Skip to main content

Working the Poison Out of the System

 


Think of Trumpism as a poison, and the body politic as, well, a body. 

I am feeling optimistic that the poison this body has taken won't kill us. That the body is slowly expelling the poison from its system. 

Case in point: The 6th district Congressional race in Texas.

Another case in point: Mitch McConnell voting in favor of taking up the bipartisan infrastructure bill. 

McConnell may want a nice new bridge in Kentucky with his name on it but, who cares? The point is solely that Trump put out a statement saying the Republicans should resist any infrastructure bill until after the 2022 elections, and McConnell defied him. 

McConnell has been the embodiment of the remaining Trumpist poison in the system since his master's slinking departure on January 20th. Now he may be showing some independence of thought. 

Heck, in a world in which Dick Cheney's little girl can sound like the Voice of Reason: bars are all set pretty low.  

Labels:

Comments

  1. HenryAugust 12, 2021 at 6:24 AM

    I read somewhere the suggestion that McConnell went along with the infrastructure bill in order to enable Manchin and Synema to continue to say that Democrats don't need to repeal the filibuster because, see, Republicans cooperate with us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HenryAugust 12, 2021 at 6:32 AM

      I probably don't need to add that McConnell will tell the Republicans not to cooperate with the voting rights bills or perhaps any other Democratic proposals before the 2022 elections. And, because of the infrastructure bill, that will be fine with Manchin and Synema.

      Delete
  2. UnknownAugust 13, 2021 at 11:29 AM

    We took a draught of cyanide (Biden) to cure our tummy ache from eating food that was too spicy (Trump).

    We deserve what we're getting.

    McConnell is a denizen of the swamp and was never on Trump's side. McConnell is on McConnell's side. Anything good we get out of him is just coincidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ChristopherAugust 13, 2021 at 12:20 PM

      McConnell was definitely on Trump's side in terms of getting him as many Supreme Court appointments as possible. Professing up and down in 2016 that it was a sacred principle that the Senate should not EVEN hold hearings on a new appointee during a Presidential election year until the election was over, and ignoring that supposed principle four years later, when the vacancy occurred much closer to the election. This was not about principle. It was about giving Trump as many appointees as they could, simply because they had the power. (And yes, the world "kept the tape" as the Trumpets asked it to, so we all know the depth of the two-facedness.)

      The poison here is not spicy food. The poison is autocracy. Trump didn't believe and still doesn't believe in the legitimacy of any authority other than the voices in his own head. So long as that was also good for McConnell, McConnell went along. But the notion that electing a President is the election of a dictator for four years, someone who has no further restraint on his power, legislative, judicial, statutory, constitutional, or diplomatic -- THAT is the Trumpist poison.

      I have no admiration for President Biden. And yes, the Hunter Biden situation sounds like an ugly case of crony capitalism -- a foreign power gave an American with no evident qualifications an important post simply to curry favor with an important American family. As if they were in the provinces of an Empire paying tribute to the imperial center. I'm against exacting such tributes. BUT, in this case I think the Hunter Biden nastiness is part of the cost of getting the much more catastrophic poison out of out system.

      Oh yes, and the pillow guy seemed to think today was going to be restoration day. How's that going for him?

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more