Justice Ginsburg stands down. pic.twitter.com/LN5uKoBXQx
— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) July 14, 2016
Yeah, she’s very sorry the media has turned itself into a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Krazy Koalition, and y’all can go eat paste. Finley Peter Dunne, we salute you!
.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has lived up to her Notorious RBG nickname this week https://t.co/EXhWZPh0J0 pic.twitter.com/ieJ4yCycGw
— New York Post (@nypost) July 14, 2016
What was RBG thinking?
Maybe speak out now while it might make a difference, retire in peace with her conscience later.
— Bob Schooley (@Rschooley) July 13, 2016
I’m with Mr. Charles P. Pierce on this:
… This is one of those days on which I’m glad I was raised Catholic and, therefore, was schooled in the difference between venial and mortal sin. Because anyone who thinks that RBG’s honest assessment of the vulgar talking yam is on a par with A.) Antonin Scalia’s hunting trips with Dick Cheney, or B.) the majority in Bush v. Gore including one justice (Scalia) whose son got a job with the administration that poppa helped install and another (Thomas) whose wife did, too, needs to seriously examine their consciences more than they did…
Ginsberg is not intolerant of conservatives; she and Scalia were opera buddies. But she’s 83, sharp as a tack, and a survivor of pancreatic cancer, which generally gives you the same odds as stepping in front of a westbound freight. Her big bag of fcks was empty long ago. She’s seen what’s happened to the courts first-hand, and she is right to warn us that a Trump administration is just as likely to put the gardener at Mar-A-Lago on the bench as not. Liberals, of course, are supposed to make sure they use the right fork when they sit down to dinner with barbarians.
I would only add to this that Ginsburg is an institutionalist and is extremely deliberate in her word choice https://t.co/Bkusbdxf6Z
— Irin Carmon (@irin) July 12, 2016
There's a credible argument that Trump represents an actual threat to democracy. Do you follow normal protocols here?
— jelani cobb (@jelani9) July 13, 2016
Today's Daily Cartoon by Kim Warp. See more cartoons with the New Yorker Today app: https://t.co/nU7sQjLGHa pic.twitter.com/sOLqE6eeO6
— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) July 14, 2016
Ruth Bader Ginsburg didn't cross the line. Three Supreme Court justices have run for president while on the court: https://t.co/WZdY5WdMPp
— Lawrence O'Donnell (@Lawrence) July 13, 2016
"Her mind is shot" — is Trump implying Ginsberg has dementia?
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) July 13, 2016
How dare Ruth Bader Ginsburg speak her mind about a presidential candidate. You wait until he's elected. pic.twitter.com/89aNZrfXBV
— Bob Schooley (@Rschooley) July 13, 2016
Even the @NYTimes and @WashingtonPost Editorial Boards condemned Justice Ginsburg for her ethical and legal breach. What was she thinking?
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 13, 2016
That you are a threat to constitutional governance. Probably right, although it was still wrong for her to say. https://t.co/2TMCeFKexC
— Orin Kerr (@OrinKerr) July 14, 2016
Yeah, Ginsburg's is the mind people are speculating about. pic.twitter.com/F3rCnYWgoA
— Bob Schooley (@Rschooley) July 13, 2016
Look, here's all you need to know about RBG's comments: There's nothing you can do about it. If you're pissed, get a fucking hobby. The end.
— David Waldman (@KagroX) July 14, 2016
Adam L Silverman
I highly recommend Lithwick’s take on this:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2016/07/ruth_bader_ginsburg_s_improper_attacks_on_donald_trump.html
Matt McIrvin
Pokemon Go is good for something.
J
The only reason I think RBG’s comments were inadvisable–n.b. how weak a term I’m using–is that they would be used by the usual suspects to call her impartiality into question in the event that one of Trump’s numerous frauds, or scams came before the court.
Barb2
RBG did what needed to be done. She is the ultimate hero. I stand with her.
NotMax
Well, Open Thread tag, so –
The history that almost wasn’t.
Short Bus Bully
All I can think about is how pissed I would be if Alito was talking shit about Hillary.
I cannot get excited about a Supreme saying things like this, even if I agree with her and love her to death.
Mathguy
Love her in the Vader helmet.
Betty Cracker
I’m sticking to my original take: Under normal circumstances, a justice should stay above the political fray. This isn’t a normal circumstance: Trump is a dangerous demagogue who is fomenting racial and ethnic hatred to grab power. The people who are pretending that Trump is a normal, legitimate candidate are the ones who are behaving inappropriately.
Mike J
When nazis are on the ballot it is immoral to just stand by.
