Partering Glances
Realizing Yourself, Leaving Others
It all started last Monday and I blame Charles Johnson. Who? Well, if you read me you probably don’t read him. He’s the guy who writes the incredibly successful right-wing political blog, Little Green Footballs. And he’s a parter.
What’s a “parter?” What? – You don’t know? A parter is someone so well-known for who they are that it seems incomprehensible that they would “part ways” with their current “affiliations.” Johnson did just that last Monday, in his post, “Why I Parted Ways With The Right.”
On his list of ten reasons why he parted ways with the Right, Johnson says, is their:
“2. Support for bigotry, hatred, and white supremacism (see: Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, Robert Stacy McCain, Lew Rockwell, etc.)”
and,
“5. Support for homophobic bigotry (see: Sarah Palin, Dobson, the entire religious right, etc.)”
and, quite possibly my favorite:
“10. Hatred for President Obama that goes far beyond simply criticizing his policies, into racism, hate speech, and bizarre conspiracy theories (see: witch doctor pictures, tea parties, Birthers, Michelle Malkin, Fox News, World Net Daily, Newsmax, and every other right wing source)”
(Shameless plug: Check out all the writing I’ve done about Michelle Malkin.)
Now, I confess I don’t read Little Green Footballs. (It’s OK; I’m sure Charles doesn’t read me either.) So I can’t tell you that he’s become a huge Socialist, or that he now supports a single-payer option, or really, anything. But I can tell you that the news of “parting ways” made the major media. Most importantly, I can tell you that it’s not he who has changed, so much as it is those around him.
The next day, Tuesday, another conservative blogger, and a man for whom I have great respect, the incredibly intelligent Andrew Sullivan, became a parter. In “Leaving the Right,” he says,
“…there has to come a point at which a movement or party so abandons core principles or degenerates into such a rhetorical septic system that you have to take a stand. It seems to me that now is a critical time for more people whose principles lie broadly on the center-right to do so – against the conservative degeneracy in front of us.”
Wow. Sullivan, who is gay and a strong supporter of marriage equality, has for a while now been embracing his inner Left. But this was a big, bold statement.
He goes on. In his own (unenumerated) list, Sullivan details his reasons, including,
“I cannot support a movement that regards gay people as threats to their own families.”
and offers,
“I cannot support a movement that does not accept evolution as a fact.
“I cannot support a movement that sees climate change as a hoax and offers domestic oil exploration as the core plank of an energy policy.”
and,
“I cannot support a movement that refuses to distance itself from a demagogue like Rush Limbaugh or a nutjob like Glenn Beck.”
And I must throw in this final gem:
“Does this make me a “radical leftist” as Michelle Malkin would say? Emphatically not. But it sure disqualifies me from the current American right.”
Bravo, Mr. Sullivan!
But wait – there’s more.
Just one day after Sullivan made his announcement came yet another parter: Meredith Baxter! She partered big time, by announcing on the Today Show, that she is a “lesbian.” (I’m putting it in quotes, out of respect – not like some conservatives put quotes around the term “gay marriage,” as if it weren’t “real marriage,” – but because it’s the word she used and a lot of lesbians were glad she used that word instead of “gay,” like Ellen did.)
Just one week after Johnson’s announcement, came news of another sort of partering. Yesterday, Al Diamon wrote about the partering of Larry Grard. Who is Larry Grard? Yeah, I didn’t know either. Turns out the Mr. Grard was, and I say was because he no longer is, a reporter for the Morning Sentinel, a Waterville, Maine newspaper. Grard was partered against his will, for emailing HRC and calling them “haters.” (I put “haters” in quotes, respectfully or not, because that’s the word he used. And it’s the word that got him partered.)
I’ll make no comment about Grard, except to say that if you’re going to say something, best be comfortable signing your name, or it’s probably not a good idea to say it. (Me, I sign everything I write.)
But, at least for (formerly Right-wing) bloggers, it’s not a one-way street. Sullivan calls attention to another parter.
In, “Leaving The Left,” Sullivan writes,
“A blogger explains why reading the liberal blogosphere’s routine attacks on Obama has led her to rethink where she stands.”
Here’s what said liberal blogger wrote, in “Why I’m Not a Liberal Anymore,”
‘”The stuff coming out of “progressive” mouths is all too often on a par with Glenn Beck’s abusive rants–both sides (right and left wingers) playing thousand-pound national football with the President as the ball…”
(And later, in, “Leaving The Left, ctd.,” Sullivan shares readers’ responses. I urge you spend the three minutes it will take you to read it.)
