The absurd nicknames aside, Searle’s past as a symbolic and financial supporter of the infamous Neo-Nazi is disturbing. Fuentes, who has, among other things, argued for 16-year-old brides, called for the execution of journalists and so-called globalists, and promoted antisemitic conspiracy theories to the point where even some right-wingers are hesitant to associate with him, is not merely a clout-chaser but a full-on fascist with violent views. 234

To add to that, Searle’s position within Gosar’s orbit is not a small position. As digital director, Searle has extensive influence over how Gosar is perceived. Such a position would be completely untenable, especially from someone who has as checkered a past as Searle’s. Yet, as of writing, Gosar has not fired Searle from his position within his staff.

This isn’t entirely surprising, as Gosar has previously been involved with Fuentes, both directly and indirectly. In one instance, Gosar attended a fundraiser with Fuentes, and in another, he was a guest at his America First PAC.5 To say Gosar has a history of far-right connections would be an understatement.

Gosar himself has engaged in violent rhetoric. As I noted previously, Gosar has used animations from the famed anime, Attack on Titan to show himself, along with Representatives Boebert and Green, attacking and fatally injuring a titan with Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s face superimposed over said monster. 6

The video, deleted after a backlash, was not merely a joke in poor taste but a representation of the consistent dehumanization within Gosar’s camp of the GOP. Despite conservative attempts to argue it was harmless, the fact of the matter is that it is a clear sign of intentionality on Gosar’s part.

As I noted in my article from 2021:

Hypocrisy aside, the idea that media has no impact on the political discourse seems laughable in the face of the pandemic, the attack on the capitol.

To this day, Republicans believe that the election was stolen, with 62 percent of Republicans asserting that voter fraud altered the election results. They are wrong. Media outlets like Newsmax and Fox helped propagate this myth, and it contributed to the death of five people on that infamous day in January.

It is bad enough that Gosar associates with far-right neo Nazis like Nick Fuentes, but the fact that he will almost certainly escape consequences for his actions is an indictment on our political system. If there is to be any calm in this tumultuous political environment, consequences have to follow. Basic decency demands it.

Gosar’s connections with such a far-right figure are unsurprising but should disturb every reasonable person in this country. If anything, the consistent failures by Gosar to remove himself from the far-right, consciously or otherwise, is an indictment on his ability to serve his constituents and the nation with any tact of good character. So long as this trend continues, Gosar and his camp will demonstrate that they are unfit to serve in the halls of government.

Pointing to a supposed deal to raise the debt ceiling, McConnell argues that House Republicans are not engaging in “hostage-taking” and that it is merely “the ordinary stuff of politics.” This argument conveniently ignores how the President can also engage in politics regarding governance while giving undue deference to the House GOP.

Nowhere in the article that McConnell cites does the GOP plan going forward get mentioned in serious detail.3 All that is mentioned is that Republicans are calling for “…. an increase in the borrowing limit be accompanied by spending cuts and other cost savings.” Not exactly the most detailed analysis of the fight going on in the hall of government now, is it?

Continuing on, McConnell writes:

Begin with constitutional basics. Article I, Section 8 lists the powers of Congress. The first clause of Section 8 provides that Congress may “lay and collect taxes.” The second clause provides that Congress has the power “to borrow money on the credit of the United States.” These clauses are absolute. The executive branch cannot impose taxes or borrow funds on its own authority. Together with the power over spending, these powers are known as the power of the purse, which belongs entirely to the legislative branch.

These provisions have pride of place among Congress’s powers for a reason. Before the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the English Civil War, the Stuart monarchs asserted the power to tax and to borrow without parliamentary approval, which effectively meant the power to rule without Parliament. The result was not just autocratic rule at home but also periodic defaults on the royal debt, astronomical interest rates for government borrowing and ultimately civil war. Our framers did not wish to recreate the Stuart monarchy, and the first two clauses of Section 8 reflect that aversion. The power of the purse may be the most fundamental element in our system of checks and balances.

The debt limit is nothing more than an authorization from Congress to borrow a certain amount, up to a certain limit. The debt ceiling is not a restriction on what would otherwise be the president’s ability to borrow; it is an authorization for the executive branch to borrow up to that ceiling. Above that, the president may not go.

Nonetheless, Mr. Biden’s advisers reportedly are contemplating violating the congressional debt limit based on a far-fetched interpretation of Section 4 of the 14th Amendment propounded by some academics. Previous administrations have flirted with this idea, but all have rejected it. Mr. Biden should do the same. It would twist the words of the 14th Amendment, ignore its history and send the markets into turmoil.

Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, enacted in the wake of the Civil War, says: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law … shall not be questioned.” The immediate purpose was to prevent future Congresses (if controlled by pro-Confederate Democrats) from repudiating pension obligations and other debts incurred to win the Civil War. No doubt it applies beyond those narrow circumstances. But by its terms it does not authorize the president to borrow more money in violation of Article I, Section 8, Clause 2. Nor does it authorize the president to impose taxes in violation of Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. By its terms, it does not augment the president’s powers one iota.

