"I have not seen a group of attorneys general target a fellow AG before"
March 23, 2024 9:49 AM Subscribe
What happens when an AG dares to investigate Leonard Leo’s network (Heidi Przybyla, Politico, 2024-03-23).
Leo is the Federalist Society co-chair who has been called former President Donald Trump’s “court whisperer” for helping to choose and advocate for his Supreme Court nominees. His aligned network of tax-exempt nonprofits is also a major contributor to Project 2025, an initiative seeking to create a “government in waiting” for another Trump term.Further reading:
The white-hot pressure campaign targeting [Washington, D.C., Attorney General Brian] Schwalb attests to the growing range of Leo’s influence. Beyond its work in promoting the conservative legal movement, his billion-dollar network of nonprofits has funded conservative media, Republican attorneys general and the campaign funds of leading congressional figures.
- Leonard Leo, Koch networks pour millions into groups prepping for potential second Trump administration (Katherine Doyle, NBC News, 2024-03-21)
- The largely unknown man behind the U.S. judiciary’s shift to the right (Deborah Becker and Stefano Kotsonis, On Point, 2023-12-20)
- We Don’t Talk About Leonard: The Man Behind the Right’s Supreme Court Supermajority (Andy Kroll, Andrea Bernstein and Ilya Marritz, ProPublica, 2023-10-11)
Rich people really think laws don’t apply to them. Sadly, they are nearly always correct.
posted by rikschell at 10:17 AM on March 23 [20 favorites]
posted by rikschell at 10:17 AM on March 23 [20 favorites]
This is both an indication of how the dude is filthy as fuck and how he’s going to get away with it, yes. The law simply is not real for Republicans.
posted by Artw at 10:23 AM on March 23 [9 favorites]
posted by Artw at 10:23 AM on March 23 [9 favorites]
Leonard Leo is incredibly dangerous. He’s an ideologue and a Christian nationalist without the buffoonery of the ones in elected office. I suspect some of them are basically his hand-puppets to do his bidding, and am fairly sure of the same about one third of the Supreme Court.
The fact that one man has this much influence - not just where he can have this level of influence over opponents but dictate policy to protect himself - over the judicial system is a sign of how much we need to get money out of the political processes.
posted by mephron at 10:26 AM on March 23 [40 favorites]
The fact that one man has this much influence - not just where he can have this level of influence over opponents but dictate policy to protect himself - over the judicial system is a sign of how much we need to get money out of the political processes.
posted by mephron at 10:26 AM on March 23 [40 favorites]
billion-dollar network of nonprofits
there is something deeply wrong about this phrase.
agreed with Dr Twist, this whole thing is completely terrifying.
posted by supermedusa at 11:01 AM on March 23 [22 favorites]
there is something deeply wrong about this phrase.
agreed with Dr Twist, this whole thing is completely terrifying.
posted by supermedusa at 11:01 AM on March 23 [22 favorites]
Our oligarchs will be jealous of Putin's oligarchs until Trump starts putting polonium in their coffee.
posted by rikschell at 11:06 AM on March 23 [14 favorites]
posted by rikschell at 11:06 AM on March 23 [14 favorites]
The thing about "Hitler did... " "Putin did..." "Trump did..." is that they don't actually do these things, in reality the state evolves into an extension of their ego (or whatever) as the bad people replace the not-bad people.
posted by torokunai at 11:27 AM on March 23 [14 favorites]
posted by torokunai at 11:27 AM on March 23 [14 favorites]
The fact that one man has this much influence - not just where he can have this level of influence over opponents but dictate policy to protect himself - over the judicial system is a sign of how much we need to get money out of the political processes
The judicial system is already 100% captured. Has been for years, arguably decades, and its power is dictatorial. Money will not be got out of the political processes through institutionally-legitimate political means. Certainly not through electoral means. The Gods hear our prayers and laugh back, and their breath stinks. Ultrafederalism, punctuated with attempted authoritarian brutality on the part of a far-right minority, will define the USA's remaining days as a mutually agreed-upon entity.