So, there’s been a lot of change, a lot of partering, if you will, over the past week or so. I’m not sure quite yet what to make of it all. My friend Cody Daigle might chalk it up to, “Saturn Returns.”
In truth, all of these folks haven’t changed, so much as remained true to who they are, while they saw the world, their world, change. And they responded. Some, like Johnson and Sullivan, taking positive, productive stances. Some, like Grard, taking a negative and unproductive stance. Some, like Baxter, allowing her true being to be seen, and thus, remaining true to herself as well.
I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions. And to chart your own course of action.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
When Donald Trump raises his right hand on Monday to swear an oath to the U.S. Constitution as America’s 47th President, he will do so not as most Presidents have done, outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., but inside. Amid forecasted temperatures in the mid-20s, Trump has decided to move the proceedings inside, a decision that was quickly met with mockery and prompted speculation about crowd size concerns.
Washington, D.C. suffers from — or boasts, depending on personal preference — a wide range of temperatures. In January, temperatures in recent years have ranged from a balmy 80 degrees (2024) to a frigid 5 degrees (2015). And while temperatures in the mid-40s are average for January, 24 degrees, the forecast for Inauguration Day, is not especially unusual.
“Due to the dangerously cold temperatures expected Monday, President-elect Trump’s inauguration is moving indoors. Expect Trump and Vance to be sworn in inside the Capitol Rotunda,” CNN’s Kaitlan Collins reported Friday. A short time later she added: “Trump confirms it’s moving inside, citing the danger posed to attendees by the cold. He says guests will be brought inside the Capitol.”
READ MORE: Biden Sparks Legal Battle by Declaring Equal Rights Amendment Is Now ‘Law of the Land’
Trump posted a dramatic explanation: “January 20th cannot come fast enough! Everybody, even those that initially opposed a Victory by President Donald J. Trump and the Trump Administration, just want it to happen,” he claimed.
“It is my obligation to protect the People of our Country but, before we even begin, we have to think of the Inauguration itself. The weather forecast for Washington, D.C., with the windchill factor, could take temperatures into severe record lows,” Trump also claimed.
“There is an Arctic blast sweeping the Country. I don’t want to see people hurt, or injured, in any way. It is dangerous conditions for the tens of thousands of Law Enforcement, First Responders, Police K9s and even horses, and hundreds of thousands of supporters that will be outside for many hours on the 20th (In any event, if you decide to come, dress warmly!),” he wrote.
“Therefore, I have ordered the Inauguration Address, in addition to prayers and other speeches, to be delivered in the United States Capitol Rotunda, as was used by Ronald Reagan in 1985, also because of very cold weather. The various Dignitaries and Guests will be brought into the Capitol. This will be a very beautiful experience for all, and especially for the large TV audience!”
The temperature during Reagan’s second inauguration was 7 degrees, with a windchill making it feel like -40, Fox News reports.
The decision surprised many.
“It was 28°F when Barack Obama was sworn in at noon on January 20, 2009 before a crowd of nearly two million people,” observed Aaron Fritschner, Deputy Chief of Staff to U.S. Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA). “NOT INCLUDING THE INSANE WIND CHILL!!”
Susan Rice, a former top advisor to both Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, mocked Trump and team: “SNOWFLAKES,” she snarked, using the common derisive term occasionally leveled at Democrats by the right.
READ MORE: Trump Threatens FBI Office, Alleges ‘Corruption,’ Demands They ‘Preserve All Records’
Some critics suggested the issue was not weather but attendance — just like when Trump was inaugurated before a small crowd in 2017, only to make his first White House Press Secretary’s job to denounce those claims and declare, “This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period,” he emphatically and infamously insisted — reportedly at Trump’s direction.
“Moving the inauguration inside due to freezing temps takes crowd size ‘off the table’ as Trump’s second term begins,” CNN’s Brian Stelter, citing his colleague Dana Bash, noted.
Moving the inauguration inside due to freezing temps takes crowd size “off the table” as Trump’s second term begins, @DanaBashCNN notes on @InsidePolitics https://t.co/vDrSx0OK5y
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) January 17, 2025
Sam Stein of The Bulwark suggested that President-elect Trump has been trying to get more people to show up: “Trump has been running twitter ads to get folks to come to the inauguration. If they’re now moving it indoors, you have to imagine folks who booked travel will be left distraught.”
David Axelrod, senior advisor and chief campaign strategist to President Barack Obama, also mocked Trump.
