To pick up on a recent exchange in a hearing that can loosely be summarized as…
“Suck my dick!”
“No, you suck my dick first!
… a recent Washington Post article talks about The Ominous Rise of Congressional Anger the likes of which hasn’t been seen at this level since the civil war. They start by mentioning the exchange that is referenced above, and they also refer to the elbow to the kidneys that supposedly came from the former Squeaker. He seems nice. (original link replaced with a gift link.
I’m not familiar with Philip Bump at the Washington Post, and he jumps around all over the place in his article, but still, I found some of it pretty interesting. (Not sure if it’s behind a paywall – I was able to read the whole thing – but if it is, anyone has a gift article to share, I can add it here in the post.) Gift link, course of Subaru Dianne.
Are we headed back to this, where congress critters engaged in hand-to-hand combat on the floor of the House? That gives new meaning to “Let them fight!” Hopefully the Dems will just bring protective gear!
In the Civil War era, outright violence was common on Capitol Hill. In her 2018 book “The Field of Blood,” Yale University professor Joanne Freeman tracked the number of violent incidents in Congress in the years before and after that conflict.
“In those times, … armed groups of Northern and Southern congressmen engaged in hand-to-hand combat on the House floor. Angry about rights violated and needs denied, and worried about the degradation of their section of the Union, they defended their interests with threats, fists and weapons,” she wrote. “When that fighting became endemic and congressmen strapped on knives and guns before heading to the Capitol every morning — when they didn’t trust the institution of Congress or even their colleagues to protect their persons — it meant something.”
Speaking of jumping around, the article purports to be about the rise of congressional anger specifically, but this chart has nothing to do with congressional anger. Still, I found it interesting.
Am I crazy, or does this remind anyone else of Trump’s signature? Apparently he is the embodiment of nasty politics.
Another excerpt:
This link between the decline of confidence in institutions and the rise of violence has been measured elsewhere. Writing for the London School of Economics last year, visiting fellows Moritz Schmoll and Wang Leung Ting delineated research showing that connection. They discovered that violent incidents in a country’s legislature were less likely to occur either when a country had a robust democracy — since institutions allowed for peaceful resolution of disputes — or when there was no democracy at all, since autocrats could simply impose their will.
They also found evidence that moments of transition between the two might be ones in which violence rose.
“During a fragile and limited democratisation process in the 1990s, brawls started happening quite regularly in the Duma (Russian Assembly), something unheard of during the Soviet era. After President Putin’s election and the progressive return to a closed authoritarian system, violence subsided,” they wrote. “Turkey, which in the 2000s had relatively high levels of democracy, had only occasional brawls in those years. But after President Erdogan shifted the country onto an increasingly authoritarian path, effectively turning it into an ‘anocracy’ that blends authoritarian and democratic elements, violence in parliaments increased significantly.”
The United States is hovering near a transitional point.
There’s another article on anger that I keep seeing in my open browser tabs – An Appropriate Anger. I haven’t had time to read it yet, but it’s a reminder multiple times a day that I want to read it. And it comes with this great graphic!
Not sure if this is Sunday afternoon material, but we’ve been 8 hours without a new thread, so discuss this topic or anything else.
Anyhoo, this is a totally open thread.
Update: Mike in Pasadena notes that the title should have read The Ominous Rise of REPUBLICAN Congressional Anger. It’s hard to argue with that!
Baud
Aside from J6, are any of the recent episodes of political violence Dem vs. GOP?
The example are all intraparty GOP.
dmsilev
@Baud: The attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband? Granted, the attacker wasn’t himself any sort of official, but it was certainly politically-inspired violence.
Chetan Murthy
@Baud: There’s been lots of incitement to violence against Dems [officials], uttered by GrOPers [officials]. I know you didn’t mean that (these weren’t explicit violent acts by GrOPer officials against Dem officials) but it’s somewhere nearby.
ETA: edited for clarity.
SiubhanDuinne
If you find you need it, here’s a gift link. If that doesn’t work, here’s the raw URL: https://wapo.st/47KBN7L
WaterGirl
@Baud: I can’t come up with anything between Dems and Rs, perhaps because Dems tend to be grown-ups who don’t have to resort to fisticuffs and violence?