Mai.naem.mobile
If Clinton V.Trump ends up in front of the USSC we have way bigger problems in this country than RBG saying crap about the Trumpster. Also,if what she said causes some Bernie Bros to change their mind and vote for Clinton,i say good job Justice Ginsburg.
Jean
@Adam L Silverman: Thanks for the link to the Slate article. It’s quite good!
RaflW
@Adam L Silverman: It’s good. But I think the time to be “old school” (as Lithwick says about herself) is over.
This is what journalism scholar/critic Jay Rosen is arguing these days re: the press and how to cover Trump. Adherence to old conventions at this very pivotal and dangerous moment enables more danger.
If Ginsberg takes a hit reputationally for stepping out of norms, she may yet (terrifyingly) be proven prescient, or at the very least shrewd and deeply worried.
cckids
Is anyone else watching “Alone” on the History Channel??
Adam L Silverman
@Jean: You’re welcome.
Jean
@Matt McIrvin: Smart campaign activity that actually reaches real voters and registers them. Good for the Hillary staffers!
Emma
What makes me nuts is that in the past 8 years our President has “enjoyed” a barrage of vulgar insults from elected officials and it’s always reported blandly and “factually.” Let a liberal throw a punch and it’s time to start squawking about propriety and codes of conduct.
Prescott Cactus
Sometimes you just have to stand up for what you think is true and right. She watched first row, Bush v Gore. Was in on all 4 of the dissents. . . It’s not like they can fire her.
They don’t even replace them anymore !
JordanRules
@Betty Cracker: Thank you!
@Mike J: And thank you!
This is a ‘what side of history are you on’ moment and as a human being I need allies to speak up now. As a black women I really, really need people to step up and out on this. I find what’s going on absolutely terrifying. Katrina ripped me to shreds and Obama built me back up so I’m trying to ride that out and keep GOTV on the brain, but damnet if I’m not angry and scared right now. Notorious knows what’s up. This fake candidacy is a clear threat to so much progress, to security and to our imperfect institutions. It’s ugly and critical.
Cmm
Ahem.
Today I became a published and paid author.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/a-former-officer-explains-why-racist-police-violence-occurs-even-when-cops-arent-racist/
(Note: not quite officially “former” yet)
I respect the heck out of you folks here and value your opinions so I would love to hear your opinions.
Also, if you like the article, it would be great if you could share it thru social media. The more traffic my stuff generates, the more likely they are to buy more!
Adam L Silverman
@RaflW: Rosen is correct. The media, especially the TV media, but also print, is dining out on the revenue that Trump is bringing in. As a result we get a candidate saying and doing things that the media would have absolutely destroyed if it was anyone else. If David Broder and Sally Quinn thought that Bill and Hillary Clinton were barbarians that were destroying the social comity and cohesion of DC, they should take a long, hard look at Trump.
As for the major print media, well we know the NY Times went all in on Arkansas scandal futures and even with the institutional turn over there over the past 30 years seems to still have a major, baked into the organization, animus to Secretary Clinton in specific and the Clinton’s in generals. And this is where the TV and print platforms begin to merge with providing incredible amounts of oxygen for the prospective Clinton scandal of the week. Its telling that other than a little coverage of the former DOJ spokesperson who wrote a column, was on a couple of cable shows, and quoted a few times about how outside of protocol Director Comey’s press conference was, no one actually followed up and did the work. That would have showed that the reason it was out of bounds is because we have the 1974 Privacy Act, which has sections that make it illegal for DOJ and FBI officials to discuss a case like this with the public, other than stating we are/we are not indicting and these are the charges. They are required by Federal statute to only deal with the facts of a case in court. So facially, though I don’t expect anyone will do anything about it, Director Comey broke the portions of that law that apply to the DOJ and FBI.
EconWatcher
I was very surprised that Ginsburg made these comments; they seemed out of character for a careful jurist. I’m glad that she’s withdrawn them,. I have to go with Chait’s take on this: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/rbg-and-the-disintegration-of-political-norms.html
With all due respect, those of you cheering on the comments don’t have a clue. Our side has to try to restore the dignity and respect of the Court. Wrestling in the mud with Donald Trump isn’t going to do that. And citing the worse behavior of those who’ve brought the Court into disrepute misses the point entirely.
Villago Delenda Est
@Emma: The vermin of the Village look the other way when Rethugs behave like the curs they are. One of many reasons for my nym.
Wipe them out. All of them.
sigaba
Can I somehow get that image of Trump frozen in carbonate framed?
Maybe someone has an STL file I can spit out on my 3D printer? :)
sigaba
@Villago Delenda Est:
“Republican is a monster” : “dog bites man”.
