State of the Discussion

I'm in pretty good shape for 71--meaning I didn't have weight gain with menopause; don't have cancer; I can see, hear and think; my hair is still brown; and I can walk three or four miles without collapse (if the weather is cool).

As mentioned above, fast movement or sudden movement is jarring and painful. I'm not flexible anymore. I can't remember names. I can't walk very far if the temp is over 80 without getting ill. This is a big change from my previous baseline which included 20 mile mountain hikes wearing a backpack and weekend bike trips of 60 miles or so plus occasional bike trip vacations.

Mostly I'm okay so far. I'm kind of afraid I will follow the pattern with my family which is to lose my sight and hearing while continuing to live into my nineties. I don't want to keep going when it stops being fun.

Thanks so much for posting that. I'm tempted to post Rick Blaine's line at the end of Casablanca, but I don't want to scare you off.

I wonder if it is a possibility that, after all the dust has settled (if it does) and the MAGAists are cast out (if they are), we would have a round of amendments. ERA, possibly expanded to deal with the Roberts court's assaults on it, something dealing with tariffs, an amendment specifically about environmental protection, possibly couched in terms of the rights of future generations, would be what I would hope for. I realize this is improbably optimistic, but that's what's for dinner.

Interesting article. The narrative of how the Supreme Court came to be so weaponized is good, and the role that Originalism played in it is plausible. I'd like a much more solid set of grounds laid out for that, but that would likely push the length of the article beyond what a popular venue like The Atlantic would support - more of an academic press book argument than a middlebrow magazine argument.

The part I found weakest, though, was the connection implied between Originalism and the abandonment of constitutional amendment as a path to change. It seems to me that the procedures for amendment codified in the Constitution themselves account for why that process has been abandoned. The threshold of support required for amending the Constitution is excessive.

https://www.californialawreview.org/print/the-worlds-most-difficult-constitution-to-amend

The only times it has ever worked, it did so because of either war or an extension of franchise to a broader group of Americans that created the potential for new cross-cutting alliances which could overcome those difficulties. I don't see that Originalism has altered anything with regard to amendment. What it has done is given conservative legal activists a recognizable brand on which to build a legal sophistry that can provide cover for a judiciary coup.

The Constitution is deeply flawed and limiting. It probably should have failed in 1860 or in 1929, and only extraordinary extra-Constitutional means preserved the nation in both instances, but the flaws remain. We would probably be better off with a new governing document, but there is no way that the nation would ever go back together as a 50-state union if the document went away. We've lost our sense of a common good.

For someone soon to turn 72, I seem to have remarkably few aches and pains. My sister is younger, and I have quit comparing notes with her because I feel guilty. Given our two histories, I'm the one you would expect to have painful worn-out joints*. All of mine seem to be cranking along fine. She's replaced both knees, one hip, one shoulder, and had an ankle rebuilt.

For the record, last time out on the bicycle I did 20 miles. I have had to admit that I will be the slowest person on the trail from now on, because the people I used to pass have all got e-bikes. I'm old-fashioned, I guess -- the goal is to conquer the uphill bits on your own, not to pass the job over to some batteries.

* Bicycling since I was six with the inevitable falls, plus off-and-on golf, racquet sports, soccer, basketball, softball, hiking/climbing, fencing, lugging around children (and now grandchildren). A variety of joints occasionally sprained, with only amateur stretching and PT routines during recovery. Tossed down the side of a mountain by a horse once.

I normally disable what cookies I can when on any new site. I do not recall being asked about this when I first logged on here. Apparently, I have "Third Party Cookies" enabled, for what that's worth.

OK, just got up and posted the pending comments, which were only GftNC and wonkie. I'll contact you both off list this weekend and try to figure out what's up.

To remarkable degree, Republican messaging uses the precepts set out by Goebbels. One is to give people the thrill of fear, basically something to be outraged about that isn't real. Kind of like the fun of being scared at a horror movie. For literally decades, Republican messaging has consisted of telling people to be afraid of not-real while also telling them that the real is fake. So "They are going to take your guns!!!!" and "There is no climate change." War on Christmas, trans kids, white people are going to be a minority!!!! ect. From the safety of their armchairs, life becomes an exciting experience of being scared/outraged over imaginary threats, which is a reinforcing experience. It's fun. Allows the participant to feel virtuous and vicariously heroic by voting for the party that will smite the evil enemy without ever being in any real danger. Meanwhile, I'm sure that those people worry about real problems, but election after election they vote to fight the imaginary ones.

I think leading Dems are sort of hoping that the economy will be the real problem that breaks through this bullshit and gets enough voters to vote D to give the Dems some power in Congress and at the state level. Hence "kitchen table issues" versus R culture war bullshit. It worked in Sioux City at a special election.

