Democrats, Don’t Waste This Opportunity

Mr. Measles: Hi, I’m Mr. Measles and this is my pal, Mr. Polio.

Mr. Polio: Hello, I’m—

Mr. Measles: We’re here to tell you just how happy we are that Donald Trump picked Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head the Department of Health and Human Services.

Mr. Polio: It’s one of—

Mr. Measles: The most important positions in the whole government. And for us, Kennedy is the best man for the job. He says there are no vaccines that are effective or safe.

Mr. Polio: Not a single one, and—

Mr. Measles: That would be music to our ears.

Mr. Polio: If we had ears—

Mr. Measles: And he says he wants to suspend the development of all new drugs for eight years. Which makes our friends Mr. Alzheimer’s, Mrs. Parkinson’s, and Mr. Big C very happy, too. And did you know that your very own Senator ______ is not opposing Kennedy?

Mr. Polio: Thank you, thank you, thank you, Senator _____.

Mr. Measles: Yes, thank you very much. So please don’t pressure Senator ______ to vote against Kennedy. That wouldn’t be very good for us or our friends. Thanks to Trump, Kennedy, and Senator ______, we can Make Measles Great Again!

Mr. Polio: And polio, too! 

Mr. Measles: See you soon. 

Mr. Polio: Very soon.

Narrator: This ad paid for by Citizens for Sanity in Government.

For the life of me, I don’t understand why Democrats and health policy groups don’t have an ad like this now airing in states represented by Republican senators, especially those who face reelection in two years. Do these legislators want to be associated with future epidemics that could kill children, and adults, too? It’s a clear shot: A vote for Kennedy is a vote for vaccine opposition and possible outbreaks of deadly diseases. And to stop Kennedy—or any of Trump’s other inexperienced extremist nominees, such as Tulsi Gabbard (director of national intelligence) or Peter Hegseth (secretary of defense)—the Democrats need only persuade or scare a handful of GOP senators. Even with Trump’s intimidating tactics—his team has been threatening to orchestrate Elon Musk–funded primary challenges to Republicans who don’t support his nominees—several of these battles are winnable for the Dems.

But you can’t win if you don’t fight. (Cue up NHL great Wayne Gretzky: “You miss 100 percent of the shots you don’t take.”) And the sordid saga of Matt Gaetz, Trump’s ridiculous choice for attorney general who has been investigated for sex trafficking involving a minor and who finally self-defenestrated on Thursday, shows that Trump’s will can be defied. Gaetz pulled his own plug after he learned that CNN was about to publish a story reporting that Gaetz had two—not one—sexual encounters with a minor. The previous day the New York Times reported that Gaetz had used Venmo to pay $10,000 to two women for sex.

But Gaetz’s trip to the guillotine was probably just as much prompted by word spreading on Capitol Hill that at least five Senate Republicans—Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma, and Sen.-elect John Curtis of Utah—had decided they were thumbs down on Gaetz. There were likely others willing to say no to Trump on Gaetz, and these Republicans reached this verdict—which in the pre-Trump era would have been a no-brainer—without much political pressure applied.

Congressional Democrats did not shout every day that the Republicans were mounting a cover-up of (alleged) sleazy misdeeds by refusing to release the final report of the House Ethics Committee’s investigation of Gaetz. In recent years, Republicans have never missed an opportunity (real or manufactured) to call for making public information that might inconvenience Democrats—and to generate hair-on-fire controversy if the material was kept confidential. Here was an instance in which the Democrats had legitimate cause to do the same. Yet they kept it cool. At one point Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader, passed up the chance to make a fuss, saying he didn’t want to bigfoot the ranking Democrat on the Ethics Committee. Really? That’s playing way too nice.

In the end, GaetzGate concluded as it should, with Gaetz abandoning his quest to rule the Justice Department. Gaetz’s retreat, though, was not the result of Democratic exertion. It was an unforced and self-inflicted error for Team Trump. On other fronts, Democrats need to show some fight. After Trump’s non-landslide triumph, the Musk-backed MAGA barbarians are inside the gates, preparing multiple assaults on democratic values and decency that could devastate the lives of tens of millions of people. Are Democrats rushing to the barricades and doing all that is possible to thwart the coming assault or lessen the impact of its blows? Are they rallying the half of the nation that said no to Trump and his demagoguery and cruelty?