Adam L Silverman
@Cmm: I saw that earlier today. Did not know it was you. Perhaps a bio: “Insert name here is also a reader and commenter at Balloon Juice. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of anyone at Balloon Juice, or who falls down, is tripped by his pets, cannot find his mustard, …”
More seriously: Nicely done!
EconWatcher
@Betty Cracker:
You don’t have to assume that Trump is a normal, respectable, legitimate politician to have a big problem with these comments. Ginsburg is an enormously talented jurist on the highest Court in the land who has to try to restore the decorum and respect of a Court that has been badly tainted in recent years; why on earth would she play amateur political pundit? That’s not her role, she’s not particularly good at it, and there are plenty of other people to do that. Yes, Scalia and Thomas have done worse, but you didn’t see her fellow liberals on the Court joining in her comments, and there’s a reason for that. On the other side, I haven’t seen Roberts do anything equivalent to this. She demeaned herself, and I believe she’s now realized that.
JCJ
@Matt McIrvin: That is hilarious. I really applaud the staff who thought of that.
pseudonymous in nc
I’m with Betty here, and with Lithwick’s more detailed argument: if you’re going to respect SCOTUS (and the federal judiciary more broadly) as an actual co-equal branch of government, then a perceived threat to that status by someone who attempts to intimidate and belittle judges is worthy of comment.
Judges should be willing to talk about challenges to the co-equality of the judiciary from the other branches, because they can’t rely solely upon those other branches to defend them. Yes, lifetime appointments change things a little, but it’s clear that GOPers like Sessions and Cornyn or the ludicrous Gohmert treat judgifyin’ from the state perspective where there are elections and it’s entirely politicised, while Trump regards judges as people to be abused, intimidated or bought off.
burnspbesq
@EconWatcher:
With all due respect, you’re re dead wrong.
Trump is an existential threat to our democracy. Traditional norms can be restored when he has been destroyed.
pseudonymous in nc
@EconWatcher:
And may be dispatched on a dignified respectful boat down the river.
It feels like the core strategy of the Clinton campaign is Ignore The Troll as much as possible and to run as conventional and normal a campaign as possible in order to say to voters, hey, there’s this normal presidential campaign here, and there’s this dumpster fire over there.
On the question of the media’s complicity. It might be worth the Clinton campaign and DNC and Dem PACs temporarily pulling ads from networks like CNN that have gone full Tr*mpton. Network beancounters treat presidential election years like the season of plenty that props up lean years, and if they’re left relying on Mike’s Local Muffler Service And Pizzeria to buy ad spots because the political campaigns don’t want to line their pockets, then it might get the message across better than appealing to their microscopic sense of morality and duty.
But that runs the risk of it not being a normal campaign.
Original Lee
@Cmm: I liked it. You made your points well, IMO.
Emma
@EconWatcher: And we’ll die a dignified death when the Christofascists take over. Thanks but no thanks.
ETA: I rather we go down kicking and eye-gouging.
Gin & Tonic
Donald Trump is a clear and present danger to the United States and everything it stands for. Full stop.
Anyone who pretends he’s just an entertainer or, worse, a more-or-less normal political candidate, is complicit in dragging our political discourse to the bottom of the sewer.
EconWatcher
@burnspbesq:
And who do you think Ginsburg persuaded, who was not already persuaded? Seriously? Did anyone think, “This Trump fella seems kinda interesting, but I guess he must not be legit, because Justice Ginsburg says so.” Come one. Her talents lie with persuading people who study legal opinions, not moving mass public opinion in the midst of an election. She has no ability to do that, and in trying to do so, she painted herself as just another partisan hack.
I’ve read the Lithwick article, and I don’t think it fits Ginsburg’s comments at all. If Ginsburg wanted to defend the independence of the judiciary, she could have made targeted comments about Trump’s attacks on Judge Curiel and the threats such attacks present to an independent judiciary. Had she done so, she wouldn’t have been criticized in the NYT and elsewhere; speaking up specifically for the independence of the judiciary does fit her role.
Come on, this isn’t hard. Are we losing our ability to recognize mistakes on our side?
Betty Cracker
@Cmm: Well done! I’ve valued your perspective when you’ve chimed in as we’ve discussed these wrenching police shootings over the past couple of years. You’re clearly a good cop — soon to be former, which is no doubt a loss for your community, but I can certainly understand why you’d want to get out. Congrats on the article. Would it be okay with you if one of us front-paged an excerpt with a link to the full article at RS?
burnspbesq
Don’t kid yourself. Trump is our Orban, our Kaczynski.
His objective is to be the last democratically elected President of the United States.
The normal rules do. Not. Apply. Anyone who thinks they do is naive, complacent … or complicit.