On the other hand, Missouri, which is a hell hole of bad government, just keeps electing Republicans over and over.

I keep thinking of the Depression, when enough voters were suffering enough to give a reform politicians real power. Once the suffering receded to being mostly minorities, that desire for reform and improvement, that desire for government as a service for the common good, started losing elections to "I got mine, screw you, and besides you are just a (fill in the hater crap du jour)."

It is a privilege to be outraged all the time about imaginary shit.

Until now none but my first comment (as announced) went into moderation, and I just entered name and email address without opening any account.
I did not click the box "save my name..."

The Republican party message is a fairy tale about how the good Republican party will save the good people from the existential threat presented by the rest of us.

My sense is that MAGA people are generally full of fear.

They're gonna take my guns. They're letting a lot of brown people in so that white people are outnumbered. Some Mexican is gonna take my job, or, if you're white collar, some South Asian is gonna take my job. They're gonna chop my kid's genitals off. They're gonna let great big guys play on my daughter's soccer team and she's gonna get run over (my (D) House Rep came out with that one).

There are actually some legitimate concerns in all of the above, and there are sensible conversations to have about them. Those conversations are not available because everybody is so freaking hyped up.

And then there are the folks whose point of view basically my life's good, I'm making money, I want to keep it that way, and if it means tasering some brown person mowing somebody's lawn or working in a restaurant kitchen or mopping floors in a hospital, I'm OK with that.

I have a friend who's an academic, a professor of psychology, who has been involved in this project for a few years trying to find ways to "bridge the divide". His approach is to get people to talk to each other, listen to each other, and try to establish some kind of empathetic connection.

My question to him is always, where the hell is that going to happen? And how are you going to scale that to a level that is going to have an actual effect on the situation we find ourselves in?

It's a mess. I have no solution. Find whatever ways are available to you to mitigate whatever harms you can, and do those.

But I don't see a path to persuading committed MAGAs to change their minds. Even if it all falls to shit around them, they'll find a way to blame on somebody, anybody, other than Trump.

He's their champion, their idol, their savior. That's no exaggeration.

I think my difficulty is... MAGA is a fascist movement--literally. People who like Prager U, Kirk, or other haters are the moral equivalent of good Germans. And most of the good Germans were, mostly, nice people.
As noted above, they only learn from being hurt themselves and even then the commitment to their groupthink often remains. The core of that groupthink is disrespect for the rest of us.
Actually disrespect isn't a strong enough word. That friend I had who claimed that Dems supported infanticide, for example. How the hell could he justify believing something that awful about other people? The Republican party message is a fairy tale about how the good Republican party will save the good people from the existential threat presented by the rest of us. How are we an existential threat? Because we (fill in the blank with current hater memes). What unites the MAGAs isn't a set of shared values or support for certain policies; it's hate for the rest of us.
Just as racists make exceptions for someone they know, MAGAs make exceptions for someone they know. But that nice person who is a good neighbor, a long time friend, goes home and chooses to indulge in hate messaging that makes the rest of us potential targets of violence because of the false claim that we are an existential threat to real true good American values.
Would my neighbor Anne object if I got shot at a protest rally? Probably. Would she object if someone else did? Not if Ingraham or Watters or someone told her that the protester had it coming.
It's weird to chat and be friendly with someone who would has no trouble seeing people get hauled off to prison in El Salvador or FL, can rationalize women dying of miscarriages, supports voter suppression and gerrymandering, voted for the guy who instigated a violent attack on Congress and who is in fact an existential threat to representative government and fundamental human rights.
I guess I have to remember the line about "Forgive them, they know not what they do." But I sure as hell am not forgiving to the ones who get elected or get on Faux.

I have a lot of friends on the right - people I've known since I was a kid. My approach these days is more or less the same as russell's. I talk about other stuff. A few of them will try to bait me into a debate on whatever topic has them spun up at the moment. It usually prompts me to say something like, just as one example, "Let's start with this: Do you think global warming is a hoax?" I respond to anything even close to a "yes" with, "There's no point in talking about this. How about those Phillies?"

I can usually play the argument we would have had in my head, anyway. I know these people.

Aha, out of the gulag! It only took about 40 minutes for both to come out.

I know almost nobody who disagrees with me about Trump, so that (luckily) doesn't arise. The exception is someone fiercely clever who has been my close friend since we were 11, and she is a tribal Republican who actually voted for Trump 3 times. I don't talk to her about it, because a) I can't bear to hear what she might say, b) I love her, and also I am worried about her cognitive decline (starting long before Trump). Now let's see if it's the gulag again...