“The Daily Reid”

Yes, Joy Reid has a Substack, bless her for doing it! Anyway, I’ve been watching/reading coverage of the Met Gala from various POVs. I’ve probably gotten the most substantive coverage from this post, so here it is, plus more generally topical (non-Gala) coverage, from our beloved Joy Reid! -A

The Daily Reid: the resistance is fly and dandy by Joy-Ann Reid

Art and fashion stood its ground at the Met Gala … while the warnings about the technofeudalist autocrats are ringing louder and louder Read on Substack

Unknown (American). [Studio Portrait], 1940s–50s. Gelatin silver print. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Twentieth-Century Photography Fund, 2015 (2015.330) Source: Vogue.

At its best, art is subversive and loud, even when it is silent and mainly visual. Fashion, at its best, is art that’s like that. The Met Gala 2025 was about that life. And while there was some criticism that not enough Black designers got to take part (too much Louis Vuitton, plenty of Sergio but not enough of everyone else… one wonderful exception being Hanifa…) and many of the looks were more elegant than Met Gala over-the-top, the overall impact of the night was deliciously subversive, in just the way art should be. From the Times:

Last October, when the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute announced its next fashion show, “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style,” the political landscape looked very different.

Kamala Harris, the first female vice president and the first Black woman ever to top a major-party ticket, was in the final weeks of her campaign for the White House. The show, the culmination of five years of work by Andrew Bolton, the Costume Institute’s curator in charge, to diversify the department’s holdings and shows in the wake of the racial reckoning brought about by George Floyd’s murder, seemed long overdue.

On Monday, however, when it finally opens to the starry guests at its signature gala, the splashiest party of the year, it will do so in a very different world. One in which the federal government has functionally declared war on diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as programming related to race — especially in cultural institutions.

In February, President Trump seized control of the Kennedy Center, promising to make its programming less “woke.” Then, in late March, he signed an executive order targeting what the administration described as “improper, divisive, or anti-American ideology” at the Smithsonian museums and threatened to withhold funds for exhibits that “divide Americans by race.”

Against that backdrop, the Met’s show, one devoted for the first time entirely to designers of color, which focuses on the way Black men have used fashion as a tool of self-actualization, revolution and subversion throughout American history and the Black diaspora, has taken on an entirely different relevance.

Suddenly the Met, one of the world’s wealthiest and most established museums, has begun to look like the resistance. And the gala, which in recent years has been criticized as a tone-deaf display of privilege and fashion absurdity, is being seen as what Brandice Daniel, the founder of Harlem’s Fashion Row, a platform created to support designers of color, called a display of “allyship.”

Especially because Anna Wintour, the Met Gala’s mastermind, a powerful Democratic fund-raiser and the chief content officer of Condé Nast, said on “The Late Late Show” in 2017 that the one person she would never invite back to the fete was Mr. Trump.

The collision of cultural and current events means the Met is now sitting at the red-hot “center of where fashion meets the political economy,” said Tanisha C. Ford, a history professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center.

“This feels way bigger than just fashion,” said Louis Pisano, a cultural critic and the writer of the newsletter Discoursted. “Putting Black style front and center sends a real message.”

And that it did. That Ms. Wintour and the the organizers didn’t shift course even a little bit, or invite the garish Trump gang or administration or maga people (unless you count Kim Kardashian) was a bold statement in itself. I think seeing J.D. Vance and his complicit wife or garish, lip-plumped Lara Trump on that blue carpet would end the credibility of the Met Gala forever. (Long live the memory of Andre Leon Talley!)

Instead, what we got was a feast of celebration, of classic Black elegance and style, of Black boldness in the face of social, economic and political catastrophe, and just a lot of fun. Made a little video about it, wanna see it? Here it goes!

There were a number of meaningful statements, reflecting the history of Black formality, which was subversive in its own way, in the early 20th century when Black men and women were socially discarded by white society as little more than servants and footstools to white lives. Black people in their church lives and social lives were often really dressy, and that’s a tradition that has lingered, particularly in Southern states, where even a trip to the supermarket or to the polls means getting fully dressed — and formality is seen as a sign of pride and regality, even in the face of discrimination. That’s the piece of Africa that stayed with every enslaved captive.