If there was ever a time to have the living daylights scared out of you by Project 2025 as a plausiblity and not a certainty then it's passed. The thing you fear is here and now and a return to the (awful) way things were is not coming. There are futures in which we one day emerge from the darkness but none of them start with "things go back to normal" and none of them end with the existence of a recognizable USA.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 11:28 AM on March 23 [28 favorites]
The judicial system is already 100% captured. Has been for years, arguably decades, and its power is dictatorial. Money will not be got out of the political processes through institutionally-legitimate political means. Certainly not through electoral means. The Gods hear our prayers and laugh back, and their breath stinks. Ultrafederalism, punctuated with attempted authoritarian brutality on the part of a far-right minority, will define the USA's remaining days as a mutually agreed-upon entity.
If there was ever a time to have the living daylights scared out of you by Project 2025 as a plausiblity and not a certainty then it's passed. The thing you fear is here and now and a return to the (awful) way things were is not coming. There are futures in which we one day emerge from the darkness but none of them start with "things go back to normal" and none of them end with the existence of a recognizable USA.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 11:28 AM on March 23 [28 favorites]
I have a bunch of friends and family that still see Trump as a buffoon and not the tip of the spear that he is.
This, and worse: it's only this year's spear. He may be a very prominent, erm, prick, but the ongoing war by background Republicans of this type against democracy, really, is constant, organised, and ongoing; there'll be other, newer pricks on an even sturdier shaft later.
The power they already have to act above and outside everyone else's laws - demonstrated as well here as anywhere else - isn't ever enough. And I've genuinely no idea how this entrenched power and money can be resisted longer term.
posted by onebuttonmonkey at 11:36 AM on March 23 [8 favorites]
This, and worse: it's only this year's spear. He may be a very prominent, erm, prick, but the ongoing war by background Republicans of this type against democracy, really, is constant, organised, and ongoing; there'll be other, newer pricks on an even sturdier shaft later.
The power they already have to act above and outside everyone else's laws - demonstrated as well here as anywhere else - isn't ever enough. And I've genuinely no idea how this entrenched power and money can be resisted longer term.
posted by onebuttonmonkey at 11:36 AM on March 23 [8 favorites]
You resist it the normal way these things are resisted.
You're never going to have a kumbaya moment with this guy where you've finally properly explained the thing in a way that he sees the light and now he's going to change his ways and begin to right his wrongs.
Hitler didn't leave France because he was asked nicely.
posted by jellywerker at 11:43 AM on March 23 [15 favorites]
You're never going to have a kumbaya moment with this guy where you've finally properly explained the thing in a way that he sees the light and now he's going to change his ways and begin to right his wrongs.
Hitler didn't leave France because he was asked nicely.
posted by jellywerker at 11:43 AM on March 23 [15 favorites]
Yeah, the idea is to install a permanent ruling class. They’re not going to let some uppity public servant get in the way of that.
posted by chasing at 12:16 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
posted by chasing at 12:16 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
And I’ll repeat that one reason to have an actual functioning liberal democracy is so the people can enact change without having to murder the wealthy. Oligarchs can also never be free.
posted by chasing at 12:20 PM on March 23 [30 favorites]
posted by chasing at 12:20 PM on March 23 [30 favorites]
Hitler didn't leave France because he was asked nicely.
No, but the idea of democracy is partly that it avoids civil war. I mean, it's a nice idea, but I guess we get to see how that works out.
posted by onebuttonmonkey at 12:39 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
No, but the idea of democracy is partly that it avoids civil war. I mean, it's a nice idea, but I guess we get to see how that works out.
posted by onebuttonmonkey at 12:39 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
The Federalist Society is a terrorist organization. Membership should be disqualifying for any office of special trust and confidence.
posted by ob1quixote at 12:54 PM on March 23 [17 favorites]
posted by ob1quixote at 12:54 PM on March 23 [17 favorites]
5-4 podcast did a three episode series about the Federalist Society recently. It was very good. Part 1 is episode 149.
posted by bq at 1:47 PM on March 23 [8 favorites]
posted by bq at 1:47 PM on March 23 [8 favorites]
No, but the idea of democracy is partly that it avoids civil war. I mean, it's a nice idea, but I guess we get to see how that works out.