“In ’61, John F. Kennedy was Inaugurated on the Capitol steps, in windchills of 7 degrees. It was almost as cold for Obama in ’09. In fairness, Trump IS more than 3 decades older than JFK & Obama were. Or did he just fear small crowds?”
In ’61, John F. Kennedy was Inaugurated on the Capitol steps, in windchills of 7 degrees. It was almost as cold for Obama in ’09.
In fairness, Trump IS more than 3 decades older than JFK & Obama were.
Or did he just fear small crowds? pic.twitter.com/3TFJil3HqF— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) January 17, 2025
Former Obama Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton, offering a history lesson, suggested there aren’t a large number of people interested in attending Trump’s second inauguration. He wrote “Tell me you have a crowd size problem without telling me you have a crowd size problem. It was colder for Obama’s and JFK’s inaugurations and JFK didn’t even wear a coat.”
On January 20, 1961, John F. Kennedy became the 35th president of the United States.
His inaugural address was a call for Americans to commit themselves to strength and sacrifice and for citizens around the globe to strive for peace and freedom.https://t.co/VuT3yRLeNZ pic.twitter.com/FQXAGCI48D
— JFK Library Foundation (@JFKLibraryFdn) January 20, 2024
Watch the video above or at this link.
READ MORE: ‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives
Image via Reuters
President Joe Biden, just days before he will exit the White House, announced on Friday that the Equal Rights Amendment, which would enshrine in the U.S. Constitution equal rights for women, is now the 28th Amendment and “the law of the land.” Although he has some legal scholars backing this declaration, experts say there are still legal hurdles and a legal battle to overcome.
“Today I’m affirming what I have long believed and what three-fourths of the states have ratified: The 28th Amendment is the law of the land, guaranteeing all Americans equal rights and protections under the law regardless of their sex,” President Biden wrote. “I have supported the Equal Rights Amendment for more than 50 years and have long been clear that no one should be discriminated against based on their sex. We must affirm and protect women’s full equality once and for all.”
“On January 27, 2020,” President Biden explained in his statement on the White House website, “the Commonwealth of Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. The American Bar Association (ABA) has recognized that the Equal Rights Amendment has cleared all necessary hurdles to be formally added to the Constitution as the 28th Amendment. I agree with the ABA and with leading legal constitutional scholars that the Equal Rights Amendment has become part of our Constitution.”
READ MORE: Trump Threatens FBI Office, Alleges ‘Corruption,’ Demands They ‘Preserve All Records’
“It is long past time to recognize the will of the American people. In keeping with my oath and duty to Constitution and country, I affirm what I believe and what three-fourths of the states have ratified: the 28th Amendment is the law of the land, guaranteeing all Americans equal rights and protections under the law regardless of their sex.”
CNN calls Biden’s announcement “a last-minute move that some believe could pave the way to bolstering reproductive rights.”
“It will, however, certainly draw swift legal challenges – and its next steps remain extremely unclear as Biden prepares to leave office.”
The news network also credits U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) with “making a major push for certification, saying in a memo to interested parties that it would give Biden a way to ‘codify women’s freedom and equality without needing anything from a bitterly divided and broken Congress’ in the aftermath of the 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.”
In 2020, after Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the ERA, the necessary requirement of three-fourths ratification may have been met.
As The Brennan Center for Justice noted just days later, “there are still hurdles in the ERA’s path. The ratification deadlines that Congress set after it approved the amendment have lapsed, and five states have acted to rescind their prior approval. These raise important questions, and now it is up to Congress, the courts, and the American people to resolve them.”
READ MORE: ‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives
Congress could try to waive the deadline and try to ignore the states that rescinded their ratification.
President Biden did not order the National Archivist to certify the ERA as the 28th Amendment. Some have suggested neither has the legal authority to do so at this point.
But some have also suggested the deadline was unconstitutional.
The Associated Press called President Biden’s declaration “a symbolic statement that’s unlikely to alter a decades-long push for gender equality,” and “unlikely to have any impact.”
“Presidents do not have any role in the amendment process. The leader of the National Archives had previously said that the amendment cannot be certified because it wasn’t ratified before a deadline set by Congress,” the AP added. It noted that the National Archives said, “the underlying legal and procedural issues have not changed.”
