On the eve of the July 4 holiday

When I was a child, the preeminent patriotic song was not "The Star Spangled Banner" ... Too formal and too hard to sing. For some, the song might have been "God Bless America" belted out on vinyl by Kate Smith. But mostly, the patriotic anthem was "My country 'tis of thee ..." Perhaps this had something to do with our proximity Canada where, incongruously to American ears, the same tune served as a national anthem pledging allegiance to British monarchy. Obviously an adaptable tune.

With this in mind, I was delighted to stumble upon this wonderful iteration contributed by W.E.B.Dubois:

... Of course you have faced the dilemma: it is announced, they all smirk and rise. If they are ultra, they remove their hats and look ecstatic; then they look at you. What shall you do? Noblesse oblige; you cannot be boorish, or ungracious; and too, after all it is your country and you do love its ideals if not all of its realities. Now, then, I have thought of a way out: Arise, gracefully remove your hat, and tilt your head. Then sing as follows, powerfully and with deep unction. They’ll hardly note the little changes and their feelings and your conscience will thus be saved:

My country tis of thee,
Late land of slavery,
         Of thee I sing.
Land where my father’s pride
Slept where my mother died,
From every mountain side
         Let freedom ring!

My native country thee
Land of the slave set free,
         Thy fame I love.
I love thy rocks and rills
And o’er thy hate which chills,
My heart with purpose thrills,
         To rise above. ... 

There are two additional verses.  

Takes one to know too many

Panic about newcomers to the United States seems to be a hardy perennial in the American experience. 

Because my parents were unusually old when they reproduced, closer to 40 than 25 when they had a child, I carry a memory of coming up with people who had come of age during the immigration restriction panic of the 1920s. Even in the 1950s, they saw nothing amiss in reflexive "soft" prejudice against people who came from what they saw as "shithole" countries; in their world, that would be people of Italian or, even worse, Polish ancestry. The great patriotic coalition of World War II had sanded some ugly edges off this for them and this disdain didn't extend either to European Jews or American-born Blacks. But during the restricted phase of legal immigration that extended to 1965, they were just normies with normie attitudes. 

My generation were more open to new experiences and newcomers; we call that the Sixties. We were beyond shocking and very controversial to previous generations.

And then, like many Americans, my parents became more and more open to the different sort of Americans who came among us when we opened legal immigration doors a crack. 

The dwindling white base of the current Republican Party desperately wants the past and their entitled bigotry back. The Supreme Court's too small majority affirming birthright citizenship does not mean the end of the fight; it merely signals a new phase in the never finished struggle over who is a real American.

Air Force vet and former Republican Congresscritter Adam Kinzinger speaks to this moment; he knows the worst of his former constituents.  

Why Trump Won't Stop Until He Ends Birthright Citizenship 

Who is an American isn’t a difficult question. Despite what four politicians in black robes tried to tell us ..., the 14th Amendment is incredibly clear, written in language anybody can read and comprehend: “Any persons born or naturalized in the United States.” It’s simple: If you’re born here, you’re an American, and entitled to all our country’s blessings. And it used to be pretty widely agreed upon that this was an asset that this set our country above other nations as a beacon of freedom.

When I swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, I knew this was part of the deal. And I served in uniform alongside people that would have proudly given their life for their country, even if their parents were born somewhere else.

... Let’s be very clear about this: Trump and his allies are not going to stop trying to end Birthright Citizenship, and whoever succeeds him will pick up that mantle. Deciding “who is an American” is central to the MAGA project; it is among the very first steps in their playbook. 

If you think this is an overstatement, just look at one response yesterday from a prominent MAGA stooge—the CEO of the right-wing magazine The Federalist: 

click to enlarge

I'm reproducing this deranged screed here because most of us don't see the stuff our right wingers stew in. "Deny entry to all pregnant foreigners." "Deny entry to all female foreigners." "Require sterilization of all foreign visitors prior to entry." These people are scared stupid!

Kinzinger goes on: 

What makes America exceptional is the idea that citizenship isn’t about bloodlines or tribal membership—it’s about our shared commitment to a set of principles. It is a big, sprawling, living and breathing Democracy. This is what sets us apart from nations that define citizenship by ethnicity or religion. A Shining City on a Hill isn’t meant to be admired in the distance, it is an actual place with people, industry, traditions and faith.

And that gets us to the core of MAGA. The movement to end birthright citizenship isn’t trying to make America stronger. It’s trying to make America smaller, more fearful, more divided. It’s trying to turn the Constitution into a weapon against the very people it was designed to protect. Ultimately, Trump wants a smaller citizenry, a smaller democracy and a smaller America—in every sense of the word.

This is an existential fight for [Stephen Miller], for Trump and for the sociopaths they’ve got running the government right now. It is the skeleton key to the fascist takeover so many of them pray for each night. So the fight continues because they will never stop. 

America, as they know it, cannot exist with birthright citizenship in place because they believe it diminishes them. And, to me, that’s what makes the MAGA movement so weak and pathetic. They want to make being born here a curse, when the rest of us know it is an immense privilege. ...

What happened at the Supreme Court is not just another move in an ongoing MAGA v. Dems chess match. This is our existential fight.

Really, it's not so bad -- I think.

Jonathan V. Last of The Bulwark published one of his acerbic essays recently accompanied by this graphic:

Photo illustration by Sarah Rogers/The Bulwark

As nearly daily, Last is thought provoking. Yet I question where he goes in this piece.

