I really appreciate the Bulwark because it presents ideas that are common sense. Fiscally conservative and socially liberal, it's sometimes difficult to find common sense. MSNBC was too much about how businesses are ruining America because they are trying to make money. Conservative news supported Trump, enough said. I recently canceled a subscription to a news service that was also anti Trump because when an article included comments that were anti Trump they also included comments about how the radical left was controlling Biden and destroying the country and it was DeSantis who was really working to put forth laws that reflected American values, and I was told I'm a naive idiot if I didn't realize the Democrats' plan to destroy the country.
14 hr ago·edited 14 hr agoLiked by Jonathan V. Last
I appreciate my Republican friends at the Bulwark very much.
Also, I sort of understand why some still identify as Republicans in spite of some of the rotten things in the party's history and in spite of the rot in today's GOP because I have some similar conflicts as someone who was raised in the Catholic Church. I've become an agnostic yet my Catholic identity remains a part of me.
Moving on, I am a supporter of Joe Biden on social media and have sometimes been accused by those who hate and despise him of "loving Biden." That's because I am so busy defending him from charges of senility, being a pedophile, a racist, a clown, corrupt, 'China Joe' - and the worst president ever, a world laughingstock who is destroying the country, etc. that I rarely note that I know he messed up the Afghanistan withdrawal, that I cringe whenever he repeats "that's not hyperbole" and "not a joke" - and that I am among those who while crediting him for his numerous accomplishments, believe that he is too old to run again. Although I think Biden deserves far better poll numbers than he's getting, I don't really love him, although I confess I did and do love Obama a little.
The ambivalence about homelessness is really about civic order vs. individual rights. There are clearly people out there who can’t take care of themselves and who cross the line of decency when they verbally assault people. Some sort of custodial asylums seem necessary (if unlikely) but there are liberty concerns.
19 hr ago·edited 18 hr agoLiked by Jonathan V. Last
JVL wrote:
*****Warning: Today’s edition is fairly self-indulgent.
[...]
[M]ost of the time being an Internet supporter means running cover for your team.*****
.
.
I agree with the truth of the latter bit and presently will emulate the former bit with a relevant personal example.
A friend of mine posted a popular agitprop meme that argues with an annotated graph that Democrats, not Republicans, are the party of fiscal responsibility.
I commented to the post that the graph was misleading. My friend replied, essentially, that I am too honest -- which I took as a great compliment! My friend argued that Democrats lose by fighting fair and that I should do my part rather than nag my friends to do otherwise.
My friend's comments prompted me to write an essay.
Long live team liberal democracy. I’m a life-long Democrat, a donor, and there is no daylight between me and The Bulwark. I support Ukraine, border control, civic order, free markets (suitably regulated and with a functioning safety net), gay rights, and choice. I’m ambivalent about trans issues and affirmative action and homelessness. What I want to say is, come on in, the water’s fine. There’s plenty of ideological breathing room for Never Trumpers in the Democratic Party. There’s a huge core of centrist Democrats who, like you, are committed to common decency and common sense. Welcome!
Mr. Last makes good points about how the Republicans have changed for the worse in the last few years. It is no longer clear that they are better on average than the Democrats on free markets, globalism and trade, individual liberty, crime, the rule of law, free speech, or a foreign policy appropriate to the situation in the world. Neither is it clear they have sunk below the Democrats on all these things. The Dems had such a head start on some of them, but the Repubs surely are bad enough. Their self-named national conservatives (i.e American falangists) are very bad indeed. I read an article a few days ago at the Federalist (a supposedly respectable conservative site I recommend checking occasionally for examples of what defenders of liberal civilization are up against) arguing that the culture war was not only the main issue for 2024 but really the only one, with questions of war and peace or the economy being irrelevant by comparison. The author demanded that the evil of his opponents in general and those having anything to do with transgender people or activities in particular had to be crushed and destroyed. The same author, one of their editors, has a piece up today calling for a religious war against woke corporations claiming they are literally siding with the forces of darkness. There are certainly big threats from the left, but there are two fronts in the fight to defend liberal principles and civilization, and some of the stuff from the right is scary as hell. Those of us who generally have seen Republicans as an at least slightly lesser evil than the Democrats have an extra responsibility to try to do something about it.