We already have. The "democracy" of the USA in the 1850s did not prevent the US Civil War. That's just in the USA, which has had several other conflicts which might be considered "civil wars" but aren't officially designated as such. The land mass currently occupied by the USA has hosted other democracy-sporting polities, some of which experienced things like civil wars.
I'm less conversant with the histories of other land areas but I should be very surprised if there was any real correlation between "democracy" and civil-war-avoidance.
The scare quotes around "democracy" imply that some polities may be democratic to various degrees (down to and including "in name only") but that the authenticity of their democracies might not correlate to their civil-war-avoiding-ness.
posted by Rev. Irreverent Revenant at 2:28 PM on March 23 [4 favorites]
And I’ll repeat that one reason to have an actual functioning liberal democracy is so the people can enact change without having to murder the wealthy. Oligarchs can also never be free.This is the part that baffles me about the politically-active billionaire class. Under the current system they have achieved unbelievable amounts of wealth, privilege, and power. To my way of thinking their clear self-interest should lie in stabilizing that system as much as possible so that they can continue enjoying the winning position they find themselves in. It's baffling to me that so many of them seem willing to risk chaos in exchange for, what, 2% more?
I understand that many of them simply think that they'll be even more on top than they are now but haven't any of them considered that they have literally the most to lose if they drive society towards collapse?
posted by Nerd of the North at 2:28 PM on March 23 [35 favorites]
With that said: I'm a doofus, not an historian, so if I get surprised... maybe I shouldn't be?
posted by Rev. Irreverent Revenant at 2:29 PM on March 23 [1 favorite]
posted by Rev. Irreverent Revenant at 2:29 PM on March 23 [1 favorite]
Well I am going to enter the billionaire class (when I win the Mega-Millions in a few days), and I will do my best to be a politically-active billionaire.
Can you even fathom having a billion dollars? Drop a million here or there? Whatever...
EDIT: But taxes! I won't be a billionaire! WTF? That's why I vote Republican!!! /s
posted by Windopaene at 3:07 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Can you even fathom having a billion dollars? Drop a million here or there? Whatever...
EDIT: But taxes! I won't be a billionaire! WTF? That's why I vote Republican!!! /s
posted by Windopaene at 3:07 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Another shadowy, amoral figure who needs to be taken down by the golden-age Superman (see here and here)--just like the other L.L.
Since that version of Superman is long gone and Metafilter has strict rules about discussing possible fates of despicable individuals, it's up to the American people to put and keep the spotlight on this network of charlatans.
It's clear to me that they despise anyone who stands in their way. This is the "deep (funded) state," with contempt for anyone who is not in their group.
Undermine them, expose them, describe them as they are. Get engaged, get involved and put on the sunglasses. Senator Whitehouse certainly has (video).
posted by JDC8 at 4:20 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
Since that version of Superman is long gone and Metafilter has strict rules about discussing possible fates of despicable individuals, it's up to the American people to put and keep the spotlight on this network of charlatans.
It's clear to me that they despise anyone who stands in their way. This is the "deep (funded) state," with contempt for anyone who is not in their group.
Undermine them, expose them, describe them as they are. Get engaged, get involved and put on the sunglasses. Senator Whitehouse certainly has (video).
posted by JDC8 at 4:20 PM on March 23 [5 favorites]
To my way of thinking their clear self-interest should lie in stabilizing that system as much as possible so that they can continue enjoying the winning position they find themselves in.
If a billionaire believed believed that, they would not be a billionaire. They would have stabilized and entrenched their own finances while mere multi-millionaires.
posted by ryanrs at 6:17 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
If a billionaire believed believed that, they would not be a billionaire. They would have stabilized and entrenched their own finances while mere multi-millionaires.
posted by ryanrs at 6:17 PM on March 23 [6 favorites]
just like the other L.L.
Lois Lane?
Lana Lang?
