Failing One War in Iran, Starting Another with Cuba

We're in yet another week of trump proclaiming a peace deal with Iran is in the works, and yet every sign that trump isn't going to gain concessions or any true victory the way he thinks (via David A Graham at the Atlantic):

Repeatedly over the past nine years, Trump has gotten rolled by counterparts during high-stakes exchanges. North Korea, Russia, Russia again, China, and China again have gotten the better of the United States. Trump has had to slink back to Washington without much to show except empty talk about friendship with whatever dictator has just run circles around him. He’s had some success in brokering agreements when acting as a third party (though not nearly as much as he pretends) but much less luck when his own government is a participant. The one glaring exception came when he was effectively negotiating with himself, getting his own administration to set up a $1.8 billion slush fund for his political allies.

(Absolute rage regarding that mess, but I digress)

The newest example of Trump’s artlessness is Iran. Let’s review the past few days: Trump posted on Saturday that he was close to striking a deal with Tehran that would end the war he started earlier this year and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. As the outlines of the agreement began to emerge, it looked both incomplete and bad: Trump had postponed discussing the hardest issues—matters, such as nuclear weapons, that led him to go to war—in exchange for opening the strait, which was open before Trump started the war. Hawkish Trump allies promptly criticized the deal, and despite histrionic pushback from Trump aides, the president had begun backing off claims of an imminent agreement by Sunday. “If I make a deal with Iran, it will be a good and proper one, not like the one made by Obama,” he posted. “Our deal is the exact opposite, but nobody has seen it, or knows what it is. It isn’t even fully negotiated yet.” Yesterday, in a sign that a deal might not be near at all, the U.S. military conducted what it called “self-defense strikes” against Iranian targets—directly contradicting the administration’s previous claims about having wiped out any threats to the United States in Iran.

Take a moment to notice how trump is obsessing over the nuclear deal in 2015 Obama made with Iran that trump impulsively tore up: A deal that in hindsight was working in spite of trump's refusal to accept anything Obama did as President (or accepting Obama as human, period). trump doesn't even know what the deal is, or even cares: All he cares about is that it'll be "better" than what Obama did. And trump is too clueless personally to comprehend how fucked he is:

First, Trump is unprepared. Some effective presidents (Dwight Eisenhower, George H. W. Bush) came to the White House with a history of deep engagement in public affairs and foreign relations, which made them ready to handle sensitive foreign negotiations. Others brought a formidable work ethic and a ruthless intellect (Barack Obama, Bill Clinton). Both types surround themselves with smart advisers whose input they take seriously. Trump is 0 for 3 on these conditions, which is one reason he wrote off the risk of Iran closing the strait in the first place: He both surrounds himself with less qualified aides than past presidents did and refuses to heed their counsel...

Second, as the roller-coaster weekend demonstrates, Trump is mercurial. Keeping one’s bottom line ambiguous in a negotiation is canny, but Trump doesn’t appear to have any bottom line in his own mind. He has cycled through different rationales for the war, including regime change and stopping Iran’s nuclear program, but hasn’t landed on one. Lacking a goal in the war means he also lacks a goal in the peace talks. Iran may be able to use that to its advantage, but even if its leaders are eager to make a deal, they will be understandably reluctant to agree to anything that requires a leap of faith, because Trump may change his mind at any moment, as appeared to happen amid Republican backlash in recent days.

Third, Trump is desperate for a deal, and everyone knows it. His misjudgments have led him to corporate bankruptcies and cheap sales in business, and he’s in a similar situation now. Every conflict between an autocracy and a democracy (however fragile this one may be) is asymmetric: Trump has to be concerned about public opinion, whereas Iran’s leaders have shown not only that they are indifferent to the suffering of their people; they are willing to massacre them by the thousands. But as the war drags on with no positive resolution in sight, and the U.S. economy looks shakier, Trump has become visibly more frantic to reach a peace agreement...

There is another reason that Graham doesn't note for why trump is desperate for a deal, desperate to crawl away declaring victory in a war with Iran he's clearly lost: trump wants to start another war with a visible target, one that the Far Right would be happy to see (even if most Americans don't want any wars at all right now). The likelihood of attacking - if not straight-up invading - Cuba keeps ticking higher (via Paul McLeary at Politico):

The Pentagon has spent months positioning the troops and weapons needed for the U.S. to launch a military attack on Cuba — all it needs is a final go-ahead from Donald Trump.

The president has floated an invasion of the island after economic and political pressure failed to topple the Communist government. But the Navy’s built-up presence in the region — the largest in the world outside the Middle East — would allow the U.S. to act immediately.

This is something that should get cleared with Congress, but Republican congresscritters have abandoned their role in government and so we're facing yet another unwanted war.

These strategically placed assets set the table for military action, from a capture of Havana’s leadership much like the seizure of former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, to a series of precision strikes. And they open the possibility that the U.S. throws itself into the third international conflict of the Trump administration.

Cuba is “in a lot of trouble,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Wednesday at a full Cabinet meeting. “Having a failed state 90 miles from our shores is a threat to the national security of the United States.”

Cuba is a failed state thanks to decades of American sanctions and a more recent blockade on any oil/fuel getting to Cuba to keep their lights on, but of course Rubio's not going to admit to that. It doesn't help that Rubio is a Cuban expat whose entire political identity is tied into being an anti-Castro advocate eager to invade his family's old country: Exacting revenge against the Castro regime that drove the hardline Cubans out.

I've mentioned these anti-Castro types before: I met some of the original generation - those from the 1960s - at various political functions in South Florida when I worked in Broward County and was a McCain supporter. That generation was rabid in their hatred of anything they deemed 'Communist' or favoring their demon Fidel. Given how Rubio is from my generation, that hatred has passed down to the current generation in power, and they are still fantasizing about pulling off a Bay of Pigs that won't fail.

But that's the problem: Whatever promises Rubio and others are whispering into trump's ear to get him to sign off - the promise of an easy military victory, the hope of being more manly than the wimps who failed to recapture Cuba for wingnut glory - even something as simple as staging an invasion on an island 90 miles off the Florida Coast is going to be too hard for this administration. Back to McLeary:

But the administration faces a timeline to act. Many of the biggest warships deployed in the summer are approaching 10 months at sea, far beyond the usual six to seven months. This has caused defense officials to worry about overextending crews, and adds to the stress on a naval force that is also conducting a blockade of Iranian ships in the Arabian Gulf...

“These back-to-back long deployments will add up over time,” said a defense official, granted anonymity to speak candidly about military operations. “Keeping them out there so long creates more problems in the long run when it comes to refitting and repairing those ships once they come home.”

The prolonged missions come on the back of the record-setting 11 month deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, which ended this month after sailing from Europe to the Caribbean for the Maduro operation and then to the Middle East for the Iran war...