In the Senate, the Democrats, who control the body for six more weeks, are pressing to confirm federal judicial appointments and leave few vacancies for Trump. But I’ve seen questions raised as to whether they’re moving as fiercely as possible. Norm Ornstein, an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, has proposed another counterattack for the Democrats: hold pre-confirmation hearings on Trump’s radical appointees. The nominees won’t show. Republicans will howl. But Democratic-controlled committees can bring forward witnesses to testify about the nutty and dangerous views of Kennedy or Gabbard. The Democrats can examine the sexual assault allegation against Hegseth. There would be no votes on the appointees—who won’t yet officially be appointees—but these sessions could publicize their extremism and unfitness and establish a narrative prior to Republican-controlled confirmation hearings in the next Congress or in the absence of any such hearings, if Trump attempts to skirt the Constitution and install these nominees via recess appointments.

Again, the purpose would be to express a fighting spirit. Trump has shown that repeating a message can be highly effective. Every day, he proclaims he’s the greatest and his foes are evil demons, that his presidency was a golden age and the last few years a hellish nightmare, that he will rescue the nation and that his opponents will cause its destruction. Over and over. And the truth doesn’t matter. So where’s the counter-message? Where’s the relentless drum-banging from the Democrats? It need not be lies or spin. And with his appointees, Trump has given the Ds a tremendous gift: legitimate targets who reveal the worse of MAGA. The Democrats are not fully exploiting the moment—or rising to it.

Are they licking their wounds? Nervous about landing on an enemies list? Discombobulated by all the thumb-sucking about why they lost and what they ought to do differently? I’ve been paying attention to that inevitable and dizzying post-election debate and believe a component often overlooked is a basic one: appearances. The 2024 results suggest that many voters crave a fighter on their side. They’re pissed off at...whatever. They don’t believe the system is working for them. And they don’t care about debate points or what a candidate proposes policy-wise. (Many union voters gave the finger to Kamala Harris after the Biden-Harris administration saved their pensions!) They want to feel that guy or gal is swinging hard for them.

There’s no better time to prove your mettle than after a defeat. The Democrats lost this election, but half the country remains on their side. Democrats must keep those folks engaged and win over a few more. This can be achieved if they pull out the stops. It’s not about ideology—crawling to the center or veering to the left. It’s about being seen consistently as passionate advocates and champions. They ought to behave not only as if they’re battling for their own political lives but that they’re battling for voters’ actual lives. By putting forward nominees who threaten the security and well-being of the nation, Trump handed Democrats a huge opening. They need to, as one highly successful politician once said, fight, fight, fight.

Got anything to say about this item—or anything else? Email me at ourland.corn@gmail.com.

If you’re not already counting the days, let me remind you that we’ll have another Our Land Zoom get-together on Tuesday, November 26, at 8 p.m. ET, two days before it’s time to watch football, eat too much, and give thanks. As you probably know by now, these fun gab sessions are only open to premium subscribers to this newsletter—that noble band who part with a few bucks each month to keep this enterprise alive and well. On the day of the shindig, these readers will be emailed a Zoom link. Click on it at the appointed hour, and our highly trained Our Land bouncers will let you in. See you then. If there’s the demand, I hope to hold more of these gatherings in the months ahead. I think we all may need the support. If you’re not a premium subscriber and would like to join this community and participate, please sign up here.

Mass deportations. Tariff-triggered inflation. Some Trump voters are now saying they didn’t expect their votes to lead to this. Huh? Were they not paying attention? (That’s a rhetorical question.) And many probably won’t be too happy when measles outbreaks erupt (thanks to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.) or when bro-trolls Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy push for cuts in Social Security and Medicare. But all of this was laid out rather well before Election Day.

And then there’s the Muslim and Arab Americans who embraced Trump. Take Rabiul Chowdhury, a Philadelphia investor who co-founded Muslims for Trump. This week, he griped, “Trump won because of us and we’re not happy with his secretary of state pick and others.” He was referring to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a backer of the war-crazy Netanyahu government. Rubio would not call for a ceasefire in Gaza and has declared that Israel should destroy “every element” of Hamas, adding, “These people are vicious animals.”