Lori Lemaris?
LL Bean?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:31 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Lois Lane?
Lana Lang?
Lori Lemaris?
LL Bean?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:31 PM on March 23 [3 favorites]
Well, that was depressing. I’ve wondered if, since no one is willing to prosecute Clarence Thomas for accepting bribes, why doesn’t someone prosecute Leonard Leo for giving said bribes? I guess I have my answer.
posted by TedW at 6:14 AM on March 24 [4 favorites]
posted by TedW at 6:14 AM on March 24 [4 favorites]
We've identified a single glowing weak spot in a massive billion dollar republican dark money machine.
If the dems operated like the GOP we'd have senate committee hearing subpoening Leo, the various non-profits, the tweeter, and the other republican AGs to testify over interference into an ongoing investigation. There would be demands for emails and correspondences, obtained by hook or by crook, to be blasted out as evidence under headlines like "Leo's shadowy republican cabal bribes justice system".
But the dems do not seem to understand the applications of power so we're not going to get that and this entire thing will rest squarely on one man, his office, and their collective ability to endure a billion-dollar-all-fronts pressure campaign.
posted by Slackermagee at 6:42 AM on March 24 [7 favorites]
If the dems operated like the GOP we'd have senate committee hearing subpoening Leo, the various non-profits, the tweeter, and the other republican AGs to testify over interference into an ongoing investigation. There would be demands for emails and correspondences, obtained by hook or by crook, to be blasted out as evidence under headlines like "Leo's shadowy republican cabal bribes justice system".
But the dems do not seem to understand the applications of power so we're not going to get that and this entire thing will rest squarely on one man, his office, and their collective ability to endure a billion-dollar-all-fronts pressure campaign.
posted by Slackermagee at 6:42 AM on March 24 [7 favorites]
The Democratic party apparatus (not to say individual Democrats) answers to essentially the same masters as the Republicans. Capture of the judiciary by corporate interests accomplishes their ends. It shouldn't be any surprise there is institutional inertia against rooting out the influence of the ultrawealthy.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 6:48 AM on March 24 [4 favorites]
posted by The Manwich Horror at 6:48 AM on March 24 [4 favorites]
> The Democratic party apparatus (not to say individual Democrats) answers to essentially the same masters as the Republicans.
No. The Republican masters are a completely different sort of beast. They are religious fundamentalists who believe they should sit atop a racist and misogynistic hierarchy.
Both parties do need money, it’s true, but that’s because our society is powered by money. But what Democrats do and desire to with that money is night and day with the GOP.
Wild that we’re 40+ years into this obvious plan by Republicans to destroy the foundations of our egalitarian, secular democracy and people are still “well both sides”-ing…
posted by chasing at 7:04 AM on March 24 [20 favorites]
No. The Republican masters are a completely different sort of beast. They are religious fundamentalists who believe they should sit atop a racist and misogynistic hierarchy.
Both parties do need money, it’s true, but that’s because our society is powered by money. But what Democrats do and desire to with that money is night and day with the GOP.
Wild that we’re 40+ years into this obvious plan by Republicans to destroy the foundations of our egalitarian, secular democracy and people are still “well both sides”-ing…
posted by chasing at 7:04 AM on March 24 [20 favorites]
We have never had an egalitarian or secular democracy in the US. Even de jure racial equality is less than sixty years old. Gay marriage is barely two decades old. And both have been under attack continuously since.
The class interests of the rich will always win out over any social conscience any individual one of them might develop.
The Democrats exist to recuperate genuinely revolutionary movements back into the system. They draw people who would be revolutionaries in to fight over the details of the system oppressing them. It works because the Republicans are there to play bad cop. We genuinely do have to use the Democrats to prevent the Republicans from making things even worse. But we should not make the mistake of thinking the Democrats as a party are ultimately on the side of freedom, or will support any change that genuinely threatens the status quo.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 7:24 AM on March 24 [5 favorites]
The class interests of the rich will always win out over any social conscience any individual one of them might develop.