It really is amazing to behold the children (Rs) running hearings and pretending to be in charge. I bet that any 10-year kid who won an essay contest could do a better job of running the House.
Miss Bianca
Question for the history buffs among us: anyone have a recommendation for a book about the just-pre-Civil War period, AKA the 1850s? I’ve been thinking more and more that that’s probably the historical period with the most parallels to our current political reality.
WaterGirl
@SiubhanDuinne: Thank you! I replaced the link up top with your gift link.
dmsilev
@WaterGirl: My niece and nephew are just a bit older than that, and I’m sure that in exchange for a modest increase in their screentime allotment, they’d be happy to give it a go and would definitely do a better job.
WaterGirl
@dmsilev: The attack on Paul Pelosi was absolutely politically-inspired violence. That was an attack against a Dem, but in response to Baud’s question, I can’t think of any violence in which a Dem was a willing participant.
New Deal democrat
A few years ago, David Frum said “ If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy.”
I happen to think that principle is not limited to conservatives. I think if *any* group becomes convinced that their views can never prevail under whatever rules exist in their polity, they will reject those rules.
For example, suppose extreme gerrymandering were so embedded at both federal and State levels that progressives could never prevail, even if they constituted 55% or 60% of the vote, and a reactionary SCOTUS prevented any recourse, does anyone really think progressives would be willing to abide by that system of government?
The rise in violence is a byproduct of the belief that the opposition is in fact the enemy, and that internal enemy is more evil than any far enemy (e.g., Putin).
We aren’t quite there yet. In the 1840s and 1850s, for example, Southern Congressmen and Senators repeatedly challenged Northerners to duels. But Trump’s most recent outbursts are explicitly heading right there.
Chief Oshkosh
Didn’t a Democratic Teletubby beat up on a Republican Congresscritter recently?
[…checks notes…]
Sorry, my mistake. It was a Democratic Smurf, who used words and logic to smack a Republican around.
dmsilev
@Miss Bianca: While its focus is on the war itself, McPherson’s Battle Cry of Freedom spends the first few chapters on the antebellum period and the lead up to the war.
JoyceH
In a lot of the politically inspired violence (the Pelosi attack, the pipe bomb mailer) the perp is obviously mentally ill – but shouldn’t the GOP step back and ponder what is it about their message and their policies that seem so appealing to the mentally ill?
New Deal democrat
@Miss Bianca: The book referenced in the post, “The Field of Blood,” is exactly what you are looking for. David Blight’s biography of Frederick Douglass also goes into great detail about the politics and events of the 1850s.
eclare
@Miss Bianca:
Battle Cry of Freedom does a good job covering the period leading up to the Civil War. IIRC the book starts in the 1830’s. It is a very big book but very readable. I should probably reread it, it’s been awhile.
And dmsilev got there first.
Battle Cry of Freedom
Baud
@New Deal democrat:
I think the first salvo would be to inflict economic damage rather than political violence. Blue cities are the engine of the economy.
Frankensteinbeck
@New Deal democrat:
You’re not describing a loss of loyalty to democracy among Democrats, though. You’re describing a situation in which Democrats are reacting to a complete rather than partial loss of democracy through rules changing. That is very different than just “In a fair vote we lose”, which is the conservative motivator.
Miss Bianca
@JoyceH:
I’m more and more of the opinion that being a Republican these days in and of itself constitutes a form of mental disorder – ranging from delusions of grandeur to extreme paranoia to outright sociopathy – so actually, no, I wouldn’t expect them to be able to step back and ponder it in those terms at all.
Seems like you have to have both your mental oars in the water at least most of the time to even question your own mental health or the health of your own beliefs and values.
Albatrossity
Not about anger, but I thought that this was a very worthwhile read in our local online journalism site. The author lives in Emporia KS, home of another great journalist, William Allen White.
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
Philip Bump is one of the reasons I still subscribe to the WaPo.