READ MORE: DeSantis’ Rubio Replacement Seen as Trump Loyalist and MAGA Culture Warrior
Image via Reuters
Just days before he will be sworn into office, President-elect Donald Trump is alleging the FBI has been engaging in “corruption,” after learning the Bureau has shut down its “DEI Office,” officially the Office of Diversity and Inclusion. The FBI has a lengthy, ongoing investigation into the January 6, 2021 insurrection and attack on the U.S. Capitol. It also conducted an intensive investigation into Trump’s removal and refusal to return classified documents, including top secret national security materials, and executed a lawful search warrant on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and residence to retrieve some of those documents.
“We demand that the FBI preserve and retain all records, documents, and information on the now closing DEI Office—Never should have been opened and, if it was, should have closed long ago. Why is it that they’re closing one day before the Inauguration of a new Administration? The reason is, CORRUPTION!” Trump alleged, offering no proof or evidence, in a social media post Thursday evening.
Trump pointed to a report from Mediaite: “FBI Shuttered DEI Office Ahead of Trump’s Inauguration.”
READ MORE: ‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives
“While on the campaign trail, Trump stated he would end ‘wokeness’ and ‘leftist indoctrination’ by dismantling diversity programs and imposing fines on colleges ‘up to the entire amount of their endowment,” the Mediaite report reads. “More recently, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) sent a letter to outgoing FBI Director Christopher Wray stating the agency’s DEI practices ‘endanger Americans.’ Blackburn made those comments shortly after the New Year’s Day terror attack in New Orleans.”
The Bureau’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion “was created in 2012 to provide guidance and implement programs that promote a diverse and inclusive workplace that allows all employees to succeed and advance,” according to an archived version of its website. That page, which stresses, “Different backgrounds. One mission,” appears to no longer be accessible from the FBI’s website, and instead forwards to the main page.
“The FBI’s efforts to diversify are crucial to creating an inclusive workforce and to being increasingly effective and efficient in our investigations and keeping the American public safe,” FBI Chief Diversity Officer Scott McMillion said in a quote on that page.
READ MORE: DeSantis’ Rubio Replacement Seen as Trump Loyalist and MAGA Culture Warrior
Apparently baseless accusations against DEI abound.
The New Republic notes that the “FBI came under fire recently as many on the right openly blamed the deadly truck attack on New Year’s Day in New Orleans on the agency’s DEI policies.”
“The priority of the last four years has been DEI, not IEDs,” New York Republican Representative Dan Meuser had told Fox News,” TNR reported.
“The ODI office isn’t closing because of corruption,” TNR added, “like Trump is claiming in all caps on Truth Social. It’s likely closing for the same reason Walmart, Meta, McDonald’s, and others are reneging on DEI policy: Trump is back.”
READ MORE: Trump Ran on Promise to Lower Grocery Prices — Few Americans Now Believe He Will
Image via Reuters
Trump Threatens FBI Office, Alleges ‘Corruption,’ Demands They ‘Preserve All Records’
Biden Sparks Legal Battle by Declaring Equal Rights Amendment Is Now ‘Law of the Land’
‘Fear Small Crowds?’: Trump and Team Mocked as ‘Snowflakes’ for Inauguration Move
‘Fear Small Crowds?’: Trump and Team Mocked as ‘Snowflakes’ for Inauguration Move
Biden Sparks Legal Battle by Declaring Equal Rights Amendment Is Now ‘Law of the Land’
Trump Threatens FBI Office, Alleges ‘Corruption,’ Demands They ‘Preserve All Records’
‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives
DeSantis’ Rubio Replacement Seen as Trump Loyalist and MAGA Culture Warrior
News3 days agoMarjorie Taylor Greene Targets Former Biden Official’s Religious Faith in House Hearing
News4 days ago‘Loyalty to a Tyrant’: Cheney Invokes Jack Smith’s Report to Warn Senate on Trump Nominees
News2 days agoTrump Ran on Promise to Lower Grocery Prices — Few Americans Now Believe He Will
News4 days agoTorture? Shoot Protesters? Greenland? Question After Question, Hegseth Refused to Answer
News4 days agoFBI Report on Hegseth ‘Insufficient’ Says Top Dem: ‘I Do Not Believe You Are Qualified’
News2 days ago‘My Eyes and Ears’: Trump Names Ambassadors to Hollywood, Critics Question Motives
News3 days agoTrump Vowed ‘100%’ to End Ukraine War Before Inauguration — Now He Says It’s ‘Up to Putin’
News3 days ago‘Concerns From Mar-a-Lago’: Speaker Johnson Boots Pro-Ukraine Intel Chair in ‘Big Shakeup’