I think we can take it that the image captures Last's disgust with the small town Americans whose views are described in the ethnographic study from the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University which serves as his text. Based in deep interviews in small town Wyoming, Michigan and South Carolina, the study documents that many adults in these communities don't much like democracy -- in fact, they hate majority rule because they know their white nationalist moral understanding of the true and good is simply not shared by the national popular majority. Most of us live in cities, suburbs and along the coasts; we encounter a mix of people and thoughts; we are not from this sad white tribe.

.. Our participants believe the American republic was always conditional on a particular moral order that has now been lost, and a people who held enough in common to uphold this order together. ... Our participants' fear of "too much democracy" is, at its root, a fear that popular will or procedural legitimacy have become misaligned with and elevated above the moral order that should orient both. They believe popular will and procedural legitimacy are important, but can become illegitimate when they stray too far from or threaten the moral foundation. ...

... The conservatives we met share a moral framework that precedes and judges all other aspects of life, including democracy itself. It is organized around four pillars: Faith, Family, Freedom, and Place. The relative importance of these pillars varies across participants, with Faith often being particularly dominant. In our participants' view, these pillars constitute the core of a good and moral life. Democratic institutions, processes, and norms are evaluated against this moral foundation rather than abstract theories of how democracy should work. 

This is not how most contemporary Americans think and believe; nor, approaching the 250th anniversary of the nation, are we willing to be confined in a moral framework from a self-consciously conservative rural minority. Most of us are not open to conversion to a cramped, ungenerous, orthodoxy of fear and decline. The people studied here respond to the majority's refusal to adopt their views by being down on our democracy; they know they are a dwindling minority faction.

The most telling anecdote in the study for me was this:  

...Participants argue the left has captured the institutions that shape what Americans believe before they ever cast a vote: institutions such as K-12 schools, universities, media, and public health, have all become vectors for pushing progressive values. Clint (70s, MI) and his wife call it the "raging river," a cultural current so powerful it has pulled their own children from faith and conservative values into an amoral progressive agenda, fracturing their family in the process. ...

This ethnographic study describes a set of America's losers. 

And the subjects of this study are all too aware and resentful of their loser identity. They wish they were not a minority, but they know they are.

Obviously, this hurts and makes such people fodder for charlatans promising impossibilities -- for Donald Trump. 

JVL worries that this recalcitrant minority, though it's huckster champion, is sinking the Constitutional ship. 

... I’m not sure how Democrats win over a voter who’s motivated not by unemployment, or the the Iranian nuclear program, or the price of eggs—but is rather lashing out because they’re angry that their children rejected their political views.

We are firmly out of the realm of policy here. Or reality, even. So long as there is a trans activist in San Francisco posting on BlueSky, these people will be aggrieved. Even if their preferred political party holds the presidency, controls Congress, and has an openly corrupt majority in the Supreme Court. Domination of the political system is not enough; they want the people who disgust them to disappear.

And—this is the key—the moral revulsion the participants in the study exhibit overrides their commitments to democratic processes and the liberal order. If “democracy” produces anything they dislike, then they are ready to be done with democracy. 

... This is not a new motivating force in American politics. And I don’t know what the cure for it might be. ...

I respond to that -- nothing in our history suggests that there is any easy cure, but we know what its elements might be: broad prosperity and opportunity available to a majority ... coupled with time. Throughout our history, the children have gone off in their own directions, whether physically to the western frontier or toward the "evil" cities. Trump's base of losers is having a very American experience in this our 250th year. But they remain an unhappy minority of losers ... 

• • •

Is the Agora study or Last's diatribe against the rubes really any different than the much-mocked "mainstream" media's dispatch of correspondents to chat with rural Americans in coffee shops? I have a hard time seeing a difference.

• • •

In the NY Times, David Wallace Wells [gift article] provides a different, and I think more accurate, assessment of this cultural MAGA moment under the Trump regime. In the majority, we're not willing to allow imagination and hope to be suppressed by MAGA's nostalgia for an imagined past.

... It’s been a while since anyone talked in such triumphalist terms about MAGA’s cultural victory — maybe since the time that the people of Minneapolis essentially repelled the Immigration and Customs Enforcement units that had descended on their city. The cruel kids’ table is not nearly as crowded anymore, and those lingering at it look to the rest of the country more like monstrous radicals or opportunistic grifters than anything that might be called a political vanguard for the entire country. 

The podcasters who once played the role of MAGA intellectuals have revealed themselves as political weather vanes, separating themselves from the president on one issue after another, and even if Mr. Trump’s evangelical base remains mostly loyal, Republicans keep getting clobbered in special elections. Tech accelerationism is still minting unimaginable fortunes but has also generated populist rage against artificial intelligence and data centers that probably counts as the biggest grass-roots backlash since at least Occupy and the Tea Party. The assassination of Charlie Kirk — which seemed at first to produce a MAGA martyr, initiating a generation of young conservatives almost as a frat house would a new class of pledges — has given way instead to crises and infighting in conservative media. Surveys show that Gen Z remains our most progressive generation.

... Eighteen months later, we can say that if that first vibe shift was real, it’s been followed by another, in the opposite direction, with the bottom falling out of Mr. Trump’s second term and his administration looking again like the same old destructive kakistocracy. But another way of looking at the disarray of the second MAGA era is to consider the possibility that it was always at least partly an illusion, jointly conjured up by self-aggrandizing Republicans and self-lacerating liberals. We haven’t even hit the midterms yet, and the prospect of an enduring MAGA majority doesn’t look like the natural path of the American future. It looks like a projection from the recent past, already fading. ...

