“Mitch McConnell will live in infamy as Trump’s principal enabler…a shameful but fitting epitaph”

The title of this piece, above, is a quote from McConnell’s once-admiring biographer, John David Dyche…(who) has recanted the accolades he once bestowed in his 2009 book, “Republican Leader.”


Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post

If condemning Trump while acquitting him was meant to thread a needle to broker peace in the GOP, it hasn’t worked. The insurrection is now celebrated in many corners of the Republican Party. And Trump, who has never forgiven McConnell for certifying the election, has lashed out time and again…

Scott Jennings, a former campaign adviser to McConnell, said understanding his former boss, and the relationship with Trump, entails a “psychological study about how what each of these two guys think is the point of politics.”

“Trump’s motivation is personal, maybe to become president again, get revenge of people who wronged him. It’s not ‘did we enact stuff,’ but ‘did we glorify Trump?’ ” Jennings said.

McConnell’s motivation, Jennings said, “is impersonal. It’s only to win back the Senate for the purpose of enacting Republican stuff or blocking Democrat stuff, because without control, we can’t do anything. And if you didn’t do any of those things, then you failed.”

More than a half-century after he first arrived at the Capitol as an intern, McConnell has spent much of his life as a political shape-shifter, molding himself to fit the moment, from moderate to conservative, from reformer to anti-reformer, fighting against Democrats on one side and Trumpists on the other. He is said by many who know him to be especially concerned about his legacy, and that brings his story full circle. In the end, his decisions to help Trump avoid a Senate conviction and to stop new voting protections may be his most consequential and, to his critics, his most troubling acts.

To me, McConnell is the ultimate Congressional politician. Obviously the folks who re-elect him think so, too. He stinks on ice. The best living example of an unprincipled Washington politician. Getting his own, getting ahead, willing to change positions that should be principled, iron-clad, not for sale. And, yes, the voters who return him to office…are as guilty of unprincipled self-delusion and a belief in power for its own sake.

Abortion Bans Based on So-Called “Science” Are Fraudulent

❝ We are scientists, and we believe that evidence, not ideology, should inform health care decisions. The wave of anti-abortion laws across the U.S. is the latest in a long string of attempts to falsely use the language and authority of science to justify denying people their basic human rights and inflict lasting harm. Although abortion is still legal in every state, recent legislation in Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio threatens the future of abortion rights in the country. Scientists should, first and foremost, value evidence, and the evidence is clear: abortion bans cause harm. They make abortions less safe and especially harm historically marginalized communities…

❝ So-called heartbeat bills, which ban abortion as early as after six weeks of pregnancy, are not based on science. In fact, no heart yet exists in an embryo at six weeks. Yet six states and counting enacted such bills in 2019, in addition to Alabama’s near-total ban. Equally unscientific “abortion reversal” laws are also gaining traction. These laws, now on the books in eight states, require doctors to tell patients receiving a medication abortion, a safe and effective way to end an early pregnancy, that it can be reversed halfway through to save their pregnancy.

Not only is this law bad science, it is actively dangerous. The idea of abortion reversal is based on a single study of six participants that was (poorly) conducted without an ethics review board. The so-called abortion reversal procedure is experimental and has neither been clinically tested nor approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

❝ Both heartbeat bills and abortion reversal laws have been opposed by leading medical groups, including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Real doctors, real scientists, don’t rely on ancient myths and legends to advance the health and welfare of our species. A primary reason they have success rate scores enormously higher than superstitious mumbo-jumbo.

Ignorant parents prefer plagues over modern science

❝ North Carolina is reporting the worst chickenpox outbreak since a vaccine for it was introduced more than 20 years ago. Ground zero for the outbreak is the Asheville Waldorf School, where 36 children have come down with chickenpox.

❝ The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that “the percentage of children under 2 years old who haven’t received any vaccinations has quadrupled since 2001,” according to the Washington Post. Many of the parents who refuse to vaccinate their children do so under a religious beliefs exemption…”

Otherwise known as the “stupid” exemption – designed to benefit opportunist politicians seeking the votes of ignoranus parents.

Conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is deliberate sophistry

❝ “…anti-Semitism is so entrenched in our society, so depressingly persistent, that to trivialise it is to trivialise the blueprint of prejudice itself. It is a barometer of moral cowardice: when someone doesn’t want to take responsibility for their own faults or problems, they blame the Jews.”

❝ At the moment, two phenomena are taking place in UK politics. For the first time in nearly 40 years, a politician with seriously left-wing ideas, and pro-Palestinian sympathies, is approaching political power. Over the past two years, that same politician’s party has been going through a series of anti-Semitism allegations so comprehensive and systematic that we may employ the term “blanket coverage”.

❝ There is definitely a long-overdue debate that needs to be had over anti-Semitism in the Labour Party – but the current barrage of media attention is not that debate. There are definitely some voices who claim to support the Labour Party, and who allow their anti-Zionism to spill over mindlessly into anti-Semitism. What we are witnessing in the UK media, however, is a near-complete evaporation of critical debate. So many aspects of this coverage are disturbing: the widespread assumption among TV hosts and commentators that anti-semitism is a problem exclusive to the Labour Party (polling suggests it is clearly not); the alarming paucity of any evidence or statistics, so that the sentence “anti-Semitism in the Labour Party”, repeated ad nauseam, becomes its own self-generating fact; the frankly ridiculous allegations of anti-Semitism levelled at the leader Jeremy Corbyn himself (Alan Sugar, one of the most famous faces in British business, tweeted a photo of the Labour leader sitting next to Hitler); the unconditional authority and respect given to voices who have been widely criticised elsewhere for bias – the Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis, for example, whose unreserved equation of anti-Zionism with antisemitism drew a letter of protest from 88 Jewish celebrities; the lack of journalistic professionalism in giving any sense of proportion to the actual problem (the membership of the British Labour Party is 570,000 – the number of cases pending for expulsion from the party for anti-Semitism, the Guardian reported this week, is 70). Media coverage has been so appalling that, earlier in the summer, a group of 40 senior British academics accused the media of relying for its sources on a handful of “well-known political opponents of Corbyn himself”.

Discussion overdue. No less a problem in the US Congress.