Insofar as I can see it, McConnell’s analysis has been almost entirely focused on the legal side of the debt ceiling, with the occasional jab at President Biden, but is almost entirely devoid of an examination of what the Republicans are asking for. Much less what type of spending cuts the House GOP demands in the first place.

If he had mentioned any of the effects of the GOP spending cuts, he would have inevitably had to reckon with an analysis by CNN which showed that GOP proposed cuts could result in “shutting down 125 air traffic control towers, slashing nutrition services for 1 million senior citizens and eliminating affordable housing assistance for close to 1.1 million families..”4

Even when it comes to improving the amount of revenue the federal government takes in, Republicans have refused to budge, rejecting a proposal by the White House to close tax loopholes.5 To be fair, McConnell published his article before the Post reported on the refusal by the Republicans to work on tax loopholes, but it is indicative of the larger context that is missing from this piece.

Finishing his response, McConnell argues that:

Mr. Biden has only one real choice if he wishes to avoid default: He has to negotiate with Congress, the branch of the government with authority over borrowing and spending. If that means agreeing to spending reductions, that is hardly a disaster. That is what previous presidents have done; indeed, as vice president, he negotiated just such a deal between President Barack Obama and Congress. The idea that the 14th Amendment gives the president unilateral power to borrow is dangerous nonsense.

It would be one thing to object solely to potential abuses of power by the executive branch or even theoretical abuses. But arguing this position without acknowledging the policy moves by the GOP that would push the president to a more defensive position does nothing to explain or accurately depict the current debt crisis.

If there is to be an honest conversation about the debt ceiling, it can’t be a constitutional debate alone. Policy and political decisions must be and always will be, central to the public’s view of ongoing controversies.

Florida’s new law prohibits public colleges from spending state or federal money on DEI efforts. These programs often assist colleges in increasing student and faculty diversity, which can apply to race and ethnicity, as well as sexual orientation, religion and socioeconomic status.

The law also forbids public colleges from offering general education courses — those that are part of a required curriculum for all college students — that “distort significant historical events,” teach “identity politics,” or are “based on theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, or privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States and were created to maintain social, political, or economic inequities.” 1

This law is not only a step towards a more top-down style to public education, which inevitably leads to state control over the freedom of thought in academic circles, but it is also an attempt to mandate an established order that researchers and academics can’t challenge. Or anyone, for that matter.

In March of this year, I warned against his approach to education, not only because of its clear partisan and authoritarian implications but also because of its ability to influence the state of government and public life. As I explained then:

If a governor or even a state legislature can determine when and where people are able to learn, even as adults, about specific subjects of public life, then it stands to reason that they can control the very ideas that could be used to criticize them and remove them from power. So long as there are no legal protections in place to prevent this authoritarian garbage, more people are going to suffer and our republic will suffer with them.2

Such a reality seems almost desirable to DeSantis, who has repeatedly claimed he is fighting a war on the so-called Woke agenda. It is worth noting that many conservatives can’t define what that is, such as Bethany Mendell, whose interview on the Hill’s Rising with Briana Joy Gray could be charitably called a trainwreck.3

But that failure to define, despite its laughable appearance, is precisely by design. If conservatives like DeSantis can use woke amorphously, then they can use it any way they like to beat down any ideological or intellectual challenge to their agenda.

And that is exactly what DeSantis is trying to do. Through his campaign to malign ideas and people he doesn’t agree with, DeSantis is successfully securing a specific type of education that he controls.

The idea that one man can upend the entirety of academic freedom in one of the largest states in the Union, all while making a bid for the highest executive office in the county, is terrifying.

Not only is it likely going to lead to more authoritarian measures, but it is also illustrative of just how far our nation has fallen. To have an informed public, academic freedom must be maintained. That can’t happen with Ron DeSantis in power.

These clips will be released throughout the week after each show so I can spread the content for you rather than just flooding you with everything.

I look forward to returning and putting my best foot forward. If you want to see some of my previous work, you can check it out here!

Far from being an extension of a critical media, which espouses their supposed ability to question all things with an open mind, Carlson’s position was seemingly meant to give the former Fox anchor the ability to guide discussions to his desired end.

And when Bregman bucked that requirement for discussion, Carlson reacted with open hostility and downright condescension that would normally get a host fired for misconduct. Of course, being one of the top-rated hosts has a tendency to protect one from the consequences of misconduct.4

But that was not the only example of Carlson’s inappropriate wrath and arrogance. Carlson has consistently demonstrated a strong chauvinistic and frankly racist side.

In an audio collection released by Media Matters for America, a progressive watchdog, Carlson was recorded referring to Iraqis as “semi-literate primitive monkeys” on a podcast discussing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.5 The tapes also demonstrated multiple racist remarks about immigrants, Obama, and Black people in general, with the host egging on Carlson to see the former president as “a real brotha.”

If any other figure referred to a country of 41 million people with that level of vitriolic hatred, they would be fired.6 Regardless of their position or how much money they made for a given company. But because Carlson has a big fanbase among young conservatives, he got away with it. At least, he thought he could.