I loved the "Bulwark is Right Wing Garbage" story. It tends to confirm my long held suspicion that Will Saletan escaped Slate one step ahead of the NKVD team that was probably about to take him out.
I fully agree with your identification of Internet supporters as fanboys (or girls, to be fair), but is that any different from being a troll? They both have the same function and, possibly, the same ability to actually vote for "their" candidate or even donate money since many trolls are overseas with no US connection (Hi Vlad).
Love the thought of 16 year old boys at a sleepover, drooling over thought pieces on institutionalism and robust foreign policy. It’s the perfect setup for an SNL sketch. The letter is 100% trollery.
Great column, as always. As to the point, "If you are in favor of robust foreign policy, your natural home 10 years ago was in the Republican party. Today, you can still find outposts for that view in the GOP, but the main body of the party has turned to isolationism. The Democratic party is now the natural home for people who want America engaged in world affairs.
The same can be said about the free market, and globalism, and free speech, and individual liberty, and crime, and the rule of law."
The Democratic Party was always a home for these things, going back to the days of FDR. I've spent my whole life listening to "conservatives" say otherwise, and, because it wasn't true in the first place, they finally had to invent a TV network to lie for them about all of this. For God's sake Bill Clinton created a surplus, and all that did was step up GOP efforts to destroy him. After all, he'd made them look bad, something authoritarians can't handle.
Conservatives lied about Ed Muskie in 1972, smeared his wife, the cruelty being the point. And it worked. That and the Southern Strategy worked so well that it's all the GOP has done ever since--lie, smear, misrepresent, misdirect, prop up racists...there's a reason the Bulwarkers aren't going to "support" a GOP candidate. Because the GOP are mostly fascists and have been since the rise of Nixon, if not far, far earlier than that.
Let's see. I think I heard about it from The Atlantic and somewhere else, possibly Vanity Fair, in maybe 2019? You can see why someone would be concerned about the influence of those notoriously alt-right magazines on their kid!
If my 16 year old son was subscribing to The Bulwark, my chief "concern" would be that he's so serious and cerebral that he won't get laid until his mid 20s. Ask me how I know...
Okay I know I am avoiding doing housework but I wish to make one more comment and yes this one is on the newsletter. Specifically the footnotes, specifically number 2.
"But on the issue of “life,” the Republican party’s behavior regarding COVID has proven that what it cares about is the practice of abortion and not a true culture of life."
Yes you are correct the republican party has proven time and again it cares little for a "culture of life" but make no mistake they do not care about the "practice of abortion" either and would just as easily force women to have abortions as not to. What they care about is absolute control of women to any extent they can get it. Hobbling women is the point why else would they be so opposed to help with child care, to equal wages, to women's rights. Yes there are people who are opposed to abortion on personal moral grounds and I respect these people's opinion. But make no mistake the Republican party stance on abortion in neither about life nor morality, it is about control.
Okay I know it is Saturday and I know Monday is a Holiday, but I am retired and as my husband's uncle says the worst thing about being retired is you don't get any holidays. So I want to talk about the debt ceiling. First of all I guess there are no Democrat congressmen involved in the "negotiations" which to me is pure insanity on the part of the WH, because McCarthy does not have the votes to pass anything Biden will agree to. Second there was this statement from the WH "spokesman" that should be amplified across the country.
"Both sides are still at loggerheads over new work requirements for federal aid programs. The White House was pushed back hard on that demand last night, issuing a statement blasting the right for trying to “tie the most vulnerable up in bureaucratic paperwork, which have shown no benefit for bringing more people into the workforce.”" This per Politico
Republicans have used this sort of thing on the state level whether it be work requirements, reapplying for benefits every few months, or the most disastrous of all drug testing to receive benefits. It has two outcomes the first one stated above and the second it almost universally costs more than it "saves" besides denying the most vulnerable the benefits they deserve. And yes cruelty is the point.