But the long deployments take a toll on the crews and Marines, who had planned for a normal rotation and are now months past their initial scheduled return home.

With our military troops stretched thin already, do we really have enough manpower to go into a jungle-covered, mountainous region like Cuba to try and capture their officials and occupy the lands? And the problems with logistics are already showing with the current deployed fleet: We're already aware how supplies and food under Hegseth's command at the War Defense Department are mismanaged to the point of futility (if not starvation for the front-line troops).

All Cuba has to do is the same thing Iran did: Deny trump a quick victory, make enough strikes to bloody America's nose (it's obvious Florida would be a rich target to strike ports, utilities, and key transportation hubs to disrupt the state), and survive long enough for trump's declining poll numbers to sink the whole Republican Party by the midterms. P.S. Most Americans don't want to invade Cuba, making it likely trump's approval will go lower if he decides to.

This is an administration of Far Right Republicans looking for any kind of military success to justify their Alpha Male fantasies, driven at the top by a madman who wants to win peace prizes while bombing three to seven nations at a time. This is also an administration made up of the least-qualified people for the jobs they're handling, meaning they are making bad decisions into worse policy that will lead to disaster.

And our troops are going to be the ones paying for those bad decisions. At the least. In a fight with Cuba, that is something that can come stateside far faster and far bloodier than we could ever expect.

In a trumpian train wreck bound to get worse - WE WARNED YOU, AMERICA - by every moment, this is getting seriously worse.

Elect Clowns, Get Circus

trump's desecration of the White House - the People's House, not his - continues with this mockery (via Nicholas Kerr at ABC News):

Construction on the Ultimate Fighting Championship Octagon is underway on the White House South Lawn ahead of President Donald Trump’s planned fights this summer to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the United States.

The event, dubbed "UFC Freedom Fights 250," will take place on June 14 -- coinciding with the president’s birthday and Flag Day -- and feature a lightweight title matchup between undisputed champion Ilia Topuria and interim title holder Justin Gaethje alongside four other fights.

How the actual fuck can you tie in a cage match fight system to the anniversary of the United States' "birthday" that was the Declaration of Independence???

photo by Mark Schiefelbein (AP Photo)

Look at how much of an eyesore that stage is going to be, dwarfing the White House itself.

In all the years that the White House has stood - since the later days of the John Adams' administration - there has never been a spectacle like this staged on the property: It's not like there's a long history of boxing fights (Teddy Roosevelt himself was an avid boxer until he got blinded: then he switched to judo) or music concerts being performed there (most concerts are better staged on the Mall just down the way).

trump is doing this because he's enamored of - and probably has money in - the UFC organization, showing up at various fights over the years the way celebrities would at boxing championship nights. It also ties into the whole "alpha male" machismo identity - the open misogyny, the willingness to delve into toxic behaviors - that trump and his lackeys crave.

trump may really believe that this event would somehow promote the "American Way" of manhood, fighting, and success: ignoring how few people - about 3.3 million per average viewership for UFC fights, compared to 125 million who watched Super Bowl LX - may actually tune in. If he's expecting a large in-person turnout - they're talking about 75,000 to 100,000 people showing up - I doubt the locals in DC are going to show up at a trump-sponsored event, and uncertain about how many will travel all that way to be there (only 5,000 or so showed up for trump's riot on January 6th, and barely half of that actually raided the Capitol).

This shouldn't be how America should be celebrating it's 250th year of existence.

This is going to be a grotesque display of violence that only the sadists like trump enjoy.

Don't tune in. Don't watch this circus of stupidity. Look away. 

Find better ways to honor America, like protesting at ICE facilities or getting out the vote in Red states to flip them Blue.

Uh-Oh, It's a Podcast! (Tell Me If It Works)

So here I am this Memorial Day weekend, finally getting around to see if I can work with the Audacity recording app well enough to start my own podcasting.

There's not much, just a brief introduction, and a request for people to leave suggestions about what you'd like to hear as podcasting topics, if any observations I can make will appeal.

It's been uploaded to Buzzsprout. I've copied a link. Let me see if I can embed it to this blog article... hold on...

Also, the opening music "Midnight Drive" is from CHANO_1_NA at the Pixabay free media store.

What do you think, eleven blog followers?

An Abuse of Prosecuting Power: trump's Destruction of the Rule of Law

When last I reported on the struggles of Kilmar Abrego Garcia - one man among hundreds of thousands of immigrants getting hunted, jailed, and punished by trump and his lackeys - he was facing false allegations about gang ties while the courts untangled the lies over what was or wasn't an "order of removal".

In the midst of all that, Abrego Garcia got hit with criminal charges, as part of trump's escalation having made this all a personal vendetta. If there's any good news today, it's that the judge overseeing the case dismissed all charges while highlighting that vendetta as a major reason why (via Sergio Martinez-Beltran at NPR):

A federal judge in Tennessee on Friday dismissed criminal charges against Kilmar Abrego García, an immigrant who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador.

Abrego Garcia was charged last year with human smuggling after being returned to the U.S. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. He didn't face charges then, but the Justice Department reopened an investigation into the traffic stop after a federal judge in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to facilitate his return from El Salvador.

In his ruling Friday, U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw said the actions by then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche "taints the investigation with a vindictive motive."

"The reopening of the closed HSI investigation is the source of the vindictiveness," Crenshaw said, referring to Homeland Security Investigations, which conducts federal criminal probes.

Crenshaw said the government would not have prosecuted Abrego Garcia if not for his successful lawsuit challenging his deportation to El Salvador.

"Blanche's now unrebutted public statements tying the reopened investigation to Abrego's successful lawsuit taints the investigation with a vindictive motive," Crenshaw said. "The evidence before this Court sadly reflects an abuse of prosecuting power."

One of the things about the American legal system is how much power a prosecutor wields: it's insane what DAs can get away with, and rare are the times that judges ever rein in those powers. That our nation's judges have been overruling and dismissing a lot of criminal matters brought to them under trump's broken Justice Department should tell you how inept and failing the current prosecutors are acting to serve trump's whims.

Just yesterday in an unrelated criminal case, a judge in Chicago tossed out a matter involving a group of ICE protestors - the Broadview Six - when the judge found out the AUSAs heading the prosecution violated a ton of regulations involving the grand jury. 

Marcy Wheeler over at her blog goes into more detail just how screwed up it got:

For months, the defendants in the Broadview 6 case had been trying to get the transcripts from the grand jury, arguing that DOJ’s theory that they had conspired to impede an officer whose car they were accused of blocking did not accord with the law. On April 9, Judge April Perry permitted the government to simply file the jury instructions for her review, rather than responding to the defendants’ argument. But the government actually had to get an extension before they did file the transcripts.