This July 4th, the majority continues to reveal that MAGA is a dwindling fraction, not an enduring "real" America. Most of us reject MAGA's terrified vision. 

I am a little shocked by the optimism that thinking about these several articles has let loose in me. Let's get on with making what democracy can of this country!

A warning by way of Britain: no deathly compromises

It feels as if it were going to be a more than usually unsettled few days, this coming week between the enormous LGBTQ+ freedom marches here in San Francisco and President Toddler's dumb and dopey July 4 appropriation of our national founding in DC over next weekend. 

As I come out of my rhinovirus brain fog, here's a warning from last week that I don't want to miss. 

Erin in the Morning: News and discussion on trans legislation and life provides just what the tagline of the substack says it will. This is news we need to attend to. And with MAGA bigots ascendant, this is news no one should ignore. So I pay attention when Erin issues a warning.

Reflecting on UK politics, where the governing left-leaning Labour Party has succumbed to a rightist-inspired panic attack on trans folk, Erin demands that here in the US, Democrats must find more spine. Deposed Prime Minister Keir Starmer's weaselly accommodation of his country's trans-hating bigots didn't win him any real allies or save his fumbling leadership.

... I often write about Democrats here in the United States, and I often criticize them for taking stances that capitulate to far-right framings on transgender people. In recent months, I lambasted eight House Democrats for voting to hand Trump more power to pull funding from schools that support transgender students. I slammed Gavin Newsom and Xavier Becerra for their retreat on transgender sports and, in Newsom's case, for floating the idea that trans people should wait until 25 to transition—a position with its roots in UK-based anti-trans activism. I've even criticized progressive icon and Mayor Mamdani for limiting his new clinic to patients 19 and older, using Trump's executive order age cutoff in what amounts to a retreat from his promises to use every tool at his disposal to fight for trans youth. 

Many have wondered why I have just as many sharp words for Democrats who retreat as I do for the Republicans driving the attacks. Starmer's resignation today should help explain why.

One of my biggest fears is not the Republican Party. They are the devil we know—terrible, and they will take every step to target trans people in the worst ways imaginable. 

But in the United States, we have one thing the UK no longer does: our major left-of-center party has not abandoned us. At least here, the harm can still be reversed. Executive orders can be revoked. Rules can be rewritten. Democratic-held states can serve as islands of refuge and support for transgender people, and a future Democratic administration can undo what this one has done. 

That is only true so long as the Democratic Party remains willing to fight for us. What happens if the only alternative party in the United States follows Labour's path and embraces transphobia too? Where does that leave transgender people?

The greatest danger to transgender people in America is not another two years of Republican rule. It is the potential for a cancer to grow inside the Democratic Party—one that whispers to its leaders that the vulnerable and "unpopular" can be thrown to the wolves in exchange for survival. 

But what the pundits pushing this strategy never tell those leaders is that there will never be enough to feed those wolves.  

There is no amount of concession on trans rights that will satisfy the other side. The ads will still come. And they will not stop at trans people… immigrants… disabled people… LGB people. 

One by one, each group will become the next "strategic sacrifice," until you are left with a party that has abandoned every community that once believed in it—all in pursuit of a political center that doesn’t even exist. You sell your soul, and all you have left are empty platitudes and a collapsing future. 

My emphasis. We aren't there yet. We have a choice about whether we will allow our panic about Trumpism to undercut our affirmation of human rights for everyone. And we can demand brave choices from our Democratic politicians. We are all in this together. 

• • •

It was nice to read a political journalist writing for a broad audience draw similar lessons in an account of Trump's gladiatorial follies on the White House lawn. Noah Berlatsky publishes at Public Notice. He has no truck with the racist malignant masculinity of the big hunk who celebrated his victory by shouting "Michelle Obama is a man." He sees scam.

... Even if the disgusting smear is not new, it highlights the ways in which the status, dignity, and rights of marginalized people are intertwined. The attack on trans people is not just an attack on trans people; it is also, and deliberately, an attack on Black women, on women of color, and ultimately on all women, on all Black people, and on the political party which the majority of all those groups call their own.

Some Democrats have wavered in their support for trans people during the Trump presidency. But this kind of smear directed at a Democratic party leader at a White House event should make it abundantly clear that throwing trans people under a wheeled conveyance will inevitably mean allowing said conveyance to run down and decimate large parts of the coalition. We need to fight back for everyone if we are going to fight back for anyone, because it is the right thing to do, and because fascists, in their hate, do not distinguish between us. ...

Again, the people may have to lead the pols on this -- but if we insist, we can! 

Still on a brain break ...

I stumbled foggily out to a store yesterday still full of rhinoviruses and found myself among crowds of lovely young women making their way to Dolores Park for the Dyke March. The scene reminded me of this classic lesbian poster by my friend Michele Lloyd.

And that's only a tiny slice of us. Happy Pride to all.

Regular posts will resume tomorrow, I hope. 

Blog hiatus

I'm having what's either ferocious allergies or an atypical head cold. Blogging will resume when I can breathe.

Go ahead, make up a story

I usually don't pause to take pictures while getting in my laps around Blue Heron Lake in Golden Gate Park. But this was too good to leave uncaptured ...