Chetan Murthy
@WaterGirl: [off the top of my head] planned consipracy to kidnap Gov. Whitmer. Multiple incidents nationwide of attacks on Dem headquarters/offices (IIRC, Arizona (remember it was burned-down?) and maybe Colorado). MTG’s Dem opponent was scared out of the race, and out of the state (obvs. by threats from GrOPer hangers-on).
New Deal democrat
@Frankensteinbeck: Ok.
Question: if in a fair vote progressives always lost, and saw no hope of change in the near future, do you think they would remain peaceful? I’m making a comment about human nature, and I think it applies universally.
Miss Bianca
@dmsilev: I think I’ve read Battle Cry of Freedom in the past – or tried to, as I recall it was a big book and I was very busy and it had to go back to the library eventually – but sounds like I might have to try it again.
@New Deal democrat: Thanks! I’ll put those two on the list too.
gene108
@New Deal democrat:
1. The vast majority of progressives / Democrats are either minorities or women or both.
2. The minorities, to varying degrees, understand people running law enforcement are itching for an excuse to bust minority heads.
3. If there are protests they will be like Black Lives Matter protests, which were largely peaceful.
4. There’s not much history of left-wing violence in U.S. history. The people running things are usually conservative regarding things like equal rights, and have often looked the other way when right-wing violence happens, if not encouraged it like Trump, Fox News, etc.
glc
Infection Protection Guidelines
Miss Bianca
@gene108:
@New Deal democrat:
Speaking cynically, I would say that the “progressive” response to things like extreme gerrymandering, etc, has already proven to be *not* to turn to violence against right-wing authoritarianism, but instead…to blame Democrats. For not democratin’ hard enough, or something.
I’m not sure – again, speaking cynically – that that dynamic would prove to be any different in an even more politically boxed-in future.
lowtechcyclist
@New Deal democrat:
We aren’t to the level of violence between politicians that we saw in the 1850s, which is what you meant.
But the GOP is, and has been for some time now, possessed of the belief that their internal enemies (us Demon Rats) are the true enemy that must be defeated at all costs, and that no external foe is anywhere near as much of a threat. (They view pretty much all foreign policy issues from the standpoint of whether it can be weaponized against Dems. If they can’t do that with an issue, it has little value to them.)
New Deal democrat
@lowtechcyclist: Yes, I agree with your take.
Raven
These fuckers wouldn’t know hand to hand if it bit dem on the ass. Buncha fucking lawyers.
RandomMonster
@WaterGirl: Subaru Diane?
Redshift
@New Deal democrat:
One thing I didn’t know until recently was how instrumental duelling was in perpetuating slavery. I learned about how duelling was a thing in those days, but I didn’t learn that a challenge to a duel was a way for Southern congressmen to get their opponents to withdraw anti-slavery legislation that they might might not have the votes to defeat. Not everyone was willing to risk their life for legislation.
Chetan Murthy
@Redshift: We’ve seen that already, per Kinzinger, right? GrOPer Congresscritters who declined to vote to impeach, b/c they had families to protect and were afraid of the consequences.
ETA: and MTG’s opponent who withdrew and left the state for fear of his life.
Leto
Part of the continuing intra-party fighting, Congressman Super Fraud (R-Obviously) is trying to go super Trumpov in his upcoming expulsion: George Santos says he’ll treat expulsion as a ‘badge of honor’ as he claims his colleagues are drunkenly having sex with lobbyists ‘every night’
Not sure “tirade” is the correct term. Think temper tantrum is more apropos. Again, as we’ve noted, it’s not just the elected members who are the problem; it’s the electorate that continues to send them there. Of course that’s been a problem since forever, but the right’s tolerance for absolutely horrid behavior in office as long as it gains them power is something that I don’t know how we fix.
Brachiator
@New Deal democrat:
We don’t have a dueling culture anymore. We don’t even have a Fight Club culture. And as some have noted, the greatest anger is reflected in GOP in fighting.
And there is a huge difference between the voter rejection of right wing policies and political spats between members of Congress.