The Democrats exist to recuperate genuinely revolutionary movements back into the system. They draw people who would be revolutionaries in to fight over the details of the system oppressing them. It works because the Republicans are there to play bad cop. We genuinely do have to use the Democrats to prevent the Republicans from making things even worse. But we should not make the mistake of thinking the Democrats as a party are ultimately on the side of freedom, or will support any change that genuinely threatens the status quo.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 7:24 AM on March 24 [5 favorites]
> We have never had an egalitarian or secular democracy in the US.
Sadly, true. We’re definitely a work-in-progress and I tend to believe that there will never be a “we got there!” moment. We will always have failures. We will always have room to get better. We’re human, after all.
> Even de jure racial equality is less than sixty years old. Gay marriage is barely two decades old. And both have been under attack continuously since.
Under attack by whom?
posted by chasing at 7:35 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
Sadly, true. We’re definitely a work-in-progress and I tend to believe that there will never be a “we got there!” moment. We will always have failures. We will always have room to get better. We’re human, after all.
> Even de jure racial equality is less than sixty years old. Gay marriage is barely two decades old. And both have been under attack continuously since.
Under attack by whom?
posted by chasing at 7:35 AM on March 24 [1 favorite]
Under attack by whom?
Old conservatives who supported the DoMA, aren't big on abortion, and are scared of integration creating a racial jungle.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 7:42 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
Old conservatives who supported the DoMA, aren't big on abortion, and are scared of integration creating a racial jungle.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 7:42 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
We genuinely do have to use the Democrats to prevent the Republicans from making things even worse.
And how do we do that? Electoral losses only get us increased funding for safe-district establishment Dems and the same vile consultants and advisors getting rehired with a raise. Electoral wins only lead to a slightly slower grind to oblivion until the next election. Structurally, the party functions as an alternative to (and effigy of) actual politics.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 7:51 AM on March 24 [3 favorites]
And how do we do that? Electoral losses only get us increased funding for safe-district establishment Dems and the same vile consultants and advisors getting rehired with a raise. Electoral wins only lead to a slightly slower grind to oblivion until the next election. Structurally, the party functions as an alternative to (and effigy of) actual politics.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 7:51 AM on March 24 [3 favorites]
And how do we do that?
Hopefully only in the short term. When I say we need to use them, I mean we need warm bodies in seats so out and out fascists don't fill them right now. That isn't a solution. It is a stopgap while we do the real political work of organizing labor power, building social networks outside the state, [redacted], and [redacted].
Just to be clear, I do think Democratic voters have pushed the party and the country left. But that is because there were real organic movements that would have gone to extra-legal channels otherwise. Without a one party making a show of supporting for example, civil rights, you get Black Panthers type movements.
But I don't for a moment believe that any of those in power genuinely care about justice or human welfare. These movements have political power because of the threat of violence were they ignored. The powes that be will bend to demands for justice only insofar as they fear the alternative.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 7:57 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
Hopefully only in the short term. When I say we need to use them, I mean we need warm bodies in seats so out and out fascists don't fill them right now. That isn't a solution. It is a stopgap while we do the real political work of organizing labor power, building social networks outside the state, [redacted], and [redacted].
Just to be clear, I do think Democratic voters have pushed the party and the country left. But that is because there were real organic movements that would have gone to extra-legal channels otherwise. Without a one party making a show of supporting for example, civil rights, you get Black Panthers type movements.
But I don't for a moment believe that any of those in power genuinely care about justice or human welfare. These movements have political power because of the threat of violence were they ignored. The powes that be will bend to demands for justice only insofar as they fear the alternative.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 7:57 AM on March 24 [2 favorites]
>> Under attack by whom?
> Old conservatives who supported the DoMA, aren't big on abortion, and are scared of integration creating a racial jungle.
Yup. AKA Republicans. So maybe don’t treat the parties like they’re one-in-the-same…
posted by chasing at 12:15 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
> Old conservatives who supported the DoMA, aren't big on abortion, and are scared of integration creating a racial jungle.