You have to wonder, what was the husband in question doing? ... Or not doing? ...

California elections: I was both wrong and right

California's June primary election taught me some lessons about the numerous vehement opinions I bring to our election system.

For many years, I argued that widespread adoption of "abseentee" or "vote by mail" would detract from voter engagement rather than increase it. I was wrong.

I used to argue that campaigning to enhance Election Day -- marches, parties, the common accompaniments of 19th century elections -- would be the best way to increase turnout. This sort of thing does work in some contexts: homeless advocates have been known to march groups of street-living foks to City Hall to vote with some effect. But there is overwhelming evidence that automatically sending every eligible voter a ballot that can be mailed, dropped in a drop box, or delivered to a polling place is more effective.

Joe Garofoli of the San Francisco Chronicle describes the extraordinary success of mail ballots in our state:

... California had the second-highest voter turnout (40%) of any state that has held a primary so far this year.  The state with the highest turnout: Oregon (41%), which, like California, mails a ballot to every voter. 

Trump doesn't like this, but if you want more civic participation, make convenience voting easy! 

• • • 

However, seeing the "top two" primary voting system in action in picking the candidates who will be on ballot in November was the absurd farce I've always thought it. In loathing the "top two," I was right. 

Los Angeles Times columnist George Skelton skewers the strange consequences of this systemic gimmick. 

... [Former state Sen. Abel] Maldonado says he crafted the current system 16 years ago believing it would produce “pragmatic and commonsense” officeholders. But that has failed, he acknowledges.

... Voters, regardless of party affiliation, can vote for any candidate. And the top two vote-getters, regardless of their party, advance to the general election. ... The idea was that candidates would be forced to appeal to centrist voters — not just party ideologues — and more moderates would be elected.

... Actually, the electorate has become so polarized in recent years — particularly during the Trump era — that very few centrist voters seem to be left.

... Democrat Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, favors dumping the top-two.

For one thing, she says, there was too much focus this spring on whether any Democratic gubernatorial candidate would qualify for the November ballot. Fear spread that so many Democrats were running that they’d splinter the party vote and two Republicans would finish first and second.

She wanted to hear less talk about the horse race and more debate over substantive issues.

“People were obsessing about a Democratic shutout,” Gonzalez said. “And people were waiting until the last minute to fill out their ballot because they wanted to vote for the candidate who was ahead to make sure someone made the top two. We didn’t have a policy discussion.” ...

Maybe we can get rid of this abomination? We implanted it by ballot initiative and we would have to vote it away in order to revert to a system in which each party gets a nominee. My instinct is that this would not be an easy campaign to win: voters tend to be protective of any arrangement which they think gives them more choices and presumably that's what defenders of the "top-two" would argue.

• • •

Meanwhile, it would be totally hypocritical of me not to point out that my candidate for US Congress from San Francisco is only still in the running because of the "top-two" system. If we'd had party primaries, Scott Wiener would be a Democratic shoo-in for November. In the current system, Connie Chan, still gives us a chance to elect a progressive, union supportive, Chinese immigrant from this city.  That seems like a good idea ...

Father's Day 2026

Roger looks pleased with himself, doesn't he? Although he remained fairly fit until he no longer could keep going, he didn't much go in for physical labor. On some photos like this, my mother wrote derisively, "Posed!" Later in life, she did the shoveling. 

This was in Buffalo, sometime in the winter of 1938, almost a decade before I arrived on the scene. He was in his mid-30s here.

If loving a child and doing no harm is enough -- and I sure think it is -- he was a good father.

Yet more on the Juneteenth holiday: against forgetting

Kevin Young self-describes as a post-evangelical pastor. Also a white guy and "a lifter." Not my instinctive go-to for theological or other insight. 

Yet, as belatedly and arduously the Juneteenth holdiay becomes more internalized as a national holiday, as well as a Black remembrance, he offers a perspective that I find compelling. He writes:

... The Hebrew scriptures are obsessed—I mean absolutely OBSESSED—with memory. 

The command to remember appears over 200 times in the Old Testament alone. “Remember that you were slaves in Egypt,” says Deuteronomy 5:15. God did not issue that command as a footnote but as the foundation of Israel’s entire ethical framework.

You were oppressed. 
You know what oppression feels like. 
Therefore, you do not oppress.
Remember!

To forget is not simply to be careless. In the theology of the Hebrew Bible, to forget is to sin.

When white people dismantle the legal protections of Black voters, erase Black history from classrooms, defund the celebrations of Black freedom, and quietly remove the holidays that honor Black lives from our national calendar, we are not just making administrative, fiscal, or even political decisions. 

No.

We are committing an act of spiritual forgetting. We are sinning against memory, and we are willfully sinning against the image-bearers we have chosen to forget. 

The alternative to forgetting is both pain admitting to horrors and joy in human liberation -- joy at the defeat of our particular American slavery, but also joy in in the possibility of wider community and a better future. This is a choice. "Let us march on til victory is won!"

Juneteenth 2026

Let us celebrate "a new birth of freedom!" 

Sociologist Robert P. Jones makes a suggestion that works for me:

... The period of 15 days that span the space between Juneteenth and Independence Day could ... function as an enduring season of critical patriotism for our time. Alongside the celebratory fireworks and other well-established practices surrounding the Fourth of July, we could develop a new civic liturgy that include the creative interplay of lament and celebration, reckoning and repair, truth-telling and hope. Borrowing from the High Holidays model, Juneteenth could function like Yom Kippur, recalling our struggles to overcome our shortcomings and achieve freedom, while Independence Day could echo Rosh Hashanah, recommitting us to shared national ideals.