Yes, EW, I am looking at you.
amk
I don’t know why she did it… I mean the apology.
Fuck wapo and nyt bastids.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Cmm: Congrats!
Cheers,
Scott.
Emma
@amk: It sounded to me much like a Republican non-apology. Good for her.
Gwangung
Part of the reason why Dems get disdain from non-die yards is that we roll over and play to the rules. Every time.
There’s a time and place for that. But every so often, you DO have to get down in the mud and wrestle with the pig. Because the people you want to lead do respect leaders who aren’t afraid to get dirty and mean when the time calls for it.
I believe this is one of those times.
hitchhiker
@Short Bus Bully:
But that’s not what this is. Ginsburg isn’t choosing D over R, she’s naming an extinction level threat to the USA. Donald John is truly an unstable personality whose face on the R ticket ought to frighten the bejabbers out of all of us.
Hillary’s just somebody the Rs have decided to hate with the passion of a thousand burning suns. Aside from that, she’s well within the parameters of what we all agree to as guides for who might be capable of governing. I mean, she can speak in coherent sentences on complex matters of policy, and she’s built a zillion relationships in both the congress and the governments of the world.
RGB can regret her remarks all day long, but they’re on the record nonetheless. She wouldn’t have made them if she didn’t think it was necessary.
Betty Cracker
@EconWatcher: I’m going to assume we don’t perceive the threat Trump represents in the same light. Would it have been “demeaning” for Italian jurists in the 1920s to break conventions around political impartiality to criticize Mussolini? In my book, it would have been brave.
ruemara
Donald Trump is an evil neo-Nazi warmongerer who poses a threat to the world. GTFOH with that preserve the dignity crap.
On a lighter note, I shall be in San Diego to be comic-con adjacent, Beyond my lovely and foolhardy hosts, BJ meetup?
amk
@EconWatcher:
the trump curious
indiesidjits?I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
My take on this, from what I’ve heard on the radio (the pearl clutching on the DR Show on NPR this AM) and my skimming of the various links is:
1) This apparently started in a story published on July 7. It took a long time to build up to the point that she was History’s Greatest Monster.
2) She was apparently responding to questions posed in one or more interviews.
3) I have not seen a transcript of the questions and answers, but lots of “Ginsburg said this and that!11” without the actual questions posed.
Her “unprecedented” and “ill-advised” comments were so horrible!!1 But not horrible enough to see the context?
I like and respect her a lot. I refuse to get upset with her about this without seeing a transcript including the questions.
Too much of the criticism is taking the form “Justices should be above politics! They shouldn’t insert themselves into presidential campaigns!!” – not the truth of what she said – for my taste.
The press can’t have it both ways, though they try to.
“Obama inserted himself into the controversy about XXX today, saying YYY…” without giving the question he was asked.
If the press doesn’t want an answer, don’t ask the question. If they do want an answer, don’t criticize the fact that they were given one. This “gotcha!!1” stuff is annoying.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who liked that she didn’t apologize though lots of places reported that she did.)
JordanRules
Heartening responses tonight. I love the Juice spot!
So many more people need to grok the gravity of the situation though. As Adam noted in a response on the thread below, the media is super broken so the current incarnations probably need to die off. Actually…I don’t think RBG, even with the moral imperative part, would have felt the need to go there if she was dealing with a ‘press’ that really was what it should be in a healthy democracy (not just another for profit arm of a large corp).
Betty Cracker
@amk: There’s that, and she also tweaked the press about being lenient on Trump about refusing to release his tax returns, and who knows — maybe it’ll inspire some Beltway hack to do his or her job?
trollhattan
@NotMax:
Wow, fascinating. To bad NASA wasn’t similarly concerned with the Apollo video tapes posterity.
Glaukopis
@ruemara: I’d like to meet any BJ folk who are around.
seaboogie
@JordanRules: Hear Hear!
amk
@Emma: egg.sack.lee
NR
Democrats ‘freaked out’ about polls in meeting with Clinton
But hey, move along, nothing to see here. Hillary’s going to win in a landslide.
Ruckus
RBG said what needed to be said by someone in a valid position of, well authority. This dipshit bigot, with no talent at being a human being wants to ruin your world. Not just mess it up a bit but fucking ruin it. I’m sure he thinks he can make a profit at it, although he’s not really done that well at making a profit at much else he’s done. He probably figures he can steal the WH china and sell it at a yard sale. This is a vanity exercise from one of the most vain people you’ve ever heard of. And he isn’t even good at the job he was handed on a solid gold platter.