Yup. AKA Republicans. So maybe don’t treat the parties like they’re one-in-the-same…
posted by chasing at 12:15 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
> But I don't for a moment believe that any of those in power genuinely care about justice or human welfare.
So one of the powerful things about a democracy is: It doesn’t matter what those in power truly believe! I don’t give a shit what’s in Nancy Pelosi’s heart-of-hearts. Or even Donald Trump’s. I support a system that forces the powerful to have to serve the people in order to maintain their power. Neither party is perfect, but one essentially acts in the furtherance of an egalitarian democracy and one is loudly and obviously trying to break our democratic institutions. Have you been paying attention to the mainstream Republican stance on the 2020 election?
So, yeah, it’s super edgy and clever to treat all politicians like the enemy, but you’ve got to be able to draw some distinctions… If you can’t tell good from bad, you’re working in service of the bad. Because that’s what bad wants.
posted by chasing at 12:20 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
So one of the powerful things about a democracy is: It doesn’t matter what those in power truly believe! I don’t give a shit what’s in Nancy Pelosi’s heart-of-hearts. Or even Donald Trump’s. I support a system that forces the powerful to have to serve the people in order to maintain their power. Neither party is perfect, but one essentially acts in the furtherance of an egalitarian democracy and one is loudly and obviously trying to break our democratic institutions. Have you been paying attention to the mainstream Republican stance on the 2020 election?
So, yeah, it’s super edgy and clever to treat all politicians like the enemy, but you’ve got to be able to draw some distinctions… If you can’t tell good from bad, you’re working in service of the bad. Because that’s what bad wants.
posted by chasing at 12:20 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
Yup. AKA Republicans. So maybe don’t treat the parties like they’re one-in-the-same….
I was describing Joe Biden. I thought the "racial jungle" quote would make that obvious.
So, yeah, it’s super edgy and clever to treat all politicians like the enemy,
It shouldn't be edgy or clever to acknowledge basic class relations. Not in the 21st century. Maybe in the 19th.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 12:32 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
I was describing Joe Biden. I thought the "racial jungle" quote would make that obvious.
So, yeah, it’s super edgy and clever to treat all politicians like the enemy,
It shouldn't be edgy or clever to acknowledge basic class relations. Not in the 21st century. Maybe in the 19th.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 12:32 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
> I was describing Joe Biden. I thought the "racial jungle" quote would make that obvious.
Well if you think Joe Biden’s bad, might I suggest taking a look at the entire GOP. You will be shocked.
And any argument that the Democrats are just as or less progressive than Republicans is absurd on its face, regardless of Joe Biden’s particular stances over time.
posted by chasing at 12:47 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
Well if you think Joe Biden’s bad, might I suggest taking a look at the entire GOP. You will be shocked.
And any argument that the Democrats are just as or less progressive than Republicans is absurd on its face, regardless of Joe Biden’s particular stances over time.
posted by chasing at 12:47 PM on March 24 [5 favorites]
Neither party is perfect, but one essentially acts in the furtherance of an egalitarian democracy and one is loudly and obviously trying to break our democratic institutions.
The Democratic party acts in furtherance of bourgeois democracy: egalitarianism among those who own something. It promises equal power to absolutely everyone [who can afford it, terms and conditions and politico-economic class apply].
Comfort and safety can scale directly to how much difference one sees between the parties. Easy to say Democrats are the good guys when they aren't killing you.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 12:52 PM on March 24 [3 favorites]
The Democratic party acts in furtherance of bourgeois democracy: egalitarianism among those who own something. It promises equal power to absolutely everyone [who can afford it, terms and conditions and politico-economic class apply].
Comfort and safety can scale directly to how much difference one sees between the parties. Easy to say Democrats are the good guys when they aren't killing you.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 12:52 PM on March 24 [3 favorites]
No one has suggested voting for Trump or not voting for Biden.
You can vote for the lesser of two evils without pretending they aren't.
Voting is not the only political action that exists.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:08 PM on March 24 [4 favorites]
You can vote for the lesser of two evils without pretending they aren't.
