Quo Vadis, Democrats?

[HVC]

The important thing when your democracy is under siege is to point fingers and lay blame at the people who may have been imperfect. Don't get distracted by trying to figure out how to fight back, you have to focus on what actually matters - that is, tearing down allies and compatriots who are insufficiently pure or were insufficiently wise in the decisions they made in the past.

Truly the liberal way. One people more dangerous then your enemies are your allies

[garbon]

The important thing when your democracy is under siege is to point fingers and lay blame at the people who may have been imperfect. Don't get distracted by trying to figure out how to fight back, you have to focus on what actually matters - that is, tearing down allies and compatriots who are insufficiently pure or were insufficiently wise in the decisions they made in the past.

Well she is dead so I don't think she really gets much chatter.

[Oexmelin]

Perhaps later history will be more kind.

Trump fires National Archives chief

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/trump-fires-national-archives-chief-00203246

[crazy canuck]

The important thing when your democracy is under siege is to point fingers and lay blame at the people who may have been imperfect. Don't get distracted by trying to figure out how to fight back, you have to focus on what actually matters - that is, tearing down allies and compatriots who are insufficiently pure or were insufficiently wise in the decisions they made in the past.

I think you have hit on an important point. The Dems are in disarray and fighting amongst themselves.  It would make a good Monty Python script if the consequences were not so serious.

The NYTimes ran a story today about how Trump is musing about not stepping aside in four years, and that notion has gained a lot of traction amongst the Republican party. It won't get much of a mention amongst all other unconstitutional acts that happened today.  Partly because the Dems are more concentrated on having their faction of the party prevail over the other factions within their party.

One of the podcasts I have enjoyed listening to, since Sheilbh told us about it, is "Know your Enemy".  It has struck me that they keep saying they will talk about what Trump is doing in later episodes, but right now they seem to think there are more important, more ideologically pure things, to talk about.  What greater Enemy is there folks? 

[Barrister]

The important thing when your democracy is under siege is to point fingers and lay blame at the people who may have been imperfect. Don't get distracted by trying to figure out how to fight back, you have to focus on what actually matters - that is, tearing down allies and compatriots who are insufficiently pure or were insufficiently wise in the decisions they made in the past.

I don't get this attitude.  Don't people owe a duty to the truth?

I don't think RBG cares what we say about her, you know with being dead and all.

[Oexmelin]

The important thing when your democracy is under siege is to point fingers and lay blame at the people who may have been imperfect. Don't get distracted by trying to figure out how to fight back, you have to focus on what actually matters - that is, tearing down allies and compatriots who are insufficiently pure or were insufficiently wise in the decisions they made in the past.

I have been banging the drum of direct action for a while now.

When I am finger pointing, it isn't about some purity test. I am not interested in adjudicating what sort of healthcare is best for the US right now. I am, however, concerned about people who are asking us (or, at this point, my American friends) to trust they will swing at the right time, or to trust the great moral arc of the universe, or that the pendulum will swing back on its own.

If people want to feel empowered, they need to think that their actions have meaningful consequences. Not that it was simply a matter of bad luck - it certainly was part of it - but also, of deliberate choices. They may have been wrong choices - but they at least need to be identified as wrong, not just "unlucky".

For me, it's about people clinging to a conception of politics that has been dead for a while - and one that, I believe, leads either to inaction, or to placing all of one's eggs in the same institutional basket. It's also about accountability. You may not have been subjected to the barrage of unrelenting texts asking for money by the Democrats. When a party is sitting on such a considerable war chest, and seems incapable of meeting the moment, one is tempted to ask "what's the plan"? I don't know if you've heard Hakeem Jeffries recently? It does not fill me with confidence. Rather, to me, it evokes the same sort of thinking that led the US in this mess.

My point isn't to say RBG was a terrible person. She wasn't. My point is that she did not understand how the times had changed. This is something we can all be guilty of. That sort of lesson should precisely be more impactful when the error is committed by someone you admire and respect.

[mongers]

Perhaps later history will be more kind.

Trump fires National Archives chief

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/trump-fires-national-archives-chief-00203246

Odds now on literal burnings, not just wipping data from systems?

[Maladict]

Perhaps later history will be more kind.

Trump fires National Archives chief

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/07/trump-fires-national-archives-chief-00203246

Odds now on literal burnings, not just wipping data from systems?

I don't know, those people at NARA are the most fanatical (in a good way) archivists I've ever seen. You can hide things pretty well in a place like that.

[mongers]

Odds now on literal burnings, not just wipping data from systems?

I don't know, those people at NARA are the most fanatical (in a good way) archivists I've ever seen. You can hide things pretty well in a place like that.

 

Good to know, well at least I hope.

[The Minsky Moment]

I did not expect her to know that Trump would win, but to know that she would eventually die. I would have expected her to at least get a reading on the changing political climate - or, at least, for others to get it, and push her aside. Gently, preferably; forcefully, if need be.

I had the chance to hear her speak. I have tremendous respect for what she did, but her political acumen struck me as being stuck in the 90s. Somewhat like Biden.

I think the RGB critics are missing the personal dimension.  She was very close to her husband but he died in 2010.  It is not always easy being an elderly widow in American society.  The Court was a source of personal friendship and camaraderie for her and it provided meaning and social standing.  Not an easy thing to give up.

[garbon]

I did not expect her to know that Trump would win, but to know that she would eventually die. I would have expected her to at least get a reading on the changing political climate - or, at least, for others to get it, and push her aside. Gently, preferably; forcefully, if need be.

I had the chance to hear her speak. I have tremendous respect for what she did, but her political acumen struck me as being stuck in the 90s. Somewhat like Biden.

I think the RGB critics are missing the personal dimension.  She was very close to her husband but he died in 2010.  It is not always easy being an elderly widow in American society.  The Court was a source of personal friendship and camaraderie for her and it provided meaning and social standing.  Not an easy thing to give up.

I'm not sure a good defense is I was putting my personal needs ahead of service.

[Jacob]

I'm not sure a good defense is I was putting my personal needs ahead of service.

I find your framing of this as a "defense" a bit strange.

[garbon]

I'm not sure a good defense is I was putting my personal needs ahead of service.

I find your framing of this as a "defense" a bit strange.

Joan suggested it should be a mitigating factor.

[Barrister]

I'm not sure a good defense is I was putting my personal needs ahead of service.

I find your framing of this as a "defense" a bit strange.

Joan suggested it should be a mitigating factor.

He never said "mitigating factor".

I would phrase it as "Explanation, not excuse".

[garbon]

I'm not sure a good defense is I was putting my personal needs ahead of service.

I find your framing of this as a "defense" a bit strange.

Joan suggested it should be a mitigating factor.

He never said "mitigating factor".

I would phrase it as "Explanation, not excuse".

I think there can be many reasons to explain why she did what she did. I'm not sure why what Joan highlighted should spare her from her detractors.