When Judge Perry reviewed the transcripts after receiving them on April 23, she found there were three presentments. And while the instructions on the law were problematic before the first one, it got cleaned up by the time the grand jury returned an indictment...

But she also found they were redacted, and so instructed the government to bring unredacted copies to a hearing on April 29.

The government dismissed the felony, 18 USC 372, and therefore mooted the transcript order.

The defendants, smelling a rat about the redactions, nevertheless persisted in asking for the transcripts. And after the government expressed a willingness to do so, Judge Perry got the full versions earlier this week.

She almost immediately ordered every AUSA involved in redacting the transcripts to show up to a hearing yesterday...

I can tell you on Bluesky when the legal eagles heard about that order, they knew the judge was pissed.

Perry described four problems with the unredacted grand jury transcripts:

• Vouching, in which a prosecutor invokes her own assurances in lieu of evidence
• Improper communications with grand jurors outside the grand jury room
• Dismissal of the grand jurors (one in particular) who objected to the charges
• The redaction of the transcript to hide all that

I'm not a lawyer, but I know what "vouching" is: it's where a guy is basically gaslighting you with "trust me babe, I know what I'm doing" without presenting the actual evidence for a trial that a grand jury is supposed to review. I know what "ex parte" outside communication is, which is something of a no-no. Removing grand jurors - or forcing them out - is supposed to be a huge no-no. And redacting all of that to hide it from a judge tends to make judges believe the prosecutors are straight-up lying to them.

Judge Perry said as much when dismissing the Broadview case (via Edward Helmore at the Guardian (US)):

Perry said she was “incredibly shocked” by the government’s redactions, and that she had never seen the “types of prosecutorial behavior before a grand jury that I saw in those transcripts”.

She added that “trust has been broken”.

These Justice Department officials deserve to face all sanctions and even disbarment once the dust settles. In all, a complete breakdown of ethics, professionalism, and trust. 

Which is what we expected when trump regained high office and brought back his style of bullying, vindictiveness, and incompetency.

trump truly believes the legal system is there to punish enemies, as a reaction to all the times he's been brought to court for all the actual crimes and frauds he's committed over the decades. It doesn't matter how things are supposed to be done in the legal system, trump doesn't care: All he wants are results of everyone he hates and fears suffering in courtrooms under his brand of (in)justice.

Which is why I worry still for Abrego Garcia and all the others facing these miscarriages of justice. The courts may have tossed out these attempts at prosecution, but trump will demand his Justice Department minions generate a new set of criminal allegations based on trump's fearmongering... and that won't CAN'T be proven real in a court of law. 

As long as trump is there to twist the rule of law into his law of misrule, no one is really safe.

Keep fighting. And for the LOVE OF GOD throw every elected Republican official out of office this midterms.

trump and His Cronies Aren't Even Hiding the Theft Anymore

This is how corrupt trump's administration is: he sued his own government for billions of dollars so he could then weasel out of the lawsuit and claim an imaginary settlement for a mere billion to pay off his foot soldiers among the insurrectionist ranks (from Katherine Faulders, Peter Charalambous, and Alexander Mallin at ABC News):

The Justice Department announced Monday that as part of a settlement agreement in President Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, the attorney general is establishing an $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" to compensate those who allege they were wrongly targeted under the Biden administration. 

The announcement came after attorneys representing Trump informed a federal judge in a court filing earlier Monday that the president was dropping his suit against the IRS.

The judge overseeing the case, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams, subsequently ordered the case closed -- signaling that she does not plan to challenge the controversial settlement. 

In a brief order issued Monday, Judge Williams said she was "stripped of jurisdiction" to continue overseeing the case. She noted that the settlement agreement was never docketed in the case, so there is no "settlement of record" -- leaving her with no authority to adjudicate the private settlement. 

Do you see it? There's no official settlement of record. There's no paper trail the legal system is supposed to rely on. And yet, there's a billion dollars that Congress never approved of getting set up in a slush fund that I doubt will have any real oversight to where it gets turned into a funnel of illegality where even more money gets siphoned off to gods know where.

As thought making the payment amount symbolic to make it say 1776 like it's for FREEDOM on our nation's 250th birthday is going to patch things over. GODDAMN THIS IS CORRUPT.

This is Paul Krugman over at the National Memo:

So the Trump administration is creating a $1.776 billion slush fund — 1776, get it? — to pay off victims of “lawfare and weaponization.” Just to be clear, if you’re a U.S. taxpayer, this action means that almost $1.8 billion of your money will be handed out to whomever a panel appointed by Donald Trump decides to reward. The beneficiaries are likely to include January 6 insurrectionists, as well as Trump, his family, and his allies.

Few things shock me these days, but this development — in which a Justice Department that works for Trump is paying a vast sum to “settle” a lawsuit brought by Trump himself — is a new nadir in self-dealing, further revealing Trump’s utter contempt for the American people.

Now, massive corruption on the part of Trump and his minions isn’t new. But the shamelessness of this latest episode of looting takes it to a new level. Until now, we’ve seen a combination of crony capitalism and insider trading. Plutocrats and corporations have been enriching Trump through back channels, especially crypto, in return for government contracts and policy favors, while Trump himself and people close to Trump have been making hugely profitable market bets thanks to advance knowledge of government policies.

But now Trump has eliminated the middlemen, effectively telling his officials to pay money directly to him or anyone else he favors.

Granted, we already knew that Trump was, by orders of magnitude, the most corrupt president in U.S. history. But now Trump is the most explicitly corrupt leader in today’s world. After all, Vladimir Putin has obviously stolen billions, but never this brazenly. Even Third World dictators normally try to mask their corruption.

If there's any true justice, trump's move here should get tied up in the courts - especially over that fact that there's no judge-approved agreement on record - long enough for the Democrats to win back Congress this midterms well enough to guarantee they will use their Article I constitutional powers to block trump and his cronies from stealing one more nickel from our nation's coffers.

This is why the Republicans are so desperate to gerrymander the hell out of congressional districts, this is why the Republicans are so desperate to suppress voter turnout to keep their Senate seats safe from statewide anger. They're not that stupid to ignore the polls showing how unpopular they've gotten among even independent voters (and even enough registered Republicans willing to flip their ballots).

Voter turnout still matters: that's the good news. The Republicans can't rig enough barricades and tip enough scales to stop all of us angry at them and trump. Everyone needs to understand the mission this midterms: GET THE DAMN VOTE OUT FOR DEMOCRATS. VOTE EVERY REPUBLICAN OUT AT EVERY LEVEL OF THE BALLOT.

We can save this nation from an eternal void of Far Right grifting and greed, if we show up and vote goddammit.