The world will be a horrible place if this asshole wins. Even a number of republicans have said this and I’d bet good money that a lot more know it. That a member of the USSC stated this is not a revelation or the worst thing since that jackass with the funny mustache was fucking up the place, it doesn’t demean the court it defends it. A democracy works when the pieces work and right now 1/3 of the pieces is almost entirely useless. If we make 2/3 of it unworkable what the fuck would the propriety of the other 1/3 be worth? GWB was useless, dangerous and deadly, drumpf is 20 levels farther down the scale. RBG was doing her duty as a citizen in speaking out.
I’d bet she had in mind to apologize before she ever spoke. Put it out there and then do a little contrition for the morons who think that any of us needs to be respectful of this total jackass being nominated.
amk
@NR: “the hill”. the rethug mouthpiece. sure. sure.
Steeplejack
@Betty Cracker:
In the Dahlia Lithwick piece that Andrew linked to above, she says that it’s not just about Trump:
Steeplejack
@Cmm:
Congratulations! Interesting piece.
Ruckus
@Steeplejack:
If you can’t make it work the way you want, because that’s not a democracy, make it not work at all. Easier to steal the silverware when there isn’t anyone watching it.
Aleta
A SC Justice reaches a point when she can’t in good conscience stay quiet, and has to speak as an individual. I didn’t read all the hasty co-concurring editorials, but the ones I did read failed at adding perspective. So here’s some perspective:
seaboogie
@Cmm: Great article!
amk
@Steeplejack: Excellent reasoning. Where is the fucking press on Garland issue? (For that matter, where the fuck were they for the past 8 years on burn it to the ground rethugs tactics and their complete abdication of governance). donnie dreck was the ultimate tipping point and yet the fucking media aids and abets him 24×7. fuck ’em and fainting couches.
seaboogie
@Aleta: Thank you for adding this perspective. I trust RBG and her reasons and opinions.
Steeplejack
@Ruckus:
I’m pissed that the Merrick Garland issue seems to have been allowed to drop completely from public consciousness. We should be hanging this around the Repugs’ necks on a daily basis!
amk
@Adam L Silverman: Thanks Adam. A very good analysis by Dahlia.
Betty Cracker
@NR: From the article you linked:
In case you were wondering about that stinky yellow puddle you’re marinating in…
Steeplejack
And I just went to the New York Times site to look for Krugman’s column (apparently he’s still on vacation), and I found something else to grind my gears: “Congress Takes a Vacation Without Doing Anything About Zika.”
amk
@Betty Cracker: just shitcan the moron/troll. I know this troll since 2006 from tpm.
amk
darth bader. love it.
Mary G
@Cmm: Congratulations ! You make a good argument above unconscious racism. I took an online test one time that said that I have a bit of it and got quite upset. After thinking about it , I realized that my parents both came from very racist families and even though they rejected it there was probably some very small bias that got passed down to me. I have worked to identify and root it out of myself.
Villago Delenda Est
@Cmm: Damn, that’s good stuff! I think you make some very important points.
Aleta
A couple of Ginsberg’s direct experiences with discrimination:
Also, her father came to the US as a boy, arriving from Russia only 4-5 years after a murderous period of pogroms in his district and town.
The integrity of her critics pales in comparison to hers.
The facebook page Historians on Trump is a collection of videos of historians speaking out, organized by Ken Burns. At the top of the page is Ken’s commencement speech denouncing Trump and it’s a doozy of a barnburner. It’s fantastic and the students go wild.
Aleta
Here’s the short videos on Historians on Donald Trump. You don’t have to have fb to watch, just scroll past the box. But Ken’s speech isn’t there now. Prob on youtube. I swear it’s worth watching for the exhilaration.
Aleta
Ken Burns speaking out against Trump.
“We no longer have the luxury of neutrality or “balance,” or even of bemused disdain. Many of our media institutions have largely failed to expose this charlatan, torn between a nagging responsibility to good journalism and the big ratings a media circus always delivers.”
Bobby Thomson
@Adam L Silverman: Muddled mush. She claims not to respect the tu quoque fallacy and then engages in one.
Look, we can accept that armed robbery is not nearly as bad as genocide while still accepting that people shouldn’t commit armed robbery. As a judge with integrity, Justice Ginsburg recognized that what she had done was incorrect – not in the same ballpark or sport as Scalia’s misconduct, but still wrong.