Such a practice could also embrace a conviction that is deeply engrained in Judaism, Christianity, and indeed most religious traditions—that no people can live with integrity into the future if they cannot face their past failures to live up to their principles. ...

Bringing the Juneteenth and the Fourth of July together in a creative mutual orbit, where each is embraced by the gravitational force of the other, can also help us develop other rituals that are honest about our country’s failings while also being hopeful about its possibilities. 

Perhaps it takes time for a new federal holiday to acquire full potency. 

Juneteenth, proclaimed nationally in 2021, has been a living remembrance within Black culture, migrating from Texas along with the diaspora and particularly noted in California where so many African American citizens arrived from the southwest. Nationally the holiday still might take further seasoning. Somehow I doubt that Trump and MAGA will succeed in erasing this happy anniversary, anymore than they'll succeed in Making America White Again. All together now, "let us march on 'til victory is won!"

A lesson for us all

 

Last Sunday in church I had an unexpected experience. At the end of the service, the musician launched into a stirring rendition of James Weldon Johnson's hymn, "Lift Every Voice and Sing" -- otherwise known since the early 20th century as the "Black (or Negro) national anthem." 

 

In the sort of overwhelmingly white churches I attend, the hymn has become a commonplace. There was an era when a gay community whose men were dying in droves during the worst of HIV/AIDS took it up enthusiastically. That made a certain emotional sense; the lyric speaks the joy of the dismissed and discarded.

 

Yet I have been uncomfortable. The practice smacked of cultural appropriation; what right did a bunch of historically illiterate white Americans have to Black Americans' hymn of liberty?

 

Now the Trump administration has sought to erase the federal holiday that marks Juneteenth, the day of liberation from chattel slavery for four million Americans. No more free admission to National Parks to mark Black liberation under the MAGA regime!

 

Civil War historian Kevin M. Levin discusses why it feels so much more plausible and honest for us all to celebrate Juneteenth in this awful year when Donald's decrepitude tries to overrun us all.

Juneteenth Is Not Someone Else's Story 
Emancipation didn't just free four million people. It rebuilt the country the rest of us still live in.

 

... Juneteenth is a federal holiday now. It belongs to the country, which I understand to mean that it belongs to all of us, and not in some abstract, ceremonial sense. Emancipation did not simply liberate four million enslaved people and leave everyone else untouched. It rewrote the Constitution, redefined citizenship, and forced a reckoning over federal power that still shapes our politics. It launched a fight over Reconstruction whose outcome determined who could vote and who counted as a full citizen, a fight whose unfinished business runs through Jim Crow, through the civil rights movement, and into our own disputes over voting rights and equal protection.
 

... None of us, whatever our ancestry, lives outside the world that emancipation built. 

I am not ceding anything. This is part of my history too, not because I share an ancestral claim to bondage or liberation, but because I am an American living inside the consequences of that rupture and the story of how four million people moved from slavery to freedom is the central drama of this nation’s history.
 

... Black Americans inherited Juneteenth as lived memory, as family history, as a chain of testimony passed down with a weight and intimacy I will never replicate. Nor do I have any interest in attempting to do so.
 

... Nobody should cede this story. Juneteenth is the only national holiday that celebrates the freedom of over four million people, in a nation that has long claimed to be ‘exceptional’ in advancing freedom. We should all be reaching for it, from wherever we stand, both as historians and students of history. Because a nation that only half remembers its emancipation has not yet finished becoming free.

This Juneteenth, it behooves us to celebrate emancipation and refuse to cede our aspirations for more perfect freedom.

Lift every voice and sing,
'Til earth and heaven ring,
Ring with the harmonies of Liberty;
Let our rejoicing rise
High as the list'ning skies,
Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.
Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us,
Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us;
Facing the rising sun of our new day begun,
Let us march on 'til victory is won." 

Thought for a Wednesday.

Busy today. I find myself living in a construction site; thirty years of deferred maintenance has its - expensive - consequences. I am sometimes distracted.

The early 20th century four-story school building across the street is an even larger construction site --and  has been now for a couple years and looks to take a few more to get finished.  

As soon as the workers across the street put up plywood to cover their fencing, the graffiti gremlins come out. They promote the neighborhood sentiment,

'Nuff said, for a busy day.

A Third Reconstruction? The end of the beginning?

Or possibly we've turned a corner? A lot of commentators in DC seem to think so. As Josh Marshall remarks:

... you build autocracies when you’re popular (often by goosing the economy in a smart and concerted way), not when you’re swirling the bowl with approval ratings in the mid-30s and falling.

Trump's stupid human cockfight on the White House lawn can't distract from the reality that he has lost a dumb war and murdered thousands of Iranians and a few Americans out of sheer vainglory. 

It can't even distract from the court-ordered removal of his illegally placed name from the Kennedy Center. For now he is covering up the wound, but his body and brain are obviously failing. 

The array of Trump setbacks don't mean that the Orange Toddler and his tribe of second rate grifters and sycophants won't wreak vast additional damage on our country and people. They can and they will. But just perhaps we can begin to look ahead

I like the prescription offered by Chris Geidner who chronicles the legal fights which the defense American democracy entail every day: 

... The lessons to take from the Kennedy Center debacle — itself by no means over — are essential to understanding how we get out of this moment and, in particular, how we move forward while Trump remains in power. 