There are some parallels to right wing attempts to make women second class citizens and the 19th century pro slavery movement and the resulting political turmoil, but mainly you have the ongoing GOP obstruction madness and their unhinged belief that the are the only legitimate political party.
Trump’s outbursts are a manifestation of his mental illness. The political media is too cowardly to say that he is psychologically unhinged and a danger to democracy.
schrodingers_cat
@Miss Bianca: Yep. They are out in full force right now threatening to sit out the elections because Biden won’t say “cease fire”.
Chetan Murthy
@schrodingers_cat: And they don’t seem to understand that there’s a large contingent of Dems who would view any attempt by Biden to strong-arm Bibi [spit] as anathema, and would choose not to vote Dem for *that* reason.
lahke
So as usual, BTS has a song for this: UGH https://youtu.be/HPZdb5bptCQ?si=GuWkfXjXVk631c4C (this is just the rappers)
It’s about how people maliciously gin up fake anger about irrelevant stuff and that both normalizes anger and drains the righteous anger that can be used to effect positive change.
No, they aren’t just a boy band.
Scout211
From November 16: Mother Jones Dueling, Shoving, and Threats in Congress. Why Are Republicans Like This?
Long read, but very interesting. Here are a few snippets:
Gretchen
It’s maddening when articles like this don’t want to come out and say this is a Republican problem. They’d both-sides anything.
A reporter got his feelings hurt when he asked Biden if he’s too old to run again and Biden said that’s a stupid question. Any high school kid given the chance to ask the President something could have come up with a better question. We need a new press.
WaterGirl
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon: Good to know, thank you!
WaterGirl
@RandomMonster: What is your question?
edit: In case you are not familiar with our nickname for the commenters whose nym is as hard to spell as it is to pronounce. I forget who first coined Subaru Dianne as an alternate.
If you were asking something else, please let me know.
schrodingers_cat
My motto is keep calm and make art.
OT: Art break
From Hanna Karlzon’s Daydreams
I have used 3 types of pencils, two types of markers and watercolors.
WaterGirl
@Scout211: Thanks for that – very interesting!
Geminid
@Chetan Murthy: There is not a large contingent of Democrats who would view any attempt by Biden to strongarm Netanyahu as anathema. Most Democreats, even strong supporters of Israel, do not like or respect the PM.
One thing going on here is that even Israeli opposition leaders like Lapid (Yesh Atid) and Michaeli (Labor) fundamentally agree with the government’s goal of ending Hamas rule of Gaza. Israel’s supporters within the Democratic party including Joe Biden do also.
Chris Johnson
@New Deal democrat: The point really is ‘if you lose, does that mean you get nothing and are destroyed’?
Liberals tolerate more in the way of dissent and contrary narratives, whether from progressives or conservatives. It’s easy to bully liberals into making allowances: that’s what they’re for.
That’s why they can run cities and conservatives can’t.
Conservatives are more likely to try and stamp out wrongthink and get 100% compliance, which is fantasy. Even when they win it doesn’t last because they double down.
I think the point in being civilized is working out what proportion of fucked-up you can live with, and doing your best to do just that. For all that conservatives boast, they’re uncivilized.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@Miss Bianca: There are some chapters that cover this period in Battle Cry of Freedom
And dmsilev already covered this.
bjacques
@schrodingers_cat: Noice!
Ruviana
@WaterGirl: I think s/he needs to know the story of where “Subaru Diane” came from.
mvr
Before reading the comments I will comment and go back to read. There is an in theory question and and actual practical question. In theory all non-pacifists say sometimes violence for political ends is justified. And that is interesting and in some contexts worth discussing. In practice, in America in the 20s, I think political violence is not warranted and will backfire on the good guys (and hopefully also on the bad guys).
SFAW
@New Deal democrat:
If you keep re-configuring your straw man propositions/hypotheticals, I imagine you’ll eventually get one where someone here will say “Gosh, yes, violence would be justified!”, and then your work here will be done.
After all, it’s only “human nature.” Or something.