SarahT
You know what ? Fuck these fucking bed-wetting Dems who can’t handle what RBG said, AKA the truth ! I expect the pearl-clutching & bullshit rationalization from our brave MSM & from Repubs, but damn, Dems, really ? Justice Ginsberg did nothing wrong or even out of bounds! SCOTUS isn’t currently on a case involving Trump, and being a SCJ doesn’t prohibit speaking out on current events that don’t directly involve a pending court case ! Also, where were you Dem pearl-clutchers & the MSM when Scalia went hunting w/Dick Cheney, who actually WAS involved in a current SCOTUS case at the time ? Or when Clarence Thomas’ wife literally drunk-dialed Anita Hill ? Do you care that Ginny Thomas is STILL lobbying for the GOP ? Obviously no. The hypocrisy from both sides is beyond depressing. Seriously, Dems: Stop buying into right wing bullshit: SO sickening that Dems STILL won’t grow a sack, GAH !
SarahT
Also, sorry to be late, but thank you, Anne Laurie.
Patricia Kayden
@Short Bus Bully: Well, that is true. Never thought about it from that perspective. I hate Trump so much that he’s blinding my better judgment.
Patricia Kayden
@Steeplejack: Yep, the do-nothing Repugs are subjected to zero consequences for not doing their job. The DNC should be running ads against Repug Reps up for re-election.
80 people murdered in Nice. Another terrorist attack. This is depressing. Not sure how the French fight this.
Elizabelle
I stand w the notorious RBG. To this day, I still hold my nose when I think of Sandra Day O’Connor waving GW Bush into the White House. She is ruined for me.
History will be kind to RBG. And the pearl clutchers would have been vying for a dinner or weekend with Hitler. (“He is a man of vigor and charisma. — pick me! Pick me!”)
amk
@Patricia Kayden The point is that the same 3rd rate 4th estate never bothered whenever the rw’ers on the bench spouted all kindsa partisan bs and partied with the rw’ers openly and blatantly. So, fuck msm and the typical bed wetting dems for fake their pious bs at this point.
Manyakitty
@Cmm: Read it, liked it, shared it on Facebook. Congratulations!
Keith G
@EconWatcher: I think that your words here and just below at #27 are wise.
The answer to past impudent behavior is not “ill-advised” behavior. RBG did not change any minds, She did not wake up one more additional partisan (or neutral) to the need for action. She did not “throw a punch” that will have any impact on our electoral politics. The impact of this (such as it will be) will be owned by her. Thus as it usually is if one flops into the sty to wrestle with a pig.
@burnspbesq:
No
No he is not.
How ever painful his election would end up being, our democracy would survive it. Our system of governance is set up especially to survive idiots like him – to limit his power.
Trump is not an existential danger to our democracy or an extinction level event (as was said upthread, fer cripes sake) The underlying feelings that give rise to his support are another issue. Trump is not causing groups of the citizenry to disconnect and to withdraw to separate corners. He is the evidence, not the cause. And Supreme Court Jurists acting as CNN commentators are not the cure.
When you say “Trump is an existential threat to our democracy.” You are just a few words different from what my asshole, redneck boss said about Obama in January 2008.
Us copying their worst behaviors is more harmful than just their worst behaviors. We can beat them without the imitation.
Elizabelle
@Cmm: Loved your article. Posted it to FB and sent it to some relatives who are studying/embarked on criminal justice-related careers. I worry about unconscious bias in them, good-hearted as they are. They’d be offended to hear me say that, but it’s so clear, and alarming. We are a “growing up White” family, in all its manifestations.
Elizabelle
@Keith G: Respectfully, I disagree. There is a chasm between Obama and Trump. Your uncle was just plain wrong, which does not make RBG wrong in her assessment.
Trump personally may not be as “extinction level” as detractors assert, but the powers that will influence him are deadly. The changes a non-Democratic president would make to the Supreme Court are extinction-level. Game over, for the remainder of our lives.
I think people should stand up and yell, and assert their consciences, because our institutions ARE rotted and corrupted from within, and the mass media is a real danger in normalizing terrible behavior by the opposition party, for years now.
When Thomas Friedman is rooting for a Democratic wave event, and calling the Republicans out by name, we have arrived at a crossroads.
So, not pearl-clutching. I am ready to throw a brick.
Keith G
The above date should read January 2009.
Keith G
@Elizabelle: I agree with everything you typed – except it was boss, not uncle. Redneck uncle was long dead by then.
And, no bricks.
Her assessment was not wrong. Nothing was gained by her public foray into this election cycle.
The Thin Black Duke
@Keith G: What white people call “paranoia”, black people call “common sense”. My African-American ass would rather not find out what this country is going to be like if Donald Trump is elected to the White House, thank you very much.
Keith G
@Elizabelle: One more thing.
I am a partisan. I want to take the fight to the other side. I want to defeat them soundly while staying true to certain ideals. Those ideals were recently stated by one our best political writers.
amk
@Keith G:
Good joke. If deadbeat donnie wins, it’s most likely the rethugs (too harsh a word for you?), keep the senate and house majorities too. They will appoint a 100% rwer for the sc and it’s a trifecta.