First: Stand up, speak out, and challenge them. [Congresswoman Joyce] Beatty’s lawsuit, like so many over the past 17 months, was the result of a person who thought the Trump administration did wrong and lawyers willing to back that person up in that fight. 

Second: Remember that this is not a quick process, especially not litigation. It took nearly six months for this clearly illegal act to be reversed. 

Third: Realize they’re going to push back — and that they’re going to get more unhinged as you are closer to winning. Friday’s D.C. Circuit filing was embarrassing (at best), but, at this point, it should not have been unexpected. 

Fourth: Support one another. From the support Beatty got for her effort to the guy going around offering pizza to people at the Kennedy Center on Friday night, Trump’s effort to destroy community is best combatted by simply not allowing it. 

Fifth: Be ready for the fact that they’re not going to be nice about the losses — and that there will be malicious compliance and passive aggressive compliance (as well as, yes, noncompliance at times). But, as here, even the temporary noncompliance was a sign of how much this win mattered — and gave way to compliance by morning. 

Sixth: Celebrate the wins. They purported to change the name, it was despised and also illegal, Beatty sued, the lawyers did their job, the judges did as well, and — after an absurd 48 hours — they took down his name. Take the W. 

Seventh: Get up the next day, and start it all over again.

David Kurtz at Talking Points Memo offers a hopeful, but sobering take on our moment: 

... Make no mistake: This was the first step in what will be a decades-long effort to strip Trump from American public life and repair the damage he has done. It will be slow, pain-staking, halting, and thankless work — and perhaps most frustratingly it will have to overcome the inertia of faux reconciliation and indifference. 

The political dynamics of this renewal, America’s reconstruction history suggests, will be brutal. 

Each effort to undo what Trump has done will be met with howls of outrage, real or not, to maximize the political price exacted. Elected officials will have to decide whether to expend political capital to pay that price. If the 2008 financial crisis and Trump I are any indication, the stomach will not be there to engage in these fights even in the immediate aftermath of Trump II, let alone for the decades it will take to finish the work. 

The destruction of state capacity is the biggest and hardest thing to reverse. But the cosmetic and structural changes Trump has wrought without legal authority, in D.C., national parks, and the White House itself will carry symbolic weight that is likely to trigger the kind of backlash past Democratic administrations have avoided. 

If we don’t begin to confront now the scale and scope of the work ahead, we, too, will wilt when the times comes. 

It won’t be easy for all the obvious reasons but also for a particularly Trumpy one: He hasn’t just broken things. He’s replaced them with crap. Trump’s own track record across decades in business and his first term in the White House strongly suggests that we will face the additional friction point of projects done poorly, on the cheap, and not built to last. 

Shoddy work is a direct product of two Trump mainstays: corruption and performative spectacle. If it’s all just a grift, it doesn’t need to last. It just needs to wow the audience and produce the opportunity to cash in. The suckers are stuck with the aftermath. 

Everything Trump manages to accomplish creates a double whammy of burdens for those who to seek to undo it: the actual cost of demolishing, repairing, rebuilding, and replacing, plus the opportunity cost of what else could have been done instead. ...

He concludes: 

That’s why blocking Trump at every turn now has double the benefits.

So this indeed is the task for our Third Reconstruction, not only to win our institutions, not only to eradicate the white supremacy that enables the current regime, but also to reform our democracy so as to preclude another set of con men from taking advantage of our discontents. Are we up to the task?

No to ICE in Gilroy!

Californians will recognize this image: a string of marchers trudging under the sun carrying banners alongside rich fields in a wide agricultural valley. City people may forget at times, but this too is our state.

The location on Sunday was just outside Gilroy, in southern Santa Clara county. Why the march? The Trump/Miller deportation machine is threatening to build an ICE detention facility among these fields.

Neighbors are not having of it.

Gilroy is proud to call itself the Garlic Capitol of the World. 

A go-to source for information about the Gilroy detention plan seems to be the independent non-profit newsroom, the San Jose Spotlight. They've got the goods: 

Blueprints confirm ICE involvement in South County facility

Detailed blueprints show an ICE office with detention and processing space is planned in South Santa Clara County.

The 111-page document obtained by this news outlet, dated Sept. 17, 2025, illustrates a future U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility with detention areas, detainee processing areas, interview and holding rooms, spaces for mothers with infants, visitation rooms, weapons and ammunition rooms, tactical equipment storage, offices and a fitness center planned at 7240 Holsclaw Road. Certain pages of the document bear the logos for ICE and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

The planned facility is located in an unincorporated area right outside Gilroy.

San José Spotlight obtained the blueprints after first reporting on public records that gave an incomplete picture of what was being built. ...

County and Gilroy elected officials want no part of this project; California Attorney General Rob Bonta has sued to block what he claims is an "Illegal Development" of an ICE facility.

 

Country people understand that sometimes elders need a seat in the heat.

Once more, to the Beach ...

Several thousand of us took to Ocean Beach once again yesterday to denounce the Trump regime as Brad Newsham and his contemporary incarnation of a band of merry pranksters have taught us to do. We've made this human art over 30 times since the first which sought to impeach George W. for his wars.

Drone photo of the human art piece we created

There's plenty of local outrage about the Epstein files.

 

The vibe at these events is at once determined, angry, and celebratory. We like seeing each other.