Data Dangers

There's a thing happening the past few years of the tech companies rushing around trying to build data centers everywhere. Normally, a data center is a building - oft-times a warehouse - where companies can maintain their servers, networks, and other business functions.

Thing is, most of these newer data centers are built to handle artificial intelligence (AI), which requires more processing speed and power that demands more electricity - and water for coolant - to where the local communities are shoved out of their own access to such resources. These data centers also take up more land than ever before, squeezing out communities looking to expand housing, maintain farmland, or protect fragile ecosystems.

It's a problem that's literally developing in my back yard, as there's a corporation trying to build a large data center in nearby Fort Meade where the city council approved a deal in spite of the large and angry turnout of locals who opposed it (via Chad Mills at ABC Channel 28):

The Fort Meade City Commission unanimously approved a controversial development agreement Tuesday night, which advances a massive data center proposal that has drawn weeks of concern from neighbors, especially over water use and the project’s long-term impact on the city.

The vote clears a major hurdle for Stonebridge’s proposed data center campus, planned for more than 1,300 acres northwest of downtown. The project calls for up to 4.4 million square feet of development and, if ultimately built out, could become one of the largest data center campuses of its kind in Florida.

Tuesday’s meeting stretched for hours, with many in the crowd speaking in opposition before commissioners cast their votes.

Mayor Jaret Landon Williams told the crowd the city was not deciding whether a data center could be built on the site. He described Tuesday’s vote as approval of the development agreement tied to a project that had already won land use and zoning approvals during a meeting last June...

What I can tell you about Fort Meade is that it's a small community in a very rural part of the county, where most of the surrounding lakes are carved-out shallow remnants of where phosphate mining took place, meaning there's not a lot of water resources to rely on. Stonebridge's people were claiming they'll only take up 50,000 gallons a day for "potable" use only, but that's still an insane amount of consumption (and I don't believe them when they're claiming they will recycle water coolant: for what I know, data centers evaporate every last drop). 

Internet connectivity out there is meager at best, begging the question how well that AI data center can reach the web. And the electric grid out that way arguably can't handle an energy hog of that scale. They're going to have to add more power stations (or do something like build a solar panel farm to support it). It's like the only reason the Stonebridge corporation wants to build out there is because there's not a lot of residents who could complain when things go bad.

If you read Mills' article above, you'll see photos of the city hall turnout by locals to where the room was packed and standing room only: I've rarely seen a turnout for local issues like that before. It should have been a warning to the city council, but they ignored it as well as ignoring the evidence that a lot of Americans across the nation hate the spread of data centers (via Jeffrey M. Jones at the Gallup news site):

Seven in 10 Americans oppose constructing data centers for artificial intelligence in their local area, including nearly half, 48%, who are strongly opposed. Barely a quarter favor these projects, with 7% strongly in favor.

These results, from a March 2-18 Gallup survey, represent the first time Gallup has asked about data center construction, a topic that has met fierce opposition from local residents in many parts of the country. These data centers house computing equipment that helps power AI technology used by businesses, universities and other institutions. The centers cover large areas of land, require extensive amounts of electricity to operate and need substantial water to cool the equipment, raising concerns about their impact on the environment and local electric bills...

The March survey asked people to rate their level of concern about the environmental impact of AI data centers. Forty-six percent say they worry a great deal and 24% a fair amount, largely mirroring the degrees of opposition to data center construction.

To gain a deeper understanding of people’s reasons for favoring or opposing data center construction in their area, Gallup asked an open-ended question on an April web survey using the Gallup Panel. Americans who favor the building of a data center in their area mostly cite the potential economic benefits. Opponents of data centers have more varied reasons for their position, but they focus mostly on environmental concerns.

Half of opponents mention data centers’ excessive use of resources, including 18% each mentioning their use of water and energy. Sixteen percent mention a related environmental concern of pollution, including noise pollution and air and water pollution...

Most of the remaining opposition stems from general or specific concerns about artificial intelligence.

Speaking of, the growing disdain towards AI especially as the "techbro" elites push the technology is growing louder, even at college graduation ceremonies (from Mirna Alsharif and Austin Mullen at NBC News):

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was booed multiple times Friday while discussing artificial intelligence during a commencement speech at the University of Arizona.

Schmidt, who led Google for a decade, opened his remarks by reflecting on his own student years and the rise of the computer, — a device named Time magazine’s “Person of the Year” in 1982. He traced its evolution into the laptop and smartphone and its proliferation through the internet and social media...

Schmidt then drew a parallel between artificial intelligence and the transformative impact of the computer — and was immediately met with boos.

“I know what many of you are feeling about that. I can hear you,” Schmidt said, addressing the crowd as many continued to boo him. “There is a fear ... there is a fear in your generation that the future has already been written, that the machines are coming, that the jobs are evaporating, that the climate is breaking, that politics is fractured, and that you are inheriting a mess that you did not create, and I understand that fear.”

No, Schmidt, I don't think you understood that fear. It's not so much fear about losing jobs as it is fear of drowning in slop.

The disdain towards AI isn't entirely built on hostility towards technology overall: nearly everyone accepts the usefulness of things like smartphones and computers. Most of the ire is coming from getting overwhelmed - having it shoved almost literally down our throats - by high-tech oligarchs openly desperate to get people to buy their latest shiny toy that doesn't even work well.

I wrote about Artificial Intelligence over at my librarian blog last year, as the use of AI in research and document creation is showing up more in my profession:

This is a serious problem facing librarians and the overall reference/research profession. As a reference librarian it is (maybe was now) my job to ensure the proper information got to the people asking for it, that the materials were well-vetted, fact-checked, and proven. I was in a lot of trouble if I gave people the wrong info.

Now were we are with AI as a research "tool" except that people are expecting it to be 100 percent accurate; when AI still has problems seeing beyond the poor data getting uploaded, or understanding that the algorithms that produced those results might have been in error. It doesn't help if a patron's existing bias blinds them to the factual information that does come up: they'll take the bad info if it fits their world-view (even if it kills them).

Nothing since then has changed: AI is still faulty, still creating fake data, still untrustworthy, still a major health risk. And yet we are all getting AI shoved into our daily lives - in our browsers, our email services, even house appliances - when we didn't ask or even need them.

We're all in danger with this rush to an AI future that doesn't even look like it will work as promised.

Gods - or else Tech Support - help us. 

The Sins of Jim Crow Returning

So in-between the time that the Supreme Court ruled to allow more extreme gerrymandering among the Republican-controlled states - you'll notice they stopped Virginia from their own Democratic gerrymander - and my heading off to vacation in Las Vegas to see the Grand Canyon and get my left leg mangled in an e-bike accident (ow ow ow), it shouldn't be too shocking that most of the Southern (Confederate) states controlled by racist Far Right Republicans sped faster than ludicrous speed to redraw their already-skewed congressional maps to erase all Black-majority districts they could (via George Chidi at the Guardian (US)):

The reaction speed of southern states to the US supreme court’s decision last week in Louisiana v Callais has been breathtaking for voting rights activists.