It's not just Rubio that’s disappointing Muslims for Trump. Trump will be nominating former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a diehard pro-Israel conservative, as US ambassador to Israel. Huckabee is a fierce supporter of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and he has called a two-state solution “unworkable.” Also on Trump’s list: Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to be UN ambassador. She called the United Nations a “cesspool of antisemitism” for daring to condemn the deaths in Gaza. None of these selections are the least bit surprising. Trump has bear-hugged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and welcomed billionaire and Netanyahu fangirl Miriam Adelson’s $100 million effort to boost his campaign. So what was Chowdhury thinking when he backed Trump?

His remark of regret was rather dumb, but he was bested by Musk, who the judges decided to honor for a trio of idiotic statements. Championing Matt Gaetz for attorney general, he exclaimed, “Matt Gaetz has 3 critical assets that are needed for the AG role: a big brain, a spine of steel and an axe to grind. He is the Judge Dredd America needs to clean up a corrupt system and put powerful bad actors in prison. Gaetz will be our Hammer of Justice.”

An axe to grind? Is that appropriate for the head of the Justice Department? And Judge Dredd is a comic book character who has the power to summarily arrest, convict, sentence, and execute criminals. That’s not what you want in an attorney general—unless you’re running an authoritarian regime.

Musk also tweeted, “There will be consequences for those who pushed foreign interference hoaxes. The Hammer of Justice is coming.”

The Trump-Russia scandal was no hoax. Musk was once again abusing his platform to peddle disinformation to millions. As I pointed out, both Rubio and Stefanik—chosen for top national security positions by Trump—have previously confirmed that Russia attacked the 2016 election to assist Trump, and each noted that Trump helped Putin get away with it. Yes, lost in all the fuss over Trump’s nominees is that he has appointed senior Republicans who agreed the Russian assault was real and blasted Moscow for its Trump-benefitting interference. In fact, in 2020, when Rubio chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee, he released a 966-page report that detailed the Russian operation and Trump’s perfidy. (It pointed out that Trump’s campaign chair, Paul Manafort, had colluded with a Russian intelligence officer during the election.) As with Trump’s tiny hands, Rubio doesn’t talk about this anymore. I recently explained it all here.

The remark that drew the most scorn from the judges came when Musk responded to statement from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The Ukrainian said that the United States could not force Ukraine to “sit and listen” at the negotiating table, and he proclaimed, “We are an independent country.” Musk shot back: “His sense of humor is amazing.” He added an emoji for laughing hard.

On social media, I observed, “Imagine taunting the democratically elected president of a nation that has been brutally invaded by Russia, which has bombed civilian sites killing thousands, occupied territory, and kidnapped children. Elon Musk, have you no decency?” Once again, a rhetorical question. But we know the answer, and that’s why the deceitful boy-king who wants to be co-president wins the crown this week. 

Tough times produce much mail. And it’s been pouring in the past two weeks. Let’s get right to it.

Shari Silverman responded to my recent piece on Trump accommodationists in the media:

The sane-washing is happening even in venues where it would be unexpected. Today in the Nature Briefing newsletter (a science outlet), one of the sub-headlines was “NIH Braces for Reform.” In the paragraph below the headline, the word “overhaul” was used. None of this is what’s going to happen: It’s not “reform,” “overhauling,” or “restructuring.” The correct term would be “dismantling.” But “dismantling” is not what normally happens to government programs and institutions. The normal vocabulary will not apply. I’m not sure if that realization has sunk in. 

Harry McConnell commented on the dismay of non-Trump voters:

Doesn’t the great sadness of the minority (that’s us) come from being forced to acknowledge that this is what “we” want? Irrespective of the quality of reporting and analysis, We the People witnessed the full display of MAGA corruption, incompetence, and hat, for years and said “give us more.” Now all of us in this flawed democracy will get what “we” deserve.

Given that Trump received slightly less than half of the popular vote, I think that when it comes to talking about Trump voters, you can say, not “We the People,” but “We Almost Half of the People Who Voted.” There was no landslide. The country is divided evenly. That’s a problem different from the problem of a decisive pro-Trump majority.