Leto
@mvr: the right has been committing political and physical violence since the 70s, with zero repercussions. They haven’t paid for it politically or culturally. The best example anyone can come up with for “violence” from the left is either Weather Underground, or anarchists who want to stir up shit during protests. Both of these examples don’t even begin to come close to the violence perpetrated by the right, but it’s always how it’s framed. There’s only one side where it backfires.
Edit: you can go further back than just the 70s: Jim Crow, segregation, etc… But it really started expanding further near middle/late 70s with end of Vietnam and the expansion of the white power movement, in all it’s forms/incarnations.
WaterGirl
@Ruviana: I thought maybe she was pointing out that I had misspelled it – Subaru Dianne has two Ns. :-)
mvr
@Geminid: Hell, I’d agree with the goal. Just not with using any available method to get there. (And I say this as someone cautious to weigh in on this war because I worry that even saing true things can lend support to bad policies.) That a goal is good doesn’t end the investigation of whether it is worth pursuing. Costs matter, as does whether a policy severely violates the rights of people. Even against the worst of the worst.
mvr
@Leto: If your point is to argue for pessimism about violent responses being counterproductive to the interest of those who respond violently from the right, I think I’m just less of a pessimist about violence backfiring on the right as well as on the left than you are. If your point is something else, I guess I need to know more about what it is before I respond.
Edit: And since I’ve now written two responses in a row I figure this thread may be dead and I won’t ever find out.
Brachiator
@Miss Bianca:
I have not read this book, but have seen positive reviews.
West of the Rockies
@New Deal democrat:
Good points, but, of course, Republicans don’t lose elections because of gerrymandering or a biased SCOTUS. It’s because their policies and ideas are unpopular.
RevRick
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony:
@Miss Bianca: I would recommend a couple of biographies as well as histories of the era. There’s a good one on Polk, whose Presidency set the stage, and also one on John Brown.
Drew Gilpin Faust, who has a pretty good reputation, has written The Ideology of Slavery.
Besides Battle Cry of Freedom I also enjoyed its predecessor in the Oxford History of the United States, What Hath God Wrought , which covers 1814-1850.
The best, however, is The Half Has Never Been Told by Edward Baptist, which looks at the intimate connection between slavery and capitalism.
Captain C
@Leto:
The more the Republican Congresscritters are doing this, the less time they have to ruin the Republic, and they’re not competent or organized to begin with.
Miss Bianca
@Leto: No lie told. And the level of projection, propped up and propelled by the media, is intense: *any* time you bring up the inconvenient facts about right-wing political violence, out come the “Antifa! BLM protests! Portland is a burnt-out shell!” yammerings.
I guess the truth of the matter is that left-wing political violence – such as it is – is usually in service of people protesting real injustices, and is at least in theory aimed at creating a more progressive society, where more people have rights.
Whereas right-wing political violence seems to be entirely devoted to keeping THOSE PEOPLE down and reserving rights entirely to the (white) (male) power structure status quo.
Gee, no wonder left-wing violence is so scary!//
Another Scott
@Albatrossity: Thanks for the pointer.
My J used to walk to Walden Pond to go swimming in the summer. It’s not as grand as Lake Louise – it’s a pond, after all, ;-), but it’s nice and inspired lots of people to do good things.
Cheers,
Scott.
RevRick
@Brachiator: Though I haven’t read that, there’s two other books pertinent to the era:
Bleeding Kansas by Nicole Etcheson
The Field of Blood by Joanne Freeman, which is specifically about violence in Congress.
I will put Walther’s book on my to buy list.
Nukular Biskits
It would be interesting to see an overlay of political violence perpetrated by “conservatives” with the firearm-related stats of their home states.
I suspect there would be a correlation.
Another Scott
Something, something, not even past.
My NPR station rebroadcast an episode of Reveal this afternoon, on prison labor that built business empires:
Well worth a listen. (A transcript is at the link.)
It’s important that we learn, and not forget, our history.
Cheers,
Scott.
WaterGirl
@mvr:
Trying to understand what you are saying here, so ‘i will state this a different way and ask if I have it right.