One week after Callais, Louisiana’s governor has ordered the state’s ongoing congressional election to be set aside while state lawmakers redraw maps to eliminate a Democratic-majority – that is, a Black-majority – seat covering Baton Rouge.

Alabama’s Republican-majority legislature is drafting legislation in a special session that will allow it to set aside the results of a completed primary later this year if courts lift an injunction on its redistricting.

Florida was amid a special redistricting session as the ruling was handed down, passing a congressional map for 28 districts that packs Black and brown voters into four districts on the south Florida coast and Orlando, eliminating every other Democratic majority.

DeSantis and the other Republican bastards in Tallahassee as I feared did cleave the Tampa metro to turn everything in those counties into "safe" Republican districts, in spite of the huge Democratic numbers I personally know exist in that region (well okay, maybe not Pasco County...).

The corpse of the Voting Rights Act was still warm as these inheritors of John C. Calhoun and Jeff Davis celebrated their efforts to deny Black voters in their states any representation at all. It's like the conservatives who make up the modern Republican Party in the Deep South - many of whom were Democrats until the great migration to Reagan's GOP in the late 1980s - were waiting for decades to eagerly undo everything back to 1965 1855.

Donald Trump’s demand to tear up political norms has been met by Republican states eager to dust off a segregation-era playbook that maximizes the political power of white voters.

“What’s happening right now is probably the swiftest disenfranchisement of Black folks since Reconstruction, due to disenfranchisement by racist gerrymandering. And they will lie and say that it’s for political purposes,” said the Democratic state representative Justin Pearson of Tennessee, a Memphis legislator running for a congressional district blown into pieces by Republican lawmakers. “They cracked it into three. The district stretches hundreds of miles … it’s completely diluted in thirds almost to the percentage. It’s surgical, how they remove the possibility of Black participation.”

A lot of these maps will get challenged in the courts, but what success could any of them bring when the top court controlled by six Far Right Republican Justices already sided with the segregationists to bring the horrors of Jim Crow back?

Via Paul Blumenthal at HuffPost:

Following the Civil War and the end of slavery, the Republican Congress led an ambitious campaign of Reconstruction to integrate the formerly enslaved into political society and create pluralistic governments in the South. Hundreds of Black men (women still did not have the right to vote) were elected to offices including governor, congressman, senator and on down following the passage of the 14th and 15th amendments. But this was short-lived as white Southerners organized a campaign of violent repression and terrorism known as Redemption to seize back control, while the Supreme Court carved the original intent out of the 14th and 15th amendments and gutted civil rights laws passed by Congress.

These Redeemers imposed new laws and constitutions on the Southern states meant to ensure white rule by eliminating Black political representation and Black voting rights. This push culminated with the enactment of Jim Crow laws across the South as a response to suppress the successful fusion of Black voters with white Populists at the turn of the 20th century. What remained were authoritarian states imposing racial apartheid through legalism and violence...

The former Confederate states would not send another Black congressman to Washington for another 72 years. The Voting Rights Act, enacted in 1965 following the historic march from Selma, Alabama to Montgomery led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. made that possible. That law banned the bread-and-butter of Jim Crow — literacy tests and other subjective discriminatory criteria for voter registration — and created legal mechanisms to challenge laws and district maps as discriminatory...

But the court’s decision in Callais threatens all of this by reversing the 1982 Voting Rights Act reauthorization by stating that challenges brought under the law’s Section 2 to district maps must prove intentional racial discrimination. The decision also requires any challenge to yield to the partisan motives of state legislators, who can now claim they are eliminating Black majority seats simply because they predominantly elect Democrats.

This is the endgame of all that conservative shifting into a Republican Party driven by Culture War racism/sexism that made certain most Blacks would shift over to the Democratic Party, giving the Far Right judges the 'excuse' of "oh, it's okay if the gerrymandering is ONLY partisan in nature," with the full understanding that racism is driving the differences between the two major national parties.

It's painful that the Southern states are the ones racing to do this, because these states happen to have the largest Black populations across the whole nation. Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina all top the list, with only Maryland up north with a large enough Black population but currently not under the control of racist Republicans threatening to take away their representation (and even their right to vote, and even their citizenship). The only former Confederate state without a sizable Black population - Texas - is currently obsessed with gerrymandering to subdue the Latino vote instead (and also the large Black population in major metros like Houston).

The horrifying thing is how the Republicans in these southern states believe they can get away with gerrymandering black voters out of representation (and political power) with the belief that yes, too many WHITE voters will not turn against these redrawn maps. Even with the risks that the Republicans in these "safe" districts are vulnerable to independent or moderate voters in these regions who could vote for Democratic challengers - especially if they're mad at trump and the whole GOP for tariffs, inflation, oil wars, inflation, immigration raids tearing apart communities, and even more inflation - these wingnuts are convinced enough Whites will vote with their fears and their rage for even more racism.

It would be pretty to think that enough Whites - the ones who aren't conservative, the ones who are still Democratic voters in these redrawn districts, the ones who have a clear idea where all our economic and social ills are coming from (trump and his crooked buddies) - will prove these assholes wrong and refuse to give Republicans the false "majority" control they hope these rigged districts will bring. The Far Right knows, deep down, they really aren't the majority of this nation: otherwise, why would they gerrymander in the first place (and second, why else try to take away voting rights period)?

One of the major reasons to gerrymander is to drive down voter turnout / interest especially by the party getting drawn off the maps. It is high time for Democratic voters - and every No-Party-Affiliated voter - to rise up against these rigged districts and do everything possible to vote Republicans out. 

Fight the corrupt powers of trumpian misrule, America. 

Fight the Far Right assholes trying to take away our power to vote.

Get the goddamn vote out this midterm.

AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD AND COUNTRY, STOP VOTING REPUBLICAN.

The View Was Grand Indeed

I apologize for the long absence: I had a long vacation last week going to Las Vegas, with the intent of visiting the Grand Canyon. I had never been to Vegas, although it's a spot my dad enjoyed visiting as a Navy pilot making delivery runs from East to West Coast. I don't travel as much as I'd like, either. Living on a librarian's salary doesn't allow for a lot of trips I'd like to take. Even saving up for this trip has crimped my current budget.

It did not help that on the day after my trip to the Grand Canyon, I tried to travel around Vegas to do some birthday shopping for my twin brother... and in the process injured my left leg bad enough that I'm walking on crutches and seeing my local clinic about possible ligament tears at my knee. Ow ow ow.