Joanie Freeman offered advice:

Another Trump era is terrifying to me. However, being a retired medical professional has steadied me somewhat and also led me to the conclusion to take some time off from my Trump relatives and friends for my mental happiness. It’s liberating. I’m spending Thanksgiving with my liberal friends this year. I’d encourage others to do the same, if they have as much concern as I about interpersonal confrontation with the Trump relatives. I was going to do the Thanksgiving tradition, but with PTSD I decided to mend myself after reading the below article.  

The article—from Fox News(!)—reported on Yale University chief psychiatry resident Dr. Amanda Calhoun telling MSNBC host Joy Reid that liberals who are disheartened by Trump’s win might want to separate from certain loved ones: "So, if you are going into a situation where you have family members, where you have close friends who you know have voted in ways that are against you…it’s completely fine to not be around those people and to tell them why.” You can read it here.

Stephen Blake had a specific complaint about the media:

The media failure was not just their coverage of Trump. Coverage of inflation was abominable. They virtually ignored the corporate consolidation and the price gouging that followed, bolstered by stock buybacks and the inflationary tax cuts for the rich, blaming inflation on a $1200 stimulus check that was a month's rent during the pandemic, if you were lucky. The same wealthy and well-to-do cohort that benefited from the tax cuts also benefited from record corporate profits because they were stockholders. Their continued spending in the face of rapidly rising prices was a key driver of inflation, but you'd never know that reading or listening to NPR, NYT, WaPo, WSJ, CNN, CNBC, NBC, CBS or ABC. 

According to corporate media, immigrants were driving up housing prices, not private equity. I had just sold my only home, my primary and only residence during the pandemic and had to find a cash deal with the proceeds because I didn't have the income for a mortgage and I was renting, bleeding cash while searching for a home. Private equity came into my market big time, buying up the properties that were in my price range to rent or flip. I just barely managed to close a deal as the pandemic was winding down. Now, sadly the Democratic donor class is still in control of the party, so the corporate media is not going to face the pushback that it deserves. 

Marilyn Davis had a complaint about a certain term I used:

GOP handmaids. Really! Comparing spineless individuals to women again. Couldn’t you have said suck-ups or toadies. Or something else?

I will try to remember to use “backbone-free jellyfish” next time.

John D’Orazio tried to be upbeat:

Perhaps I am the eternal optimist, but I am banking on a handful of Republicans forming a coalition with the Democrats to stop the current very dangerous nominations. In fact, such a coalition could be the firewall needed to minimize the damage to our democracy that Trump could cause in the next four years.

Not. Holding. My. Breath.

Toni Barnhart was concerned:

I have a couple of questions, and they are serious ones: Do you have decent security, and do you have plans in place for how best to deal with this storm that is breaking upon us? Some of us can ride this out…maybe, but journalists? I am not so sure. Please stay safe and know that even as we count on you for what you do to keep us informed, not at risk to your safety.

Thanks, Toni. I appreciate the concern. Rest assured, I am mindful of security, but in difficult days, opposing the powerful can entail some risk.

Ruth Lezotte sent in this query:

Where the hell did JD Vance go? Seems like he disappeared on election night.

Who?

Nick Vollendorf had a different question:

During Biden’s presidency, Republican state attorneys general fought him tooth and nail by suing over everything. My impression is that this litigious strategy was at least somewhat effective in slowing Biden’s progress. Will Democratic AGs pursue a similar strategy? How successful do you think this can be in thwarting the worst of Trump’s actions?

It’s my understanding that Democratic governors and AGs have already started looking for areas where they can work separately or jointly to thwart some Trump plans. I’m sure we will soon be hearing more about this.

Edie Allen asked about Moxie:

Is Moxie wondering whether RFK Jr. is opposed to rabies and distemper shots for dogs?

That is a good question. The rabies or distemper shots for dogs is a vaccine, as is the rabies shot for humans. So will Kennedy try to limit them? Speaking of Moxie...

“So you’re telling me Robert F. Kennedy Jr. might be opposed to rabies shots for dogs?”
“Yes, Moxie, and I suppose for people, too.”
“Now it’s getting serious. You have to let the Democrats know this.”
“Some might read this newsletter.”
“Wonderful. Make Rabies Great Again. Just what we dogs need.”