You are more hopeful than Leto because you think violence from the right will backfire on the right? And you think violence from the left (which I think we haven’t seen) would backfire on the left, but not any more so than violence on the right?
Miss Bianca
@Brachiator: OK, I have added the Walther book to the pile as well! Thanks for the recommendations, everybody!
Geminid
@mvr: This is true. I would say though that the question of ways and means is where the Biden administration has leaned more heavily on the Israeli government. But rightly or wrongly, Biden and his people still back the basic goal and will supply the weapons neccessary to achieve it.
This is not to say the Israelis can remove Hamas, but I think Biden is going to let them try and not lean on them to observe a permanent ceasefire until they have succeeded or failed. That will be some time after Israel renews its offensive, when the current truce ends.
Glidwrith
@Miss Bianca: I think you are touching directly on two sources of anger, only one of them being justifiable:
1) anger for justice denied: everything from cops willing to murder brown folks in broad daylight, stripping away women’s rights to taking food from children.
2) anger that as a white straight man, they can’t collectively shit on everyone downhill from them.
Rising anger on both sides as the second group keeps trying to force the larger collective of humanity back under their thumb.
TriassicSands
Day 22 in the hospital. I might get out tomorrow.
From “An Appropriate Anger.” The author writes:
I don’t know why people make statements like this. No don’t ALL know this. One of the greatest failings of human beings in general, but of Americans especially is the inability to learn anything useful from the experiences of others. There are people who can, but the overwhelming majority of Republicans certainly appear to be unable to accept anything that doesn’t happen directly to themselves or maybe their spouses or children. That became beyond obvious during the pandemic.
Medical bills are the single greatest cause of personal bankruptcy in the U.S., even for people with insurance.* Everyone should know this, but they don’t and undoubtedly many who do know it still don’t believe it could ever happen to them.
*Medicare for All is not a good slogan, because Medicare as it stands is an 80-20 plan that requires a supplementary plan. Twenty-percent of a huge number is still a huge number. It has to be a greatly enhanced program over what traditional Medicare is today to serve as a universal health care program.
NutmegAgain
Joanne Freeman’s book is a terrific read. Recommended, especially if you are interested in political insanity, broadly speaking.
mvr
@WaterGirl:
Yes, that’s the gist.
mvr
@Geminid:
Yes. (Edit: Or at least yes to first part of first paragraph.)
And I am not either the administration nor anyone else with direct power. So I have to figure out what to say (and not to say) and what to support to get those with more direct influence to make things less bad. All without lying.
mvr
@TriassicSands: Glad you are getting toward the end of in patient treatment.
Geminid
@mvr: I think Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff has staked out a forthright position on preventing civilian casualties in Gaza. Ossoff has not called for a permanent ceasefire, but his speech in the Senate last week got a lot of attention in Israeli media. Statements by other Democratic Senators have tracked Ossoff’s.
But I was originally commenting on the question of a supposed group of Democrats who are inhibiting President Biden’s desire to pressure Netanyahu. I have not seen it. But I do read Israeli news sites like Times of Israel, Jerusalem Post, and Haaretz and they have reported on several issues where the Biden administration has pressured Israel.
One instance that did not get the attention that it deserved (in my opinion) was early in the war, when Netanyahu was forced to accept opposition party leader Benny Gantz’s terms for entering a “unity” government. This was a full-court press that included Majority leader Schumer, who probably is Israel’s most powerful Congressional supporter. Schumer did not stop Biden from pressuring Netanyahu, but instead he joined in.
Miss Bianca
@Glidwrith: Yeah, that is what I was trying to say, only you just said it much more directly and elegantly.
evodevo
@TriassicSands: Yep…20% of a $100k hospital bill, is $20k, which is beyond what a majority of seniors could afford, and 100k can be run up pretty quick in ICU…a co-worker’s husband turned up with an abdominal aortic aneurysm – not something you can plan for in advance – and over the course of two lengthy hospitalizations, ran through 200k fast…luckily, she was a full-time postal employee and had good insurance, but still, they were really in a bind, trying to pay off what Medicare didn’t cover…GoFundMe and all that…
WaterGirl
@Glidwrith: @Miss Bianca: Yes, perfect!
mvr
@Geminid:
I think we’re not disagreeing. I think I may be more cautious than many folks about what I say because I think I don’t know how what I say will effect the general discourse and I’d rather let people who know more take the lead.