I really appreciate the Bulwark because it presents ideas that are common sense. Fiscally conservative and socially liberal, it's sometimes difficult to find common sense. MSNBC was too much about how businesses are ruining America because they are trying to make money. Conservative news supported Trump, enough said. I recently canceled a subscription to a news service that was also anti Trump because when an article included comments that were anti Trump they also included comments about how the radical left was controlling Biden and destroying the country and it was DeSantis who was really working to put forth laws that reflected American values, and I was told I'm a naive idiot if I didn't realize the Democrats' plan to destroy the country.
I appreciate my Republican friends at the Bulwark very much.
Also, I sort of understand why some still identify as Republicans in spite of some of the rotten things in the party's history and in spite of the rot in today's GOP because I have some similar conflicts as someone who was raised in the Catholic Church. I've become an agnostic yet my Catholic identity remains a part of me.
Moving on, I am a supporter of Joe Biden on social media and have sometimes been accused by those who hate and despise him of "loving Biden." That's because I am so busy defending him from charges of senility, being a pedophile, a racist, a clown, corrupt, 'China Joe' - and the worst president ever, a world laughingstock who is destroying the country, etc. that I rarely note that I know he messed up the Afghanistan withdrawal, that I cringe whenever he repeats "that's not hyperbole" and "not a joke" - and that I am among those who while crediting him for his numerous accomplishments, believe that he is too old to run again. Although I think Biden deserves far better poll numbers than he's getting, I don't really love him, although I confess I did and do love Obama a little.
The ambivalence about homelessness is really about civic order vs. individual rights. There are clearly people out there who can’t take care of themselves and who cross the line of decency when they verbally assault people. Some sort of custodial asylums seem necessary (if unlikely) but there are liberty concerns.
JVL wrote:
*****Warning: Today’s edition is fairly self-indulgent.
[...]
[M]ost of the time being an Internet supporter means running cover for your team.*****
.
.
I agree with the truth of the latter bit and presently will emulate the former bit with a relevant personal example.
A friend of mine posted a popular agitprop meme that argues with an annotated graph that Democrats, not Republicans, are the party of fiscal responsibility.
I commented to the post that the graph was misleading. My friend replied, essentially, that I am too honest -- which I took as a great compliment! My friend argued that Democrats lose by fighting fair and that I should do my part rather than nag my friends to do otherwise.
My friend's comments prompted me to write an essay.
Please indulge MY shameless self-promotion:
https://decencyandsense.substack.com/p/advocate-and-argue-in-good-faith
Long live team liberal democracy. I’m a life-long Democrat, a donor, and there is no daylight between me and The Bulwark. I support Ukraine, border control, civic order, free markets (suitably regulated and with a functioning safety net), gay rights, and choice. I’m ambivalent about trans issues and affirmative action and homelessness. What I want to say is, come on in, the water’s fine. There’s plenty of ideological breathing room for Never Trumpers in the Democratic Party. There’s a huge core of centrist Democrats who, like you, are committed to common decency and common sense. Welcome!
Mr. Last makes good points about how the Republicans have changed for the worse in the last few years. It is no longer clear that they are better on average than the Democrats on free markets, globalism and trade, individual liberty, crime, the rule of law, free speech, or a foreign policy appropriate to the situation in the world. Neither is it clear they have sunk below the Democrats on all these things. The Dems had such a head start on some of them, but the Repubs surely are bad enough. Their self-named national conservatives (i.e American falangists) are very bad indeed. I read an article a few days ago at the Federalist (a supposedly respectable conservative site I recommend checking occasionally for examples of what defenders of liberal civilization are up against) arguing that the culture war was not only the main issue for 2024 but really the only one, with questions of war and peace or the economy being irrelevant by comparison. The author demanded that the evil of his opponents in general and those having anything to do with transgender people or activities in particular had to be crushed and destroyed. The same author, one of their editors, has a piece up today calling for a religious war against woke corporations claiming they are literally siding with the forces of darkness. There are certainly big threats from the left, but there are two fronts in the fight to defend liberal principles and civilization, and some of the stuff from the right is scary as hell. Those of us who generally have seen Republicans as an at least slightly lesser evil than the Democrats have an extra responsibility to try to do something about it.
I loved the "Bulwark is Right Wing Garbage" story. It tends to confirm my long held suspicion that Will Saletan escaped Slate one step ahead of the NKVD team that was probably about to take him out.