Not only was the Met Gala a visual blockbuster, it was also a record-setting fundraiser:

Five hundred people RSVP-ed to Monday morning’s media preview for “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style” at the Metropolitan Museum of Art; the majority appeared to show up to tour the show before it bows to the public on Saturday.

Beforehand, attendees got a primer about dandyism, the exhibition’s undercurrent. They also were reminded by the Met’s director and chief executive officer Max Hollein that the museum is “having a little party tonight aka the Met Gala.” And this year’s annual fundraiser for the Costume Institute is a record-breaker at $31 million.

That was “quite a jump” compared to last year’s total of $26 million, Hollein said after the program. As for how that happened in such economically and geopolitically shaky times, he said, “The level of support, enthusiasm and importance of what we do is significant, especially this show, which is not only a celebration of Black designers, but it’s also a statement. It’s an important exhibition about history. That all comes to the fore. That’s what a lot of our supporters felt — that it is meaningful and important.”

Because Black people, and Black Americans in particular, have always been fashion and cultural trendsetters. (I’d note that there is also a long Dandy tradition in my late father’s home country, the Democratic Republic of Congo, where dandyism is a whole thing…

Diasporic Black dandyism mirrors the Congolese sapeur movement—a fashion subculture that emerged in the 1920s when Congolese soldiers returned from World War I with foreign attire. These Congolese dandies, known as sapeurs, often inherit the tradition from parents and community role models. For them, dandyism resembles a religion. They revere style and derive power from being impeccably dressed.

Poverty, unemployment, and avant-garde exploitation from the superpowers of the West, East, and neighbouring nations, including Uganda and Rwanda imprison the Republic of Congo. Despite hardship and grim surroundings, Congolese dandies choose to live joyfully. They dance, celebrate, and express themselves with flair, as captured in Solange’s “Losing You” and Kendrick Lamar and SZA’s “All the Stars.”

Both movements grew out of the 1920s — the age of the Harlem Renaissance, when Black Americans were perfecting a unique post-enslavement culture that drew on the rich heritage of African music, ornamentation, dance and style, coupled with evocative literature — poetry, fiction and nonfiction — that spoke to the ache of being an African trapped in America, yet with little or no memory of where your people originally came from. Your timely reminder that some of us Black Americans are immigrants, but even most of us are immigrants whose people were unwilling workers in the so-called “new world.” Very few Black people in America are here by choice. Instead, it was grace, determination and sheer force of will that built a culture that has come to be globally dominant and largely determinative of what the world considers “American culture.”

Here’s Vogue’s piece on the history of Black Dandyism.

And here’s TheGrio’s take on which stars stole the show at last night’s gala and Kamala Harris’ Met Gala debut.

Great article here on some of the artists who capture the essence of Black Dandyism.

Also peep this article at BET.com on the Black designers who laid the groundwork.

A warning…

I came across this powerful TED Talk by investigative journalist Carole Cadwalladr of the Observer, best known for breaking the story in 2018 that Facebook was allowing a British tech company called Cambridge Analytica to steal millions of users’ data without their consent. Her new warning about the rising tech “broligarchy” that are using their global digital platforms and hijacking our data (including via “doge”) to amass unprecedented political power and dismantle our democracies in the U.S. and abroad and replace them with authoritarian rulers, is chilling. But she also reminds us that we have more power than we think to slow the tech bros down. This Talk recorded April 8th at TED2025 is well worth the 17 minute listen, to receive her bleak but powerful warning:

Set your cookies to “performance only.”

Another relatively long listen: on a very popular episode of Diary of a CEO, tariff expert, investor and bestselling author Morgan Housel explains not just the danger of tariffs, but succinctly lays out why we cannot rebuild the power manufacturing era of post World War II America. The podcast goes on for more than an hour after his excellent explanation but it’s worth diving into the first 20 minutes or so in the link below:

The tariff situation, and the futility of Trump’s “back to manufacturing” dream are important to unpack, because what’s happening beyond our shores ain’t good.

Everybody hates Trumpmerica…

In Europe, consumers are developing an aversion to U.S. products, or at minimum, they’re getting used to ignoring them. From the New York Times:

For motorcycle lovers in Sweden, Harley-Davidson is the hottest brand on the road. Jack Daniels whiskey beckons from the bar at British pubs. In France, Levis jeans are all about chic.