WaterGirl
Mike in Pasadena noted in another thread that the title should have read The Ominous Rise of REPUBLICAN Congressional Anger. It’s hard to argue with that!
Mike in Pasadena
Wash Post’s headline writer often uses “congressional” where it should use “Republican” as in Republican anger or Republican dysfunction.
KSinMA
@eclare:
@Miss Bianca: “Gentlemen of Property and Standing” by Leonard L Richards. It’s about the 1830s, but absolutely a must-read.
@Miss Bianca:
WaterGirl
@Mike in Pasadena: I beat you to it at #78. :-)
frosty
@WaterGirl: IIRC Steve in the WTF coined Suburu Diane. I’m not sure who changed his ATL to WTF, but I feel like it was all of us.
Geminid
@mvr: I am also reluctant to speak about this war and often find myself holding back. I mainly try to combat what I think are misconceptions. But I would urge people who care about it to read as much as they can, and from foreign sources like Al Jazeera, Al Monitor and the three Israeli news sites I mentioned at #73. If you mess with Twitter, Laura Rozen is a careful aggregator of informed commentary. I believe she is also on Blue Sky and (maybe) other media platforms.
mvr
@Geminid:
Thanks for the pointer. And also for the general attitude displayed here.
Miss Bianca
@KSinMA: Yow! That sounds amazing too! (added to pile.)
dnfree
@Miss Bianca: I was looking for the same thing a few years ago, and I came across America Aflame, which covers the time period from around 1830 to the end of Reconstruction, using period documents and more of a sociopolitical slant. Evangelical religion played a role in both the north and the south.
https://www.amazon.com/America-Aflame-Civil-Created-Nation/dp/1596917024
topclimber
@TriassicSands: I read Medicare for All as being available to all folks but also for all Health Care.
Medicaid for All is actually more precise. But you want to go with Medicare because it’s an entitlement and Medicaid is not.
geg6
@Miss Bianca:
Most good Lincoln biographies have a good explanation of the period. The collapse of the Whigs as a party also. Lots of political turmoil, somewhat reminiscent of today. It’s worried me for a while now and, as much as I like to laugh at the dumbasses of GOP House, the worry has grown stronger.
Miss Bianca
@dnfree: Oh, wait, *that’s* the one I started, not Battle Cry of Freedom! Yes, that one was good, too!
gene108
@TriassicSands:
@evodevo:
The fundamental problem with M4A is it’s been promoted with unrealistic expectations. Pay a bit more in taxes, without any details on the tax increase, and every American will have free healthcare from birth to death.
There are three basic problems in U.S. healthcare: (1) access, (2) affordability, and (3) how much do healthcare providers need to make to continue providing services.
First issue largely depends on where people live. Rural areas the world over will have less access to specialized care than people in urban areas with teaching and research hospitals.
Technically, the ACA has been able to provide 93% of the population with insurance. If Republicans would expand Medicaid in all states, then we can probably get to something approaching universal insurance coverage.
The second and third barrier barriers are linked. Making healthcare less expensive for patients may lead to reductions in the healthcare sector, whether it’s reduced pay or hospital closures or layoffs, I don’t know.
Mo MacArbie
@frosty: I think it was Mnemosyne rather than Steve in the ATL.
Sheldon Vogt
@Miss Bianca: Our Man in Charleston, by Christopher Dickey
Geminid
@mvr: You are very welcome.
Another Scott
ctrl-R – no Adam update yet, so I’ll put it here…
The images are of the 2 page “Dear Colleague” letter on the timing of upcoming Senate action. Including the Supplemental which will be voted on “as early as the week of December 4”. (“As early as” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there, given the way the Senate works, but it’s good news that action may be coming.)
Cheers,
Scott.
RandomMonster
@WaterGirl: I was not familiar with the nickname. Thanks for helping me understand!