While there's a ton of political madness to keep up with, at least I got to see the majestic views of the west side of the Grand Canyon. Using a Canon Rebel T6 camera, I was able to get some pics:

I wonder if you can see the shape...

Yup, there's a sleeping dog on the left.

The west side is on tribal land: the Hualapai people oversee and manage the tour sites, including a Skywalk viewpoint that is pretty scary for anyone - like me - afraid of heights.

You have to pay extra to go on the Skywalk. 
I was not about to pay extra to scare myself.

Just remember this is the WEST side of the canyon.
There's a North (currently closed) and a South. Spread over 
HUNDREDS of miles.

Even the staff parking lot has an epic view.

I tried to get an interior picture, but it was too dark.

This is stop two at this park: Guano Point. That
rocky formation is actually called Ant Hill.
The top of it is supposed to give you the best
360 degree view of the canyon possible.
And it's impossible to get up there.
I tried, twice.

I'm told that's the Colorado River down there.

There's a bat cave down there. (No, not THAT one)
Guano was harvested for fertilizer. That's part of the old
lift system they used to get to the cave.

I dunno if you can see it but I tried to get a picture
of the tour helicopters that fly through the canyon.

The Guano Point facilities, where bathrooms are available
and lunch can be had. I really needed that bottle of water
after all the hiking and walking, especially because
that dry heat of the desert made more dehydrated than I'd ever
been in Florida!

I have a number of videos that I recorded to my smartphone - and a lot more photos of Las Vegas on there as well - that I will need to upload through YouTube to share properly on the blog.

In the meantime, I hope you all have good vacations planned for the summer, and for the LOVE OF GOD DO NOT INJURE YOURSELVES. Hurts like hell still, ow ow ow...

This Is Not Victory, This Is Iran Punching Back

I'd like to blog about May The Fourth Be With You, but trump is making things worse as always.

After spending the weekend running around claiming "the war with Iran was over" and that the Strait was opened (aka lying as usual), today Iran made it clear who was in charge of this war and who was winning (via Luena Rodriguez-Feo Vileira and Bernard McGhee at AP News):

The United Arab Emirates on Monday said it came under attack by Iran for the first time since a fragile ceasefire took hold in early April. Authorities in the eastern emirate of Fujairah said an Iranian drone sparked a fire at a key oil facility, and the British military reported two cargo vessels ablaze off the UAE.

The attacks appeared to be in response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s latest efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. forces on Monday began offering to guide commercial ships through the critical waterway and reported that two American-flagged merchant ships had successfully transited. Hundreds of ships have been stuck in the strait since the war began.

Trump on Saturday said he was reviewing a new Iranian proposal to end the war but expressed skepticism that it would lead to a deal. Two semiofficial Iranian news outlets believed to be close to Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard said Iran sent a 14-point proposal via Pakistan in response to a nine-point U.S. proposal.

Trump, meanwhile, also claimed that the war has been “terminated” because of the ceasefire — an interpretation that would allow him to skirt the War Powers Resolution, which requires Congress to authorize military action that extends beyond 60 days. Trump called this law “unconstitutional,” and its May 1 deadline passed without action after lawmakers left town.

This war isn't going to end until one of three things happen: Congress forces trump to abide by the War Powers laws and shuts down military operations; trump is out of power and saner heads can prevail; or Iran obliterates enough oil production capabilities by our Middle East allies to where they scream loud enough for trump to withdraw outright.

Invading Iran with ground troops is out of the question: Our military is falling apart under Hegseth's misrule as I type this. trump getting a peace deal out of Iran is out of the question because Netanyahu and the Far Right wingnuts in Israel do not want peace with Iran under any terms.

I seriously wonder what will happen first: trump's willingness to lie and deceive himself into a nursing home; or our overseas military quitting in a mass mutiny over lack of food and coherent leadership.

Eighty Sixing Forty Seven

There are several constants in the known universe. One of them is that donald trump will not stop his bullying ways to avenge even the slightest injury to his raging fear/hate.

I noted last November how trump's "Revenge Tour" - attacking everyone who exposed his ties to Russia, investigated that nation's likely involvement in the 2016 election fiasco, or refused to do his bidding to go after his perceived enemies that first go-around - was falling apart because the facts of the universe did not fit trump's fantasies of being the victim/hero. Those legal failures by his puppeteer-ed Justice Department ended up costing lackey Pam Bondi her job as Attorney General, setting up a replacement AG to do trump's dirty work pursuing vengeance on even flimsier evidence.

Which led to this past week's act of injustice when Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche filed charges against former FBI Director James Comey (again) on the pretext that Comey threatened trump's life by sharing a photo of seashells on the seashore (more details from Ryan J. Reilly, Monica Alba, Gary Grumbach and Michael Kosnar at NBC News):

The two-count indictment, posted Tuesday afternoon, alleges that a reasonable person would interpret the image of the shells, arranged to spell out “86 47,” as “a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the President of the United States."

Justice Department attorneys sought the indictment in the Eastern District of North Carolina, where Comey has a beach house and where he posted the beach scene photo. The Department of Homeland Security previously investigated Comey, who has long been a Trump target, over the May Instagram post, even subjecting him to questioning by the Secret Service.

Comey had deleted the post, saying it never occurred to him that it would be interpreted as being violent. "Eighty-six" is a term commonly used in restaurants when an item is sold out, and it's also informally used to mean "cancel" or "get rid of."

In a subsequent Instagram post in May, Comey said that he assumed the shells he saw on a beach walk were "a political message" and that he "didn't realize some folks associate those numbers with violence," adding that he opposed violence "of any kind."

Comey said in a video posted after his indictment that he was innocent, that he was not afraid and that he still believed in the independent judiciary.

"They're back," he said of the Trump administration. "This time about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina beach a year ago. And this won't be the end of it."

By the by, should we count the number of times donald trump threatened violence or wished harm on other sitting presidents like Obama or Biden? In those instances, he openly directly called for violence. trump never got charged by the Justice Department for that. All Comey did was flash a photo of "86 47", and trump's lackeys are having fainting spells across the Sunday talk shows.

The hypocrisy of this reeks.

It's also pulling what's called The Streisand Effect: By drawing attention to a minor, almost ridiculous matter, trump has instead exploded interest and willingness by a lot of other Americans and protestors to use "86 47" as a vocal protest against him.

Sales of "86 47" merch are expanding.

The actual legality of what Blanche and the rest of trump's enforcers are attempting is up for debate. It's just that a good number of experts are pointing out how stupid it all is (via Matthew Chapman at Raw Story):

Former FBI Director James Comey's indictment for supposedly threatening violence against President Donald Trump is completely ridiculous, said former FBI official and counterintelligence specialist Michael Feinberg on MS NOW's "Deadline: White House" Tuesday.