Here we both enjoy getting in costume .. and mean it.

Friday night festivities

The weekly resistance Dance Party on the 18th Street overpass over Highway 101 in San Francisco greets the evening traffic.

Recorded music competes with the loud traffic and many affirming honks from passing cars.

Sometimes a frog joins the party.

 

From the bridge and the surrounding surface streets, there's no vantage point from which to see the signage.

But yesterday's message that dozing Don is asleep at the wheel seemed popular with the drivers passing underneath.

Organized by RiseUpToAction and friends, the party will be on the bridge every Friday at 4:30pm through the November elections according to the group's newsletter.

Resistance can be a party!

How Democrats win California: there are a lot of us and we vote

Republicans don't win statewide and urban elections in California. There simply are too few GOP voters to get their candidates over the top. So -- naturally -- for a party that has a hard time with reality, they say our elections must be rigged. Bulls__t!

I am no longer a subscriber to the Los Angeles Times. The editorial policies of the paper's nutcase, Trump-loving owner, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, made sure of that; I quit. But I still seem to get the paper's California Politics e-newsletter and that means I can read occasional dispatches from one of the most plain spoken columnists writing anywhere, Anita Chabria. 

Chabria recently responded to Republican whining about our elections with a useful explainer of how the state conducts our voting.

... Voter rolls are a huge refrain in conspiracy theories and the subject of numerous (mostly unsucessful) lawsuits by Trump’s Department of Justice. Trump is demanding that the federal government “audit” the voter rolls to ensure ballots go only to legal voters, which is one of those scary and ill-conceived ideas that sounds reasonable on the surface.

... So what’s the deal with voter rolls? Are they really the dark heart of a Democratic scam to rig elections? Or is the scam that Trump and MAGA are attempting to use the boring and bureaucratic nature of voting rolls to do the very thing they claim to be fighting — undermine of free and fair elections?

... Voter rolls are the lists of eligible voters kept by each state. States run elections, because, well, the Constitution. But that structure is also a good idea because states keep closer track of who is a legal resident and where they are than the federal government. 

Republicans charge the Dems cook the books, putting fraudulent people on the rolls. Not so.

... voter rolls are “loose,” according to Chris Fowler, a professor of geography and demographics at Penn State who specializes in voting rights. Most states have laws that strive to be inclusive and are slow to remove people from the lists, precisely because we want as many people to vote as we can get.

Some people in California are added when they get a driver’s license. Some people move and ask the postal service to update their voter registration. Some people register once, move dozens of times and never think to tell their secretary of state.

Some people die. Some people get married and change their name. Some people don’t vote for 10 years, then do. You get the idea. Life happens, and updating voter registration is rarely our first thought.

But doesn't that mean that people who shouldn't be on the rolls can vote? Well no.

... here’s what the conspiracy folks leave out: Being on the voter roll doesn’t automatically mean a vote will be counted or even that a ballot will be sent. It’s just the starting point of everyone who might be invited to the party.

There are numerous safeguards, such as signature verification, that cast ballots go through before the vote is considered legitimate. When there is doubt, the vote is “cured,” which is an unnecessarily convoluted way of saying local election officials may go as far as tracking down the actual voter and making sure they are legit. Yes, if there is a question, actual people contact an actual voter. If they can’t get in contact, the vote is usually set aside.

The MAGA demand to audit voter rolls ignores all this reality and is instead based on the false idea that voter rolls translate directly into counted votes.

The game MAGA is running with voter roll audits is that it was never about election integrity. It’s about suppressing the vote of Black people, brown people, young people and others who tend to vote Democratic and also tend to have more unsettled lives that would lead them to have inaccurate information, such as conflicting addresses, on the voter rolls. 

I should add that Chabria is also a fair minded commentator. She points out that the baseless whining is not from all Republicans. 

[Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve] Hilton on Tuesday addressed the president’s unfounded but vociferous claims that Democrats have massively cheated in our recent election.

“We’ve got teams standing by, we’ve got lawyers standing by, very focused on that,” Hilton told reporters, including my colleague Seema Mehta, outside the L.A. elections headquarters. “We don’t want to let anyone down, we don’t want to let anything slip away, and we’ve seen nothing.”

Hilton made the November runoff; he's not served by denouncing the vote. He's going to lose; there aren't enough Republicans in California to make a contest. If you want to know who Hilton is, I recommend this delicious piece on his toxic past as a British conservative ad-man by Finton O'Toole in the New York Review of Books. [Free link.]

Friday cat blogging

 

Whatever is going on out there, Janeway seems to yearn to be part of it.

Mio is such a big boy, he not only hangs off his bed. He even hangs off the furniture.

We're all being schooled for moral depravity

Once again, the United States is putting itself in the international war crimes business. If a distinguishing feature of GW Bush's "War on Terror" was institutionalized torture of unfortunate captive brown men, it seems that a central motif of Trump's imperial adventures is using and enlisting the people of the U.S. military in the murder of civilians. 

The ongoing sinking of small boats off Central America without any proof of their involvement any offense is one instance.

Now we get news of an apparently intentional airstrike on a civilian water treatment facility in southern Iran; at least 20,000 Iranians will lose access to clean water.

Strikes early Wednesday destroyed what appears to be a drinking-water facility on Iran’s southern coast, near the Strait of Hormuz, according to an analysis by The New York Times. Around the time of the strikes, the U.S. Central Command said in a post on X that it had conducted attacks near the strait “with precision munitions from U.S. Air Force and Navy fighter jets.” 