But in the tumult of President Trump’s trade war with Europe, many European consumers are starting to avoid U.S. products and services in what appears to be a decisive and potentially long-term shift away from buying American, according to a new assessment by the European Central Bank.

In April, Mr. Trump imposed a 10 percent blanket tariff on America’s trading partners, and threatened “reciprocal tariffs” on many of those, including the European Union. Companies like Tesla and McDonald’s are seeing customers in Europe put off by “Made in America.”

“The newly imposed U.S. trade tariffs on European products are causing European consumers to think twice about what’s in their shopping cart,” the E.C.B. wrote in a blog post about its research on consumer behavior. “Consumers are very willing to actively move away from U.S. products and services.”

Europeans had already begun testing grass-roots boycotts on American products, including Heinz ketchup and Lay’s potato chips, shortly after Mr. Trump took office. His threats to take over Greenland, part of Denmark, energized Danes to organize no-buy campaigns on Facebook. Tesla owners in Sweden slapped “shame” bumper stickers on their cars to distance themselves from Elon Musk, the Tesla chief executive who is one of Mr. Trump’s top advisers.

But Europeans’ anguish over Mr. Trump’s treatment of America’s longtime allies has hardened as he has moved to rewire world trade with steep global tariffs, the central bank found. …

… And even if a trade deal is reached, Europe’s newfound wariness of its longtime ally will not easily be unwound. The E.C.B. study found that even if a mere 5 percent tax were placed on American products sold in Europe, Europeans would still be inclined to shun them.

What is new, the central bank said, is a “preference” among European consumers “to move away from U.S. products and brands altogether,” no matter what the cost. That was the case even for households that could bear the brunt of higher prices.

“Even though they could afford more expensive U.S. products and services, they consciously choose alternatives,” the bank said. “This suggests that consumers’ reactions may not just be a temporary response to tariff increases, but instead signal a possible long-term structural shift in consumer preferences away from U.S. products and brands.”

In Germany and Italy, developers have created apps that scan grocery and clothing items for people who want to make sure they are not buying American. The top app, BrandSnap, even suggests European alternatives.

On a French-run “Boycott USA!” Facebook channel with 31,000 members, people boast about buying Adidas, a German brand, over Nike and New Balance, and post stories about avoiding travel to the United States.

In a Danish Facebook group with 95,000 members, people try to help each other figure out if products like Gillette Mach 3 razor blades or Schweppes soda are from the United States. One run from Sweden promotes alternatives to Airbnb and is calling for a European boycott on Meta platforms for a week in May.

Europeans have also posted online to say they have begun canceling subscriptions to U.S. streaming giants, including Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime Video.

Some consumers who have boycotted Amazon have gone online to lament that delivery from alternate e-commerce platforms in their countries are slower or less reliable, but say that they are staying the course.

Millions of people still buy American goods and services worldwide, but U.S. companies and investors are keeping a close eye on international markets for signs of anti-American sentiment related to Mr. Trump’s policies.

Thanks a lot, Donald.

This as Europe is wooing our fired scientists…

As the Trump administration slashes support to research institutions and threatens to freeze federal funding to universities like Harvard and Columbia, European leaders are offering financial help to U.S.-based researchers and hoping to benefit from what they are calling a “gigantic miscalculation.”

“Nobody could imagine a few years ago that one of the great democracies of the world would eliminate research programs on the pretext that the word ‘diversity’ appeared in its program,” President Emmanuel Macron of France said on Monday.

He was speaking at the Sorbonne University in Paris during an event called Choose Europe for Science that was organized by the French government and the European Union.

It was unthinkable, Mr. Macron said, alluding also to the withdrawal of researchers’ visas in the United States, that a nation whose “economy depends so heavily on free science” would “commit such an error.”

Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, announced an investment of 500 million euros, or $566 million, at the conference to “make Europe a magnet for researchers” over the next two years.

Although that amount is not much compared to the billions in cuts American universities face, it comes on top of the $105 billion international research program called Horizon Europe that supports scientific breakthroughs, like genome sequencing and mRNA vaccines, Ms. Von der Leyen said.

She did not mention the United States by name, but she described a global environment where “fundamental, free and open research is questioned.”