Sure, ‘the system’ will work.
AxelFoley
EconWatcher, looks like you’re on your own with that purity bullshit.
As stated by others here, sometimes you gotta get down and dirty with your enemies. There’s a time and place for playing nice.
This ain’t one of them.
satby
Ok, so we have two votes for a genteel civility while the other side attempts to burn the joint down.
I’m with Elizabelle, and I have a few bricks.
Keith G
@amk:
Maybe a bit harsh for someone you claim to admire. See above.
Anyway, this is just a blog. Don’t care about your words here.
The Trump side will lose because their rhetoric (and actions) are turning off too many voters who might in other instances be willing to be allied.
And they will lose because important voting blocks have moved a bit leftward in the last several years and they have not adjusted.
Keith G
@satby: The President is our third vote. :)
amk
@Keith G:
The one I admire has taken his own potshots at the rethugs, there is that word again, when warrsnred. So, a false equivalence.
Keith G
@amk: Not really.
I never asserted that “shots” are out of bounds. I’ve taken more than my share. The point is “over heated rhetoric”.
amk
@Keith G:
In what way was ginsberg’s overheated rhetoric? Ridiculous.
AxelFoley
@Bobby Thomson:
I take it back, EconWatcher. You do have one supporter here joining you in bedwetting.
AxelFoley
@Keith G:
Ah, I should have known the Balloon-Juice contrarian would chime in.
rikyrah
@Betty Cracker:
This is true. All you say.
rikyrah
@Cmm:
Congratulations!
rikyrah
@EconWatcher:
Chait is a professional bedwetter.
rikyrah
@Gin & Tonic:
Keep telling that truth.
rikyrah
@ruemara:
Keep on telling THE TRUTH about Ferret Head.
Cmm
@Betty Cracker: it would be more than okay, I’d be honored! Thank you and thanks to everyone else for your responses!
I’m more than ready to hang up my 20 pound duty belt. I’ve been freelance writing on the side for years and I’m psyched to do it full time. And it feels like today’s publication is a good start.
Thanks again!
Elizabelle
@Cmm: I would love if you front page posted here, as you can. A professional police officer’s view. Dog knows, we all read enough from the “chairborne” types, who don’t deserve their megaphones.
D58826
@Mai.naem.mobile: Well if partisan lines hold, if Clinton v Trump gets to SCOTUS it will be a 4-4 tie. Kennedy or Roberts would have to flip to Clinton for the good of the nation. Possible but not probably.
sunny raines
RBG is sharp and not knee-jerk. I expect she made her statements on trump to get it out there knowing full well ahead of time there would be yuuuge wingnut blowback and she would likely end up apologizing. Her thoughts are out there and there is no going back.
Cmm
@Mary G: thanks Mary!
One of the things White Amerixa in general and white cops in particular need to get past is assuming that someone saying that any part of our thinking has racist implications, underpinnings, history, etc is the equivalent of saying that person is a capital R Racist.
To me a Racist is someone who consciously embraces and insists on the truth of racist ideas. It’s the people in black and white photos screaming at children going to school or manning the firehoses. That’s what most people think a racist person is and that’s why they automatically shut down, reject and stop listening to anything that says to them “you are a Racist”. It’s also what people mean when they say racism is over because that kind mostly is tho not as much as we like to think.
In discussions and online conversations I’m very careful to distinguish racist influences, ideas and assumptions and call them such. People still hear “You are a Racist” when I say “that is a racist assumption” but not everyone.
Some of the commenters there insist I’m just making excuses. No. I’m trying to open up a place where we can all consciously look at the racist assumptions underneath a lot of our society without the walls going up. Because that is the only way any change is going to come in the whole culture and the police culture.
One example–when I first started some of the oldest officers would call the mass of “bad guys” out there in our streets “heathens”. They didn’t mean everyone and they didn’t mean all the black people, they meant the criminals of any color who we saw again and again in our jail or out doing shady stuff. The ones who don’t give a shit about what society says you are supposed to do and do crime all day every day–there really are people like that, criminal activity is their job and they seem to take joy in their work. And in a town that is 80 percent black, most of that group of criminals are too.
So, leaving aside for the moment all the imperialist and Christianist implications of the word, because these guys were completely clueless about that, they used it to refer to a subset of the population, and many of them meant nothing specifically about black people–even the older black officers use the term.
But it’s also a handy way for the officers who ARE racist to say the n-word without really saying it because they don’t mean it the same way. And it will certainly be heard as a euphemism for the n word by many listeners whether that’s what the speaker means. People have come to realize that over time and the term has mostly died out in my department.