JVL—who said kids can’t make political contributions? They can: https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate-taking-receipts/who-can-and-cant-contribute/
Happy to serve as the Bulwark’s unofficial campaign finance lawyer.
I fully agree with your identification of Internet supporters as fanboys (or girls, to be fair), but is that any different from being a troll? They both have the same function and, possibly, the same ability to actually vote for "their" candidate or even donate money since many trolls are overseas with no US connection (Hi Vlad).
Love the thought of 16 year old boys at a sleepover, drooling over thought pieces on institutionalism and robust foreign policy. It’s the perfect setup for an SNL sketch. The letter is 100% trollery.
Great column, as always. As to the point, "If you are in favor of robust foreign policy, your natural home 10 years ago was in the Republican party. Today, you can still find outposts for that view in the GOP, but the main body of the party has turned to isolationism. The Democratic party is now the natural home for people who want America engaged in world affairs.
The same can be said about the free market, and globalism, and free speech, and individual liberty, and crime, and the rule of law."
The Democratic Party was always a home for these things, going back to the days of FDR. I've spent my whole life listening to "conservatives" say otherwise, and, because it wasn't true in the first place, they finally had to invent a TV network to lie for them about all of this. For God's sake Bill Clinton created a surplus, and all that did was step up GOP efforts to destroy him. After all, he'd made them look bad, something authoritarians can't handle.
Conservatives lied about Ed Muskie in 1972, smeared his wife, the cruelty being the point. And it worked. That and the Southern Strategy worked so well that it's all the GOP has done ever since--lie, smear, misrepresent, misdirect, prop up racists...there's a reason the Bulwarkers aren't going to "support" a GOP candidate. Because the GOP are mostly fascists and have been since the rise of Nixon, if not far, far earlier than that.
"Where did he hear about The Bulwark?"
Let's see. I think I heard about it from The Atlantic and somewhere else, possibly Vanity Fair, in maybe 2019? You can see why someone would be concerned about the influence of those notoriously alt-right magazines on their kid!
If my 16 year old son was subscribing to The Bulwark, my chief "concern" would be that he's so serious and cerebral that he won't get laid until his mid 20s. Ask me how I know...
Thanks for this Triad toay, JVL.
Another bi-partisan, all inclusive event to watch this weekend....the Memorial Concert on the Mall with Gary Sinise and Joe Montagna.
In 256 comments, someone has probably already mentioned that the Slate "response" is a fake written by ChatBot.
Okay I know I am avoiding doing housework but I wish to make one more comment and yes this one is on the newsletter. Specifically the footnotes, specifically number 2.
"But on the issue of “life,” the Republican party’s behavior regarding COVID has proven that what it cares about is the practice of abortion and not a true culture of life."
Yes you are correct the republican party has proven time and again it cares little for a "culture of life" but make no mistake they do not care about the "practice of abortion" either and would just as easily force women to have abortions as not to. What they care about is absolute control of women to any extent they can get it. Hobbling women is the point why else would they be so opposed to help with child care, to equal wages, to women's rights. Yes there are people who are opposed to abortion on personal moral grounds and I respect these people's opinion. But make no mistake the Republican party stance on abortion in neither about life nor morality, it is about control.
Okay I know it is Saturday and I know Monday is a Holiday, but I am retired and as my husband's uncle says the worst thing about being retired is you don't get any holidays. So I want to talk about the debt ceiling. First of all I guess there are no Democrat congressmen involved in the "negotiations" which to me is pure insanity on the part of the WH, because McCarthy does not have the votes to pass anything Biden will agree to. Second there was this statement from the WH "spokesman" that should be amplified across the country.
"Both sides are still at loggerheads over new work requirements for federal aid programs. The White House was pushed back hard on that demand last night, issuing a statement blasting the right for trying to “tie the most vulnerable up in bureaucratic paperwork, which have shown no benefit for bringing more people into the workforce.”" This per Politico
Republicans have used this sort of thing on the state level whether it be work requirements, reapplying for benefits every few months, or the most disastrous of all drug testing to receive benefits. It has two outcomes the first one stated above and the second it almost universally costs more than it "saves" besides denying the most vulnerable the benefits they deserve. And yes cruelty is the point.