“What a gigantic miscalculation!” she said.

In Europe, there is a widespread feeling that Mr. Trump has abandoned America’s traditional support for liberty, free speech and democracy through his embrace of autocrats and the assault on science and academia. That has created strains but also a sense of opportunity on the continent, where attracting the best scientific minds to vigorous and independent universities is seen as part of a broader campaign to “rearm” Europe as an independent power.

Over the longer term, the European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, plans to double grants for researchers who relocate and to enshrine freedom of scientific research into a law called the European Research Area Act.

“The first priority is to ensure that science in Europe remains open and free. That is our calling card,” Ms. von der Leyen said.

Well it should certainly remain open and free somewhere…

Not invited to the Star Wars party

Another thing about culture — either you’re part of it, or you’re not. And the immigrant-hating Christofascists currently running are government certainly are NOT. They’re not even decent nerds. Item: whoever posted the latest AI Trump cosplay on the official White House social media in order to demonize immigrants (while creating hilarious maga entertainment) whiffed it … badly. Here’s the ridiculous AI image, posted on May 4th, AKA Star Wars Day, when actual franchise fans cry out: “may the Fourth be with you…” as a nod to that famous line about the “force…”

Note the color of the laser. Come on, magas… you’re so close to getting it … and not just the absolute absurdity of presenting your elderly, possibly senile, portly, big-bellied God-king as some kind of roided up demigod whom y’all really seem to have a creepy visual-almost-sexual fantasy life over … or the ginormous eagles hovering over him … The color of the laser … I’m just gonna let y’all figure it out on your own.

You can’t help everybody…

Two From Werd.io: About An EV, And More

The $20,000 American-made electric pickup with no paint, no stereo, and no touchscreen

[Tim Stevens at The Verge]

It’s rare these days that I see a new product and think, this is really cool, but seriously, this is really cool:

“Meet the Slate Truck, a sub-$20,000 (after federal incentives) electric vehicle that enters production next year. It only seats two yet has a bed big enough to hold a sheet of plywood. It only does 150 miles on a charge, only comes in gray, and the only way to listen to music while driving is if you bring along your phone and a Bluetooth speaker. It is the bare minimum of what a modern car can be, and yet it’s taken three years of development to get to this point.”

So far, so bland, but it’s designed to be customized. So while it doesn’t itself come with a screen, or, you know, paint, you can add one yourself, wrap it in whatever color you want, and pick from a bunch of aftermarket devices to soup it up. It’s the IBM PC approach to electric vehicles instead of the highly-curated Apple approach. I’m into it, with one caveat: I want to hear more about how safe it is.

It sounds like that might be okay:

“Slate’s head of engineering, Eric Keipper, says they’re targeting a 5-Star Safety Rating from the federal government’s New Car Assessment Program. Slate is also aiming for a Top Safety Pick from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.”

I want more of this. EVs are often twice the price or more, keeping them out of reach of regular people. I’ve driven one for several years, and they’re genuinely better cars: more performant, easier to maintain, with a smaller environmental footprint. Bringing the price down while increasing the number of options feels like an exciting way to shake up the market, and exactly the kind of thing I’d want to buy into.

Of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating – so let’s see what happens when it hits the road next year.

#Technology

[Link]

=====================

Trump ‘Alarmists’ Were Right. We Should Say So.

[Toby Buckle at LiberalCurrents]

This resonates for me too.

About the Tea Party, the direction the Republican Party took during the Obama administration, and then of Trump first riding down the escalator to announce his candidacy:

“If you saw in any of this a threat to liberal democracy writ large, much less one that could actually succeed, you were looked at with the kind of caution usually reserved for the guy screaming about aliens on the subway.”

And yet, of course, it got a lot worse.

The proposal here is simple:

“I propose we promote a simple rule for these uncertain times: Those who saw the danger coming should be listened to, those who dismissed us should be dismissed. Which is to say that those of us who were right should actively highlight that fact as part of our argument for our perspective. People just starting to pay attention now will not have the bandwidth to parse a dozen frameworks, or work backwards through a decade of bitter tit-for-tat arguments. What they might ask—what would be very sensible and reasonable of them to ask—is who saw this coming?”