Some of the people who said heathen are capital R racist. Most aren’t, they just uncritically used a term that had racist underpinnings and connotations no matter how they personally defined it. Over time people have recognised that and it has died out. But the people who genuinely believed that when they said heathen they meant “the group of routinely bad actors of any race or ethnicity in our community messing things up for everyone else” would be mortally offended if someone said to them, because you use that word you are a Racist.
You have to pull out and examine the racist stuff without making people hear “You are a racist” because to most people that means “you are a person who would have been out on the Pettus bridge bashing heads” or “you are the kind of person who would build a separate toilet in your garage so the “colored help” doesn’t use your bathroom” and they quite correctly say “no I’m not and I can’t believe you would say that fuck off” end of discussion.
Some people will hear that anyway. Some will pretend they hear that and use it as a shield to avoid challenge but at least it may plant a seed that will grow later when they see racist tropes or another news show full of nothing but black mugshots, and start to ask a few more questions.
TLDR call people including cops racist and they stop listening. Put things in terms of racist thinking, language, assumptions, stereotypes, etc without suggesting that that is a conscious and hateful choice on the part of the person using them, and we can have more of a conversation and maybe start making some real progress.
Hmm I may have another essay germinating here….
Anyway thanks you guys!
Also if you read the comments on that article it’s funny how many people automatically assume I’m male.
Cmm
@Elizabelle: ha! Given our gracious hosts well known opinions of pretty much all cops everywhere, I don’t expect an invitation. But that’s cool, I still love John to death and love it here. Just someone suggesting I might be front page worthy thrills me to my bones because I love this place even tho I don’t get to comment as much as I would like.
D58826
@Cmm: I had linked and read the article from Twitter. Well done. As is usually the case life and people are a lot more complicated than the short hand descriptions that we read. The short hand is just another form of pattern recognition, probably necessary since you can’t write a psych manual every time you write an article. Unfortunately the background gets lost in the shouting. Both the cops and the members of the community just want to go home to their families each night so they have a common interest in working together. Just have to figure out how to bridge that gap. As the President said, and as is the case with the schools, we expect cops and teachers to solve (or maybe just keep the lid on) problems that are societal in nature and beyond the ability of schools and police to fix
Bobby Thomson
@AxelFoley: No, I’m agreeing with Justice Ginsburg. I respect her, unlike the vast majority here who see her as a pawn in their own Django Uchained fantasies.
D58826
I suspect the problem is the community heard the use of the word and assumed it was directed at every one. And just like your comment in the article that suburban experience of black life is the TV crime beat, I suspect that African Americans did not know that the same phraseology was being used by suburban cops. Having been referred to by the N word for years it just seemed like the term fit the general level of disrespect.
D58826
@Cmm: Well maybe we all can gang up on Cole. Esp. since he says he wants to foster a wide open discussion.
Elizabelle
@Cmm: I see Cole grousing publicly and (secretly) happily giving you some real estate, if it leads to better understanding of our current predicament.
burnspbesq
@Keith G:
You’re not paying attention.
Did you read about Trump’s remarks in the wake of the Nice attack? He said he would declare a world war. Not that he would ask Congress to declare a world war. That he would arrogate to himself a power that our Constitution exlicitly and unmistakably assigns only to Congress.
The man is contemptuous of our systems and institutions. He will trash them on a whim. Do you actually doubt that if a district court enjoins a Federal agemcy from doing something Trump wants it to do, Trump will order the head of the agency to disregard the injunction? Do you actually doubt that Trump will use DOJ, the IRS, and every other organ of government to enrich himself, reward his friends, and punish his enemies, on a scale that Nixon couldn’t even have imagined?
Back in 2013, there were plenty of Hungarians who thought about Orban the way you think about Trump. They have been proven wrong.
I’m not willing to take that risk with my country. If you are, then you’re a fool, and we’re enemies.
pseudonymous in nc
@Keith G:
Until it isn’t. And yes, paranoid style and all that, but if you’re going to put faith in institutional checks in an abstract “genius of the founding fathers” way you also have to take note of the filibuster and the abandonment of standard institutional processes for judicial nominations and so on.
Institutional infrastructure is like physical infrastructure. If it’s not maintained, and instead treated as if it’ll run forever because it was well-built, then one day your bridge collapses or your sewers back up or your water stops flowing and you have no excuses.
Obama was clearly an institutionalist when he ran for the presidency; Trump ain’t.
David Fud
@EconWatcher: The last time the court got involved in the presidential election, they… picked themail candidate that lost. So, you know, the court’s dignity is more than a bit tattered already. I hear what you are saying but it is a bit too late.