"I mean, again, [former Congressman] Matt Gaetz posted, 'We’ve now 86’d: McCarthy McDaniel McConnell; Better days are ahead...'" said anchor Nicolle Wallace. "Is there any reasonable interpretation that Matt Gaetz meant we'd killed them? I mean, is this — is this in law enforcement, an accepted phrase that is associated with threats of death?"

"No," said Feinberg. "I actually first learned the phrase when I was working the door at a bar in Chicago shortly after I graduated college, where we would use it to refer to ejecting unruly customers. So when I saw Jim Comey's post on Instagram from last year, I simply assumed it was a reference to removing the president from office."

"It is a very large leap to claim that that is a threat of violence," said Feinberg. "And because of that, I don't want the phrasing I'm about to use to make light of how malevolent and destructive of constitutional norms this Justice Department is being with this indictment. But this is the single dumbest charging decision I have ever seen in my entire law enforcement career, or in my even longer career as an attorney. This is the definition of bad faith."

The indictment isn't even likely to result in a conviction - the case is that weak - but it demonstrates trump's willingness to harass and harm his "enemies" in spite of reality (via Steve Benen at Maddow Blog):

When Comey, a lifelong Republican, went public with his concerns and criticisms about Trump, the president came to see the ousted FBI chief as one of his most important enemies, and in April 2018 he started demanding that Comey be prosecuted for crimes that Trump struggled to identify.

It took several years, but the president is seeing the results he’s long sought.

Months after Trump’s Justice Department brought absurd criminal charges against the former FBI director, in a case that ultimately collapsed, prosecutors secured a second indictment against Comey this week, claiming that he used Instagram to call for violence against Trump by way of a seashell-related code.

Though the case is rooted in an indictment of Comey, it’s actually more of an indictment of a weaponized DOJ. Legal experts are reportedly “shell-shocked” over how preposterous the case is, and for good reason: No fair-minded observer could defend or take seriously such spurious charges.

This isn't about justice, or securing the safety of a sitting president occupant of the Oval Office. This is about trump using the executive branch of government to humiliate and harass anyone who ever crossed him.

A case like this should never have gotten through a grand jury. It shouldn't stand before any judge who should see this as a legitimate witch hunt - pushed and prodded by a guy who screamed about all his criminal and civil cases being 'witch hunts' - for political (and stupid) reasons.

Every DOJ lawyer from Blanche on down involved in this farce deserve to get sanctioned and disbarred for this, along with a hundred other illegal acts trump's gotten them to commit against our nation. This is "sandwich guy getting charged with assault" levels of stupid that Justice lawyers are committing here, and it's going to end with the same (acquitted) results.

In a sane world, trump's campaign of legal terror would lead to impeachment and criminal charges.

Goddamn the Far Right partisan bastards in the Supreme Court and a broken Congress who are protecting trump from the justice he's deserved for decades.

We need to get rid of trump. Get him out of power he's clearly abusing for his own greed and rage. Flush him down the toilet like the shitgibbon he is, the way you're supposed to when you 86 something (that's how my fellow middle schoolers used the phrase back in the day).

Am I going to get criminally charged for blogging that he needs to get flushed down a toilet? Try me, motherfuckers. There's at least 60 percent of fellow Americans you're going to have to prosecute alongside me.

The Grinding Down of Russia as Ukraine Keeps Fighting Back, May 2026 Edition

It's been some time since I posted anything about Ukraine's war of survival against Putin's Russia.

By most accounts, it's still going terrible for Putin and his meat grinder. I once mentioned that Russia's only true advantage over Ukraine was sheer numbers: that Russia had 134 million to throw at Ukraine's 34 million, an obscene "We Have Reserves" tactic that could still well work. Problem even with that: there's really only so many bodies you can throw into a war zone before you use up the ones that are able to fight; and are left with untrainable, unhappy, unwilling soldiers. There's also a limit to how many men - young, old, mere babies - you can conscript before crippling your nation's workforce in vital fields. Meanwhile, Ukraine is playing defense and can draw on everyone willing to protect themselves and loved ones from invading Russian hordes.

If you want more data: A link to the most recent analysis from the Institute for the Study of War.

With trump's war on Iran creating a global crisis with oil supply, Ukraine's been taking advantage by striking Russia's refineries to prevent them from capitalizing on the increasing demand for oil. Granted, it's not great for the rest of the world, but it's putting more pressure on Putin who can't generate any wealth or maintain his own war machines without it. 

In this, Ukraine's skill fighting with drones has made them one of the most invaluable military forces on the planet. As Sinead Baker notes over at Business Insider:

Now, partners want access to Ukrainian weaponry, to learn from its production techniques, and to integrate Ukrainian tactics into their own militaries.

Ukraine's armed forces are now "undoubtedly the most combat-hardened and the best at the moment in Europe," Michael Clarke, a former UK security advisor and now a defense analyst, told BI. And allies are paying attention.

Partner countries have long trained Ukrainian troops to fight Russia, but increasingly the roles are being reversed, with Ukrainians sharing their expertise with NATO militaries and joining their training programs, particularly on drone warfare...

Ukrainian troops have at times pushed back on Western training, explaining why some tactics are unlikely to work against Russia while also feeding front-line experiences back to their instructors. That know-how is reshaping how partner militaries train their own forces, trainers in a UK-led program told Business Insider.

On the opening of a new training camp for Ukrainian soldiers in Poland last year, Poland's defense minister, Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz, said, "This is not a one-way process," sharing that "we will be drawing on Ukrainian experiences."

If Putin thought conquering Ukraine would make the rest of Europe tremble, he's made things worse for himself and Russia by giving them opportunities to learn from Ukraine how to fight back. Putin's never really going to win this one.

Ukraine's drone capabilities were apparently scary enough that Putin put out offers of a temporary ceasefire on his nation's upcoming Victory Day to avoid any embarrassing drone strikes on his glorious parades. Peter Dickinson at The Atlantic Council explains how this exposes Putin's weaknesses:

For Putin, the annual Victory Day parade is no mere formality; it is the main event on the Kremlin calendar. This prominence reflects Putin’s efforts to revive Russian patriotism following the fall of the USSR and place the Soviet World War II experience at the heart of the country’s modern national identity.

During the Soviet era, Victory Day had not been the leading public holiday, with only four parades held between 1945 and 1991. Since the start of Putin’s reign, however, Victory Day has been elevated in status to the level of pseudo-religion, complete with its own saints, symbols, dogmas, and heretics. Indeed, it is no coincidence that enemies of the Kremlin are routinely branded as “Nazis...”

Since 2022, the full-scale invasion of Ukraine has cast a long shadow over this spectacle. With Russia needing all available armor to replace heavy combat losses in Ukraine, finding enough vehicles for the parade has become increasingly challenging. In 2023, the Kremlin could only muster a single tank, sparking widespread mockery. “There are farmers in Ukraine with more Russian tanks than that,” quipped one internet wag.