Because you could see it coming, and it was even easy to see, if you shook yourself out of a complacent view that America’s institutions were impermeable, that its ideals were real and enduring, and that there was no way to overcome the norms, checks, and balances that had been in place for generations.

What this piece doesn’t quite mention but is also worth talking about: there are communities for whom those norms, checks, and balances have never worked, and they were sounding the alarm more clearly than anyone else. They could see it. Of course they could see it. So it’s not just about listening to leftists and activists and people who have been considered to be on the political fringe, but also people of color, queer communities, and the historically oppressed. They know this all rather well.

#Democracy

[Link]

So Reading On MPS Led To My Finding This Substack Note, Which Is Also Worthy Of Our Time And Eyes

“Early this morning, as the sun was rising in Washington, DC, Senator Cory Booker, who recently broke Storm Thurmond’s record for holding the Senate floor, joined House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries on the steps of the US Capitol to pray and invite the public into a conversation about our moral moment.” https://open.substack.com/pub/ourmoralmoment/p/our-moral-moment-comes-to-congress?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

– Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove Read on Substack

I was reading this on MPS; clicked through on the Blueshy link, read those photos, then saw “Capitol Protest”, which led to the above Substack note, which is actually pertinent to our interests, especially after reading this on MPS.

“Durbin’s Due”, Elie v. U.S.

I enjoy this man’s commentary. He’s always seemed to know whereof he speaks. Every weekend I intend to post this newsletter, and every weekend gets by me without me getting it done. This is a copy-paste of my newsletter; I receive it in email from “The Nation” magazine. All links within are live.

A retirement for the ages
Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, who has been in Congress or the Senate for nearly my entire life, has announced that he will not seek reelection in 2026. The 80-year-old’s retirement will touch off a firestorm of a Democratic primary in Illinois, and I’m already dreading the prospect of a heap of progressives jumping into the race, cannibalizing each other, and clearing the path for the wealthiest available moderate white man to buy the nomination. If progressives could just coalesce around one candidate and stick together, they’d win this thing. Then again, if I had wheels, I’d be a wagon. In any event, Durbin’s long overdue retirement is more important to what I cover than the primary, because Durbin is the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which controls the judicial nomination process. He was the head of the committee during Joe Biden’s presidency—a job he got by literally pulling rank over the guy who was best suited for the post (according to me), Senator Sheldon Whitehouse. The last four Democratic leaders on Judiciary have been, pretty much, a disaster. Durbin was preceded by Diane Feinstein, who was preceded by Patrick Leahy, who was preceded by Joe Biden. All four of these people were establishment moderates who were more concerned with formalities and courtesies than fighting for control of the courts. It was during their watch that the Federalist Society was able to overrun the judiciary with Republican judges who have literally taken away constitutional rights and redefined the law as a tool of the Republican political agenda. The Judiciary Committee desperately needs new, energetic leadership, to say nothing of a fighting spirit. I can only hope that Durbin’s retirement marks the end of the era of Democrats’ getting punked on judicial nominations.

The Bad and The Ugly
SCOTUSblog, a popular website that reports on the Supreme Court, has been acquired by the right-wing media outlet The Dispatch. The acquisition likely marks the end of one of the few nonpartisan sources of information about the Supreme Court and plunges yet another independent outlet into the dark morass of the white-wing media ecosystem. I have a ton of respect for the website’s senior editor, Amy Howe, and I know she will fight like hell to retain the site’s nonpartisan independence. But this ain’t no fairy tale. When you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.The number of young people who are incarcerated is going down, but the racial disparities among the children we put behind bars are “the highest in decades.” Black and Native American children are getting the worst of it, according to NPR.
Pope Francis died. Francis was from Argentina. He was the first pope from Latin America, the first pope from the Southern Hemisphere, the first Jesuit pope, and the first pope born and raised outside of Europe since the 8th century. He was also one of the most progressive popes in the history of that office, though admittedly that’s a bit like saying he was the least fungal fungus. For my lapsed-Catholic part, I liked him. I hope the next pope is the second pope who can claim to be most of these things.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has been caught up in yet more Signal-inspired controversy. I know I’m supposed to care, but I don’t. They put a Fox News host in charge of the American military; what the hell did people think was going to happen? Decency? Competence?
A group of bigoted parents went before the Supreme Court this week and asked the justices to allow them to object to books in school that mention gay people. The Republican justices on the court fell all over themselves to agree with the parents. I am once again asking bigoted religious wing nuts to homeschool their children and leave the rest of us who want to live in a society alone.

