I saw this guy, James Kirchick, on the June 17, 2022 episode of ‘Real Time with Bill Maher’ who said: “There’s a divide, on the left, in the Democratic Party, between the people who want to win political power and the echo chamber in the media, in the academy, in the NGO sector, and the people on Twitter – and their interests are not the same, right? So there’s the Democratic Party that wants to win power and then there are people who want to get clicks and they want to sell subscriptions and they want to, you know, bark very loudly.”

The people he dismisses as simply wanting to “bark very loudly” ACTUALLY just want a voice in their government, like they’re supposed to have according to the Constitution. As long as the DNC keeps manipulating primaries to remove the more popular candidate in favor of whomever they’ve sold the nomination to this time, progressives are going to be difficult, if not impossible, to keep in the fold.

Bernie would have won. I believe this for one, main reason. Like Republican cons, Democratic loyalists will vote for whomever they’re told to vote for by the party. Progressives won’t. When the party tried to tell everyone they had to vote Hillary, the progressives collectively said, “No, we don’t.” Had the party told the members they had to vote Bernie, they would have done so and the progressives would have, too.

I’ll tell you this: As far as I’m concerned, the DNC chose Trump, not the progressives. They just can’t allow their members to understand that – so the myth endures…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Our society pretends that people who rise to the top of an existing hierarchy do so through grit, determination, and hard work and those people are the best of the best. That’s why they get there. In my experience, though, the people who rise to the top of an existing hierarchy do so by relegating ethics to the dustbin. (Sidebar: “‘existing’ hierarchy” is an important distinction. It’s still possible – though not guaranteed – to find decent people heading up companies they, personally, built. I’m referring specifically to a company that has existed for a LONG time and the person who rises to the top of that business.) My line for those people is, “Those are the people willing to do whatever it takes.” But not because they’re “go-getters.” It’s because they’ll do anything, to anybody, at anytime, to further their ambitions. Far from being the best of the best, they’re very commonly the very worst of the worst. Zero ethical constraints make for a very dangerous person at the top. (See Trump…)

MOST people self-select out of the pretended “success” race because, at some point, they’re presented with some ethical dilemma they choose not to ignore. There’s some line they won’t cross. The line is personal and different for every person. Commonly, it means the end of their rise. Ethics in America tend to be a career staller, if not a career killer. If you’ve been watching the January 6th committee, like every decent American should, you’ve seen a veritable parade of people – Republicans, mostly – who came up against exactly that kind of question and decided to do the right thing. It’s a rare example of a time when ethics may HELP their careers. A very rare example, indeed.

In truth, theirs was a kind of bet. They decided to bet on the Constitution and not on the demagogue. If the Keystone Congress isn’t setting up a 14th Amendment challenge to the politicians who actively engaged in the insurrection, as they should be, Drumpf will be back. If he comes back, the country as we know it goes away, once and for all. At this point, it really is that simple.

I’ll tell you this: if the Constitution wins, and Trump is barred from ever holding public office again, the folks testifying may well have even BETTER careers – because they did the right thing. If Trump wins, bad news for the folks who finally reached their ethical limits and did the right thing. They’ll be the first ones punished. The rest of us will be prioritized after that…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I opened the Guardian this morning and saw the headline, “US Supreme Court in question after abortion ruling.” No it isn’t. The court fell into disrepute the second Gorsuch was seated in his stolen seat. The court fell into “controversy” when they started ruling in favor of conservative principles without regard to the law. Now, for my money, this court faces complete disregard. There is no “question…”