Voting is not the only political action that exists.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:08 PM on March 24 [4 favorites]
Oh, 100%. I don’t think the Democrats are by any means perfect and I’m not the biggest Biden fan. That wasn’t the context of my original arguments, which were against the kind of brain-numb idea that the parties are somehow indistinguishable.
posted by chasing at 1:13 PM on March 24 [3 favorites]
posted by chasing at 1:13 PM on March 24 [3 favorites]
They aren't indistinguishable, but they are of a kind. Neither is a threat to the powerful or the status quo. It is very likely no party in our system could be.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:19 PM on March 24 [1 favorite]
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:19 PM on March 24 [1 favorite]
Enjoy Trump’s second term!
I'm a lone voter in a deep red state and don't have any say in that. You must be confusing me for a Democratic party donor or the current president of the united states.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 1:20 PM on March 24 [3 favorites]
I'm a lone voter in a deep red state and don't have any say in that. You must be confusing me for a Democratic party donor or the current president of the united states.
posted by Coeliac McCarthy at 1:20 PM on March 24 [3 favorites]
Reductionism is impossible to argue against because it allows no nuance. Have a good weekend, gents.
posted by chasing at 1:24 PM on March 24
posted by chasing at 1:24 PM on March 24
It is more that these sorts of exchanges on the internet are poor places to seriously argue positions that require nuance, particularly where they are only peripheral to the topic at hand.
I hope you have a good weekend as well!
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:31 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
I hope you have a good weekend as well!
posted by The Manwich Horror at 1:31 PM on March 24 [2 favorites]
Mod note: One deleted. Folks, reminder to comment in good faith and refrain from snark/sarcasm/etc.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 2:21 PM on March 24
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 2:21 PM on March 24
This is the part that baffles me about the politically-active billionaire class. Under the current system they have achieved unbelievable amounts of wealth, privilege, and power. To my way of thinking their clear self-interest should lie in stabilizing that system as much as possible so that they can continue enjoying the winning position they find themselves in. It's baffling to me that so many of them seem willing to risk chaos in exchange for, what, 2% more?
For some, it's not enough to have wealth, if you could have more wealth. The dragon's hoard could always be bigger.
For others, it's not enough to have wealth, if someone else has more wealth. You're number one or you're inferior.
And for many others, it's not enough to have wealth if people whom they deem unworthy have anything -- no matter how infinitesimal their wealth, happiness, rights or influence are by comparison. What's the point of being the biggest dog in the land if you can't tell all the other dogs how they'll have to live their lives?
posted by delfin at 12:30 PM on March 25 [3 favorites]
For some, it's not enough to have wealth, if you could have more wealth. The dragon's hoard could always be bigger.
For others, it's not enough to have wealth, if someone else has more wealth. You're number one or you're inferior.
And for many others, it's not enough to have wealth if people whom they deem unworthy have anything -- no matter how infinitesimal their wealth, happiness, rights or influence are by comparison. What's the point of being the biggest dog in the land if you can't tell all the other dogs how they'll have to live their lives?
posted by delfin at 12:30 PM on March 25 [3 favorites]
Yeah, my understanding is that beyond a certain level, it's all just points. Unless you're Mackenzie Scott, that is.
posted by rhizome at 12:34 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
posted by rhizome at 12:34 PM on March 25 [1 favorite]
just like the other L.L.
Lois Lane?
Lana Lang?
Lori Lemaris?
LL Bean?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:31 PM on March 23 [3 favorites +] [⚑]
---------
Lalter Lhite
posted by symbioid at 11:46 AM on March 26
Lois Lane?
Lana Lang?
Lori Lemaris?
LL Bean?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:31 PM on March 23 [3 favorites +] [⚑]
---------
Lalter Lhite
posted by symbioid at 11:46 AM on March 26
I bet she donates another million dollars to a lefty organization every time Elon acts like an ash sole just to piss him off
posted by bq at 8:29 PM on March 26
posted by bq at 8:29 PM on March 26
« Older Prince Demah, limner, free Negro | It's spaceships all the way down Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Dr. Twist at 10:10 AM on March 23 [36 favorites]