Inspired Takes
In The Nation, my colleague Joan Walsh took on the Trump administration’s ridiculous and sexist obsession with white birth rates. For my part, I am willing to help the administration accomplish its goals: If it really wants white birth rates to go up, all it has to do is make most white people poor again. The lesson from literally all today’s high-income societies is that birth rates go down as economic prosperity goes up, so the solution is actually pretty simple. Maybe that’s the real reason behind Trump’s tariffs?
Contraband Camp has put out a “Trump Administration Discrimination Database.” So now, whenever your MAGA uncle says, “Point to one thing Trump has done that is racist,” you have a reference source.
I used to feed my dog a “raw food” diet. It made sense to me, in an unthinking way (dog = wolf = murderous carnivore = “Aww… who’s the good girl who wants to feast on the raw viscera of your slain enemies?”). The fru-fru suburban veterinarian I go to didn’t immediately tell me it was a bad idea. But then, I happened to run into my old, hardscrabble city veterinarian and she basically said, “What the fuck? Don’t do that. I thought you were a smart person?” She then gave me some research. Now, we’re back to kibble. For people who don’t have the benefit of knowing a frank-talking vet, Emmet Frazier explains in The Nation why your fully domesticated dog doesn’t need to be eating rabbit liver.

Worst Argument of the Week
This isn’t really an argument, but I read a story in Gothamist that almost made me cry. The Trump administration has largely cut off funding for legal aid programs that would provide lawyers to immigrant children sent here without their parents or legal guardians. That has forced thousands of children in New York City to go through the court process—which can lead to their deportation (among other things)—with no legal representation. We’re talking about children as young as 4 being hauled into a courtroom without a lawyer. I do not know what kind of sick fucks think this is OK. I cannot fathom the base, racist, cruelty and inhumanity you have to be comfortable with to think that Trump is right to cut this funding. I cannot conceive of the argument one might make to support this. All I know is that whatever argument one has for making this OK is wrong.

What I Wrote
I was not prepared to engage with a Supreme Court decision at 1 o’clock on Saturday morning, but I’m very glad the court was still working. It issued a ruling that prevented Trump from deporting another group of immigrants, and in so doing, probably saved some of their lives.
The Harvard lawsuit against the Trump administration over his illegal and unconstitutional freeze of the university’s research funding is very strong. Harvard should win, if winning in court still matters.

In News Unrelated to the Ongoing Chaos
You should watch Andor. The first episode of its second season just came out and, trust me, you should just watch it. Forget that it’s part of the Star Wars franchise. Forget that it’s another Disney-owned media property looking to milk that franchise for all its worth. This show is about fighting fascism. It is the most relevant piece of dramatic fiction of this era.

Indeed, Why Not? Makes Good Sense To Me!

AOC 2028: Because Why The Hell Not? by Oliver Willis

Just Do It Read on Substack

I think Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez should run for president in 2028. Honestly, it is hard to look at the turnout for her “Fight Oligarchy” tour with Sen. Bernie Sanders and the extremely slick videos her campaign is pushing out and come away thinking she isn’t running. This doesn’t feel like someone merely running for another term in Congress or even as a challenger for Sen. Chuck Schumer’s Senate seat. This feels like something more on the level of the 2007-2008 Obama campaign, or even Barry Goldwater’s 1964 crusade.

Personally, I think Ocasio-Cortez should run because the Democratic Party and America overall needs it to happen. Right now, under Donald Trump we are in the vice grips of a racist, authoritarian cult. But Trump didn’t come out of nowhere. Trump’s actions are built on decades of conservative groundwork, from the aforementioned Goldwater campaign to the Reagan presidency, to the Bush presidency, and yes – including the Romney and McCain campaigns. All of it.

