Opinion

It's commonplace and, therefore, uncontroversial to hear stories about "information bubbles." On the one hand are GOP voters who occupy theirs. On the other hand are Democratic voters who reside in their own. The story is neatly balanced and tightly framed, which is desirable for the people telling it. The Washington press corps will insist on equity at the expense of truth. That's why the press corps is anti-moral.

Truth is, these bubbles are not equally moral. Furthermore, they are not equally democratic. (Indeed, the information bubble inhabited by Republicans can't be called that at all.) One bubble functions separately from the rest of the country while the other functions in consonance with it. One defers to the authority of facts and reason. The other defers to no authority not its own. One is open to criticism. The other crushes dissent. One seeks compromise with opponents. One seeks the annihilation of its enemies. Yet both do have something important in common—both are rational.

Last Friday I wrote about how the Democrats plan to spend the month of June deliberately failing to pass their legislative agenda in order to demonstrate how intransigent the GOP is being with their use of the filibuster. It is reminiscent of the House plan to pass "messaging bills" in the last congress as a way of illustrating that the Senate was blocking popular legislation. How'd that work out?

This article originally appeared at Salon.

Jared Kushner really wants to move on with his life, The New York Times reported. In a report on former President Donald Trump's North Carolina rally over the weekend, it was revealed that Kushner would much prefer he and his father-in-law return to a more traditional relationship.

As a senior adviser to the president, Kushner was responsible for running several major policy initiatives for the White House, including the claim of a victory that he achieved peace in the Middle East. But Kushner is reportedly telling advisers that he wants "a simpler relationship." The report also explained that Kushner "wants to focus on writing his book."

In the past six months, we've all witnessed the near-miraculous effectiveness of the vaccines against COVID-19 and President Joe Biden's success at turning the joke of Donald Trump's vaccine plan into a well-oiled machine. Anyone who wants the shot in the U.S. can get it. Yet, despite an initial surge of interest in vaccines in the mid-spring, there's been a drastic drop-off in vaccination rates just ahead of Biden's Independence Day goal for a return to summer grilling.

This article was originally published at Salon

There are people in this world who don't like —and even hate — democracy. They're on the move against it, particularly here in America, and the Qanon religion/cult is the glue that's bringing them all together.

One group doesn't like democracy because they don't trust the "ignorant masses" and the "rabble" to choose leaders who can make decisions for an entire country. They're the "Philosopher" opposers of democracy.

The idea of there being an equivalency—moral or otherwise—between the Capitol riot of January 6 and Black Lives Matter and Antifa street agitation is preposterous. Republican attempts to submarine the January 6 commission proposal based on the isolated incidents of urban violence that arose during legitimate citizen protest over police abuses is a complete ruse. But whataboutism is a favorite tactic of politicians who have no good response for their own malfeasance or that of their followers.

Let's take Richard Nixon and Watergate as the example.

Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia officially announced in an op-ed Sunday that he would vote against the For the People Act, infuriating progressive critics who view the bill as a crucial tool for countering the Republican Party's anti-democratic tactics.

But Manchin's announcement wasn't particularly surprising, as he has repeatedly signaled that he was not fully supportive of the bill and prefers the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, a more modest proposal. Even more critically, though, he has insisted that he doesn't want to end the filibuster, the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to pass a bill, which would've doomed the For the People Act whether Manchin supported it or not. No Republican senators support the bill, and at least 10 would be needed for join all 50 Democrats to pass it into law under the current filibuster rule.

Mike Lindell, the Minnesota pillow entrepreneur and enthusiastic promoter of election-fraud conspiracy theories, appears to see himself as a crusader for truth and justice, undaunted by the scorn and mockery of those who refuse to take him seriously. (A category that encompasses nearly everyone in politics and the media, including many allies and supporters of Donald Trump.) Nothing about Lindell's performance seems insincere, which is one of the things that makes him stand out in a landscape of near-universal mendacity.

This article first appeared in Salon.

Now that Postmaster General Louis DeJoy has confirmed reports that he is under investigation by the FBI for alleged campaign finance violations, ordinary postal customers who have suffered under his regime may rightly wonder why he is still in office. That is an urgent question — and has been an urgent question ever since President Joe Biden's inauguration — but it is worth examining how DeJoy got the job, and how he abused a position of constitutional trust.

The FBI probe concerns an alleged "straw donor" scheme undertaken by DeJoy to illegally funnel over a million dollars in excess contributions to the Republican Party and Donald Trump's presidential campaign. It's an obvious form of trickery designed to evade federal limitations on individual donations by urging others to support a campaign or candidate and then reimbursing them under the table. Corporate executives with political ambitions like DeJoy have committed this particular felony over and over again — and if DeJoy is indicted and convicted, he won't be the first suit sent to prison for it.

Inequality is literally killing us, both individually and as a society, and its two main drivers are monopolistic business behavior, and greedy CEOs and politicians. Both are a result of psychopaths taking over politics and business.

Decades ago, when I was doing international relief work, I visited a school for Aboriginal children way up northeast near Cairns, Australia in a little town called Lockhart River.

"Delusion." "Off the chart bonkers." "Insane." "Objectively nuts." These are some of the terms that pundits — both on the left and on the right — are using to describe Donald Trump's reported belief that he will be "reinstated" as president in August, a belief that is tied to the growing enthusiasm in QAnon circles for a Myanmar-style coup d'état.

This article was originally published at Salon

Last week, oil companies were hit by simultaneous business decisions by climate activists to force rethinking their strategies towards reducing emissions much more quickly than had been planned.

In The Hague, a Netherlands court insisted that Royal Dutch Shell make immediate changes to comply with the Paris climate accords that would require Shell to nearly halve emissions for which it is responsible by 2030. Shell would most certainly have to reduce oil in its energy portfolio and halt growth in liquefied natural gas.

The role of the free press is critical in a representative democracy. It is covered in the First Amendment of the Constitution for a reason. The overarching purpose of the press is to keep in the spotlight every deliberation and decision that is made in our government. The press is the watchdog of our elected officials.

Politicians have tried to undermine the importance of the media by questioning their motives and intent. The most obviously self-serving and disingenuous case in point is Donald Trump, who spent his entire presidency trying to convince the public that the mainstream media is "the enemy of the people." Whenever he didn't like a story, he called it "fake news." His purposeful and relentless effort to undermine the public's trust in the media will be one of his worst legacies. Why? Because a free press is indispensable to democracy. We depend on it to inform, to explain, to interpret and, yes, to warn. To a large degree, that is what separates us from authoritarian regimes and "managed" pseudo-democracies.