “they make a jubilee of the suspension of its operations; and pray for nothing so much as its total annihilation.”

The only way to guard against such destruction, Lincoln said, was to protect the rule of law on which the country was founded. “As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor…. Let reverence for the laws…become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars.”

Lincoln was quick to clarify that he was not saying all laws were good. Indeed, he said, bad laws should be challenged and repealed. But the underlying structure of the rule of law, based in the Constitution, could not be abandoned without losing democracy.

Lincoln didn’t stop there. He warned that the very success of the American republic threatened its continuation. “[M]en of ambition and talents” could no longer make their name by building the nation—that glory had already been won. Their ambition could not be served simply by preserving what those before them had created, so they would achieve distinction through destruction.

For such a man, Lincoln said, “Distinction will be his paramount object, and although he would as willingly, perhaps more so, acquire it by doing good as harm; yet, that opportunity being past, and nothing left to be done in the way of building up, he would set boldly to the task of pulling down.” With no dangerous foreign power to turn people’s passions against, people would turn from the project of “establishing and maintaining civil and religious liberty” and would instead turn against each other.

Lincoln reminded his audience that the torch of American democracy had been passed to them. The Founders had used their passions to create a system of laws, but the time for passion had passed, lest it tear the nation apart. The next generation must support democracy through “sober reason,” he said. He called for Americans to exercise “general intelligence, sound morality, and in particular, a reverence for the constitution and laws.”

“Upon these let the proud fabric of freedom rest, as the rock of its basis; and as truly as has been said of the only greater institution, ‘the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’”

What became known as the Lyceum Address is one of the earliest speeches of Lincoln’s to have been preserved, and at the time it established him as a rising politician and political thinker. But his recognition, in a time of religious fervor and moral crusades, that the law must prevail over individual passions reverberates far beyond the specific crises of the 1830s.

—

Notes:

https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/lyceum.htm

I Know, As To All Of Us Here. From Ben Werdmuller:

In the face of this, who do you want to be?

I was out buying eggs when I saw a video of Elon Musk giving a Hitler salute at the inauguration.

In the movies, this stuff is highlighted and separated: punctuation in itself instead of an event that you see in the background of your everyday life. Hannah Arendt talked about “the banality of evil” in the context of Eichmann, one of the core organizers of the Holocaust, telling prosecutors that he was just doing his job. But banality pervades. Sometimes, you need to buy eggs. And sometimes, when you get back in the car and pick up your phone, you get a notification about the richest man in the world signaling his intentions on the world stage.

There has subsequently been much discussion about whether it really was a Nazi salute. It’s insultingly stupid. Even if he truly didn’t intend to throw three successive Sieg Heils, he certainly knows what one is, and most of us have enough self awareness not to accidentally look like a Nazi on national television. He had to know what he was doing. It was a deliberate Nazi salute. The act itself, and the subsequent denials, serve to normalize fascism; just another banal event for you to scroll past on your phone.

Still, these conversations serve a purpose. It’s worth noticing who wants to downplay the Nazism, which, after all, is not “just” manifested in the world’s richest man doing a Hitler salute on national TV. Make no mistake, Musk’s salute was a clear signal, but it’s far from the only one. It’s part of a broader pattern of normalization, visible in policies and actions designed to dismantle rights and embolden oppression.

Will they also downplay executive orders that repeal important civil rights gains from sixty years ago (as an appellate court simultaneously reinstates a Jim Crow era voter suppression law, with doubtless more to follow), or encouraging employees to inform on their colleagues?

Or decimating rights and protections for transgender people, preparing for mass deportations including by removing protections for schools and churches from raids, pardoning January 6 extremists who vow revenge on their perceived enemies, or deploying the military as internal law enforcement in border states?

Or freezing scientific research at the NIH and thereby putting universities and research organizations at risk, or attempting to end Constitutionally-protected birthright citizenship?

“Optimistic and celebrating,” Mark Zuckerberg said, on the same night that Musk Sieg Heiled the room three times. “I’m not going to agree with him on everything, but I think he will be incredible for the country in many ways,” Sam Altman said. Microsoft put out a statement saying that “the country has a unique opportunity to pursue […] the foundational ideas set for AI policy during President Trump’s first term”.

And those are public figures in technology. My Facebook feed, and likely yours, is loaded with acquaintances and extended family members who welcome the change; one on mine welcomed “the return to logic and reason”. My LinkedIn feed is worse, with many business leaders echoing Zuckerberg’s “optimistic” language, and some calling the Nazi salute into question.

We’ve tumbled into a deep, dark hole, and, as it turns out, many of us are glad to be there.

It’s just not always clear who.

Though dated in some ways, this 1941 Harper’s Magazine article still resonates. The question then was, “Who goes Nazi?” Who is going to be a sympathizer or even a collaborator with a regime that seeks to subjugate, deport, and, as it turned out in the 1940s, kill so many people?

And to be clear, collaboration doesn’t require slapping on an armband and goose-stepping behind a demagogue. Nice people made the best Nazis, as Naomi Shulman wrote eight years ago:

My mother was born in Munich in 1934, and spent her childhood in Nazi Germany surrounded by nice people who refused to make waves. When things got ugly, the people my mother lived alongside chose not to focus on “politics,” instead busying themselves with happier things. They were lovely, kind people who turned their heads as their neighbors were dragged away.

The question now is not a million miles away. Who will support? Who will collaborate? Who will decide that they are “not political” and look away as millions of people are harmed? Who will make excuses for it all? Who secretly welcomes the push for theocracy, for in-groups and out-groups, for “traditional” values that prioritize rigid gender roles, segregation, and oligarchy? Who, in other words, is safe?

Are you “optimistic” about the new regime? Will you be complicit?

When someone needs help — when ICE comes after them, or worse — will you look away, or worse, cheer them on? Or will you be a point of safety for someone who needs it?

And what about when it gets worse? Because, left unchecked, it will.

In the face of rising fascism, what kind of person are you? What kind of person do you want to be?

I’m writing about the intersection of the internet, media, and society. Sign up to my newsletter to receive every post and a weekly digest of the most important stories from around the web.