In response to this multi-decade assault facilitated via operations like Fox News, Democrats have been tepid at best. The party simply does not know how to fight, and it constantly promotes from the ranks of the “don’t fight” caucus. Just a few weeks ago, still coasting from his attachment to Bill Clinton in a campaign that was conducted nearly four decades ago, James Carville told Democrats to lie down and play dead in a New York Times op-ed. Carville’s world view is not an outlier. Democrats have been playing dead for most of my adult life and I’m just a few years short of fifty.

Coming off of the Clinton 2016 and Harris 2024 losses, the party needs a come to Jesus moment, a full-throated fight to determine what, if anything, it stands for and how it intends to conduct itself in the future. The recent DNC chair race solved none of this, because DNC chair is not an ideological position – it’s all about basic party function. The ideology of the party is still determined by leaders like Schumer, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Right now that ideology is – to be blunt – weak shit.

Ocasio-Cortez is a progressive and to be sure that is why I like her, but what I like about her even more is that she isn’t afraid of it. I’m tired of liberalism that is afraid to say what it is out loud, or that insists that every celebration of liberal ideology has to be balanced by some mealy-mouthed statement acknowledging the purported legitimacy of the conservative world view. It isn’t legitimate and more Democrats need to act that way.

The arguments against Ocasio-Cortez running for president don’t feel very compelling to me.

She’s a woman. This is the weakest counterargument and the most un-American. America is all about doing the big thing that hasn’t been done before and fighting for it. Simply because two women lost the election after getting the nomination, we’re just supposed to stop? If, after a robust primary process the voters within the Democratic Party decide that a woman is the best person to do the job, then she deserves the nomination – but we can’t simply let misogyny win out again because we are unwilling to fight.

She’s a progressive/socialist. The Democratic Party has been nominating centrists for decades. If political ideology was all about matching the candidate to the country, we would be discussing the easy presidential wins from former Presidents Gore, Kerry, Clinton, and Harris. Democrats should pick the best candidate who appeals to the world they believe in – because that kind of pure belief is far better than playing fantasy campaign manager, selecting a nominee based on what you think is most acceptable to some mythical middle America voter.

She needs more experience. This is a really ridiculous one. Back in 2007 when Obama was first debating entering the race, I prayed he would do it because I fear what the Senate does to the mind of a human being. Look at Kerry and his Republican counterpart in terminal Senate brain, John McCain. I look at the Senate as a zombie that sucks the charisma out of people and turns them into near-automatons spouting nonsense about an amendment they offered in committee and other things normal people don’t understand.

Ocasio-Cortez understands the inner workings of the government far more than the average person. Several years of getting stifled by the Senate won’t change that. Similarly, I don’t see the logic in letting her linger in the House, even if she eventually ends up in a senior leadership position like Speaker.

To use a sports analogy, in the past NFL teams would draft a quarterback and let them sit on the sidelines, purportedly learning the ropes from a veteran signal caller. But in the modern NFL, a guy is drafted and immediately thrown into the deep end to see if they can sink or swim. To be certain, many times that leads to a spectacular bust – or, like in the case of my favorite team the Washington Commanders – a rookie takes you to within one game of the Super Bowl in his first year.

Both Obama and Trump jumped into their races when they had grassroots momentum. They both beat back the establishment candidate (Clinton for Obama, Jeb! for Trump). The rallies, along with years of well received rhetoric and attacks from the right-wing machine say to me that Ocasio-Cortez has that “juice” and it would be a shame to let it wither.

I’m not arguing that she would win the nomination or even the general election. Who even knows if we can have free and fair elections anymore? But the fact that this cornerstone of American democracy is even in question at this point sort of makes the case that the same old, same old cannot continue to be the answer.

Something more needs to be done, and as Ocasio-Cortez keeps saying “a better world is possible.” So maybe let’s try it. (snip-MORE + photo of the cutest dachshund doggy ever)

Good morning, Scottie’s Playtime!

From jeff tiedrich:

Peace & Justice History for 4/13

https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistoryapril.htm#april13

What Happens When We Try

Sen. Ossoff was one of the Dems who appeared to be sitting on the fence about the budget a couple of weeks ago. I encouraged us all to call as many US Senators as we could, and of course that was after I’d done the calling because it just wouldn’t be proper to ask people to do that which I did not do. Here’s an example of what happens when we try; we get a nice letter in return. All of the senators didn’t go to this length, but Sen. Ossoff’s office did, and I won’t forget that!