Iranian state media reported that the U.S. had hit water storage buildings and a local official said that water was cut off to more than 20,000 people living in a town and villages nearby. Temperatures in the area have reached above 100 degrees Fahrenheit this week.

Professor of Strategic Studies at the University of St. Andrews Phillips P. O'Brien responds to this report without equivocation. 

Is It A War Crime?

Without a doubt. Attacking other infrastructure was probably a war crime as well (think bridges or power plants) but there can at least be arguments made that these are dual use facilities. Militaries use bridges, military production uses generated electricity. If the US destroyed all the bridges in Iran or shut off all the power, as Trump has threatened numerous times, I would definitely consider it a war crime. However, lawyers could try and argue that because of military use, these are allowable targets.

However, a reservoir serving a civilian community is unarguably a crime. The military will get its water somehow, the civilians will suffer. 

And note, this is one of the hottest and driest places on the globe. Academic data for the Sirik region confirms that summer temperatures routinely peak between 45°C and 48.5°C during the warmest months. That is over 115 degrees Fahrenheit. That is comparable to Death Valley in California.

A human being cannot live long in such a climate without water—so either the locals will die of dehydration or, more likely, some will drink contaminated water and die from that.

Either way the US has attacked, seemingly deliberately, a facility vital to the maintenance of human life that has no discernible military utility. So yes, it is a war crime. 

We need to understand that when the military of the United States commits these atrocities against international laws and norms -- as well as against our own legal codes that are supposed to govern our soldiers, sailors and airmen -- something else is happening beyond the immediate rupture of standards.

The Trump/Hegseth regime is corrupting the military, intentionally enlisting serving personnel in crimes. Our rulers want our military to get used to doing these things.

But, like the Bush regime before him, Trump is also corrupting us all. Do we accept that doing wanton murder to prove a point (probably unsuccessfully) is just something this country does? Are we that kind of country? If so, who are we?

We probably don't much care; these crimes are far away and inflicted on people we don't know. And most of the world is certainly not surprised. They live alongside an American colossus that periodically defaults to murderous illegal war-making.

But previous episodes of this national pastime usually evoked some squeamishness from the perpetrators: "No -- it wasn't that bad, it was a mistake, we didn't mean it." 

The Trump regime does mean it: it wants to teach us to thrill to unvarnished, extralegal murder. 

We're living in a magical kingdom with a demented guide

 

The irreplaceable Jonathan V Last at The Bulwark captures the complete lunacy that the madman in the White House and his billionaire buddies have led us into with his Iran debacle

Markets 

The funniest part of this whole thing—the real sorcery—is that the world’s financial markets agree that we’re in a great place and the current status quo is amazing.

America and Israel launched our war against Iran on February 28. Since then,

• America spent in the neighborhood of $30 billion on the war.

• The world experienced the worst oil shock in recorded history.

• Inflation is running very hot.

• There’s been something like $58 billion in damage to infrastructure in the Middle East, which has curtailed industrial outputs independent of the shipping crisis.

• Global companies have lost at least $25 billion in revenue because of the war.

And yet the S&P 500 is . . . up since the war started? Way up?

It gets better! In two days’ time, we will have the biggest IPO in history. SpaceX will shatter records. It will be valued at close to $2 trillion dollars. It will make Elon Musk the world’s first (acknowledged) trillionaire.

It’s going to be the most obscene financial orgy in a century. Like watching John D. Rockefeller and Louis XIV spit roast Caligula.

Iran and the SpaceX IPO are the same thing. Magical thinking. ...

We apparently have an appetite for this sort of thing. Until we don't. Neither Louis XIV (felled by senile gangrene) nor Caligula (killed by associates) ended well. 

Death of Caligula

The American republic, eventually, broke up John D. Rockefeller's oil empire by court order in 1911 and he went on to invent modern foundation philanthropy, for good and ill.

It's all about big boys with blow up toys

Economist and all-round stand up guy Paul Krugman skewers the Trump boys.

... Clean energy has become a bogeyman in the culture wars: mining and burning coal are considered “manly” activities, while renewable energy is portrayed as woke and effeminate. Real men don’t worry about black lung and airborne particulates, let alone climate change.

So a combination of big money and fragile male egos drives Green Derangement Syndrome. And the same is true for both the Iran debacle and the refusal to learn from the catastrophe by turning to Ukraine.

Why was the United States so unprepared for the Iranian drone threat, despite the obvious successes of Ukrainian drones against Russia? Well, as investigative reporters delve into the story, I would urge them to follow the money.

America has a huge, highly profitable defense industry, dedicated to a suite of technologies that are rapidly being rendered obsolete, as $4 million Patriot missiles, that take years to build, are being used to shoot down $35,000 Shahed drones that can be manufactured in months.

So it wouldn’t be surprising if defense-industry interests are playing a significant role in the Trump administration’s refusal to admit that the rules of war have changed — the same way that fossil fuel companies have campaigned against the new realities of energy technology. After all, a deal with drone-savvy Ukrainians would mean less money going to US defense contractors.

While this is speculative, we do know that recognition of the drone revolution in warfare by Trump and his inner circle would require that they abandon their fantasy of macho military power ...

... In military strategy as in energy policy, Trump is betraying America in the service of money and machismo. 

This country will have to grow up, one way or another, whether frying or fried.