This year’s parade is shaping up to be even more awkward. The Kremlin has already announced that due to the threat of Ukrainian drone and missile strikes, the event will proceed in a scaled back format without any tanks or military equipment whatsoever. Instead, the pageantry will be limited to columns of troops marching across Moscow’s central square. This dramatic downgrade represents a tacit admission by Putin that he can no longer ensure security in his own capital...

Five years ago, the entire notion of Putin seeking American assistance to protect Moscow from Ukrainian attack would have seemed absurd. This humiliating turn of events will not have passed unnoticed inside Russia, where rumblings of dissent are already becoming more audible amid a grinding war, deteriorating economic outlook, and escalating government restrictions on internet access. Putin’s obvious inability to protect his own showpiece parade will now underscore perceptions that the regime is rapidly losing control of the narrative and has become trapped in a war it cannot win but dare not end.

Starting an unpopular, unwinnable war just isn't the best way for dictators to show off, ya know?

As always, I suggest keeping up with Adam L Silverman at Balloon-Juice for insight and updates on Ukraine.

Slava Ukraini!

The Arc of Justice, Pretzeled by the Far Right Undoing the VRA

Goddammit. Just as I was writing a long spiel about gerrymandering, this extremist Roberts Court decides to come out with a ruling against redistricting for minority representation that basically made things worse for democracy (via Lawrence Hurley at NBC News):

The Supreme Court on Wednesday further weakened the Voting Rights Act, ruling that a congressional map in Louisiana was a racial gerrymander even though it was drawn to comply with the landmark law aimed at protecting minority voters.

The justices, split 6-3 with the court's (note: Republican) conservatives in the majority, told states they can almost never consider race when drawing maps to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which was enacted to protect minority voters who long faced discrimination in elections.

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, said that while there may be extreme situations where the use of race can be justified to draw a map, no such conditions existed in the Louisiana case. As a result, the new map was an "unconstitutional racial gerrymander," he added.

This ruling ignores the long, horrifying history of segregation when post-Civil War southern states slid back to control under ex-Confederate racists who rigged elections, took away voting rights for Blacks, and drew maps in such a way that pretty much guaranteed racist one-party rule well up into the Second World War. But that's the point: Alito and his fellow Far Right conservatives wanted to return to that segregationist era ever since the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s ended their racist regimes. Labeling the Louisiana district as a "racial gerrymander" is irony of the sickest kind.

The implications could be immediate: as much as we're weeks away from midterm primaries kicking off, a number of Republican-controlled states were already in the process of last-minute gerrymandering efforts that can get a boost from this ruling to erase every Black majority district off their maps. Not only the congressional districts, but the state legislative districts are at risk of seeing every Black/Latino representative getting mapped out of office.

If there's any ray of hope, it's the one David A. Graham shared in that dummymander article I quoted in my previous blog entry:

The math is simple: In order to draw more districts favoring Republicans, GOP legislators had to spread their own voters a little thinner. But if they spread them too thin and Democrats have a good year, Republican candidates will become vulnerable.

The state-level Republicans may be eager to redraw Black majority districts out of existence, but they run into the risk that those voting blocs with blend in with the surrounding districts that the conservatives made sure were racist White enough to lean conservative/Republican. A lot of those "racial gerrymandered" Black districts were intentionally over-packed with Democratic voters to where that district could be +20 Dem while the surrounding four or five districts leaned +2 or +5 GOP. Without that overpack, that +20 Blue can flow into those GOP Red districts and shift them enough to where the Republicans lose their advantages in spite of their map rigging.

This is why the Republicans are also working overtime to take away voting rights from everyone they fear/hate. Don't be surprised if there's a lot of last-minute legislation under the guise of fighting "voter fraud" to take away the constitutionally guaranteed rights of Blacks, women, and college students to solidify whatever "win" the Far Right inflicted on this nation today.

Keep fighting. This was how things were in the 1960s and here we are again, but these rights are worth fighting for, there is an America still out there worth fighting for. Don't let these bastards win: Vote every fucking conservative Republican out of office while we still can.

Update: Adam Serwer at the Atlantic explains it better than I can.

As the historian Nancy MacLean wrote in Freedom Is Not Enough, by the 1970s, (segregationist James Jackson Kilpatrick) had refashioned himself as an opponent of racial discrimination, a champion of color-blindness. Liberal egalitarians supporting race-conscious remedies, he argued, were “worse racists—much worse racists—than the old Southern bigots.” His transformation was so complete, he joked, that he was like the convert who “became more Catholic than the Pope.”

In fact, Kilpatrick’s conversion was no conversion at all. To understand it is to understand the Roberts Court’s decision today in Louisiana v. Callais. The decision purports to uphold Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in voting, but effectively nullifies it, ruling that a Louisiana redistricting map that created two majority-Black districts out of six, in a state whose population is one-third Black, was an “unconstitutional racial gerrymander.” The majority opinion uses procedural language to obscure what its rewriting of the VRA will allow lawmakers to do: engage in racial discrimination in drawing political districts as long as they say they are doing so for a partisan purpose rather than a racist one—as if the results would not be identical.

In states with large Black populations that remain under Republican control—half of the Black American population resides in the South—lawmakers will now be able to draw districts that dilute Black residents’ voting power. In his opinion for the right-wing majority, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that “in considering the constitutionality of a districting scheme, courts must treat partisan advantage like any other race-neutral aim: a constitutionally permissible criterion that States may rely on as desired.” The Court’s decision is consonant with the philosophy, articulated by Kilpatrick in his earlier days, that the state is oppressive when it interferes with the right to discriminate, and respects liberty when it allows discrimination. And the decision fits just as well with Kilpatrick’s later spin on that philosophy: Attempts to ban racial discrimination are themselves discriminatory—against white people.

What Kilpatrick wanted, and what the Roberts Court is making possible, is a country where white people can maintain their political dominance at the expense of Americans who are not white. The anticaste provisions of the Reconstruction amendments, intended by their authors to reverse the “horrid blasphemy” that America was a white man’s country, are being inverted to defend that dominance. This is not the color-blindness of Martin Luther King Jr., but what the scholar Ian Haney López has called “reactionary colorblindness,” the purpose of which is to maintain racial hierarchy through superficially neutral means. It takes the view that the Constitution’s “color-blindness” renders any attempt to remedy anti-Black racism unconstitutional, because by definition that would involve making racial distinctions. Similarly, the ruling in this case does not explicitly overturn the VRA’s ban on racial discrimination in voting so much as rewrite it to allow such discrimination.

The best way to stop racists is to stop fucking voting for them. Get every Republican out of office now.