This attitude has also landed him in hot water for allegedly creating an unsafe work environment, thanks to a lawsuit by Abby Grossberg, a former producer for Carlson.7 The use of the C-word was allegedly constant and encouraged, according to Grossberg. But what is perhaps more horrifying is the alleged way his staff viewed their position with Carlson. Staffers allegedly also encouraged a view that Carlson would “set the tone” for the show, irrespective of the toxicity of said tone.

All of this is to say that Carlson has a habit of overly bigoted, reactionary, and arrogant conduct. He assumed he was invincible. He wasn’t. The 2020 election demonstrates this as clear as day.

After Dominion Voting Systems forced Fox News to pay in a $787 million settlement, it became clear that much of Fox’s approach to media would either have to change its approach or drop media personalities to save themselves.8

And they have seemingly chosen to go with dropping Carlson as their safest bet. However, there may be another component to Carlson’s firing.

Recent texts released by The New York Times show that Carlson also sent texts seemingly encouraging a mob of Trump supporters to kill a supposed Antifa member. 9 It is worth noting that Antifa has no official membership and is a loosely-organized movement of self-described antifascists, but that is neither here nor there.10

What ended up coming out of these texts was one of the weaker elements of Carlson’s condemnation of the mob, as they outnumbered their target. In the texts, Carlson lamented that such a move was dishonorable because it wasn’t “how White men fight.”

Carlson’s texts, therefore, may have been a liability for Fox, which could have lost its plausible deniability due to Carlson’s overt white nationalism. If that is the case, then Carlson was not only demonstrating his arrogance and prejudice but also showing he had no tact in his rhetoric.

While much more is coming out about Carlson every day, and more reasons will pile up to justify his firing, it is important to remember that this was a long-time coming. Fox had every opportunity to do the right thing and hold its staff accountable, and they chose to ignore it. It was only when Carlson proved to be too much of a burden did Fox let him go.

Even with Carlson gone, Fox remains a soulless organization.

That attention inevitably put DeSantis on the map as rumors spread that he may run for the GOP Presidential nomination in 2024, prompting some to argue that even liberals should hope that DeSantis wins to keep Trump from returning to public office.

And it did initially look like DeSantis could challenge the largely unpopular former president. A Wall Street Journal poll released in December 2022 showed that DeSantis beat Trump 52 to 38 percent. 86 percent of Republicans said that they saw DeSantis favorably compared to Trump’s 74 percent. Among the general electorate, 43 percent of surveyed voters viewed DeSantis favorably compared to roughly 36 percent for Trump.

However, that momentum has seemingly wavered. A new poll released by Wall Street Journal has seen a nearly perfect flip in support in Trump’s favor. Where DeSantis once possessed a 14-point lead over Trump, he now suffers a significant 13-point decline, putting him behind the former president.

While there is a lot of time from now until election day, the fact that DeSantis has suffered such polling issues consistently suggests that his chances of securing the GOP presidential nomination are growing weaker and weaker. If this trend continues, nobody should be surprised if Trump is the nominee again.

In early February of this year, I was forced to leave my WordPress website because of Musk’s signals that he would start charging for API services on Twitter, effectively meaning that WordPress would inevitably have to raise their prices to maintain a premium website, which they have seemingly done.

Musk made these decisions in a failed and craven attempt to extract as much money from users and companies as possible at the expense of what makes Twitter such a useful platform, its flexibility. Now, once again, Musk has decided that he is going to interfere with a newly imposed restriction on Substack, largely due to their decision to launch their own Twitter-like platform known as Notes.

Clearly, Musk is inclined to restrict and limit a competitor, even at the expense of people who are merely trying to make a living and contribute to the public dialogue.

While I don’t know what my plans are for the newsletter in the future, I can safely say I will continue to write regardless of what Elon Musk’s craven attempts may bring. If that means I have to move to Medium, then so be it.

In the meantime, I would highly appreciate it if people followed me on my Medium page and my PostNews account. I will continue to update you all as best I can.

Thanks again,

Conor

It is an inspiring display but also horrifically hopeless because the GOP’s supermajority has no interest in acknowledging the overwhelming suffering that comes with having so many guns in a society increasingly in conflict with itself.

But what is more disturbing is that when a few representatives actively acknowledge the pain of their constituents through protests against the supermajority for which they can barely oppose with any effect, the powers within the GOP have elected to punish those few lawmakers.

In a swift display of their willingness to clamp down upon dissent, the Tennessee House removed Representatives Justin Jones (D) and Rep. Justin Pearson (D), with Representative Gloria Johnson (D), spared removal by one vote.1

While the expelled representatives can run again, the fact that they were expelled in the first place is astounding, especially considering that one of those representatives was allegedly assaulted by Representative Justin Lafferty on the House floor. The alleged assault was caught on camera by Representative Jones’ camera, which he posted to Twitter.

Whatever the justification, the Tennessee GOP has demonstrated that its main objective is to maintain power and gain more of it at the expense of the people. It doesn’t matter if their state’s future is begging them to save their lives or protect their dignity. Power is the ultimate goal, and tone policing and political persecution is their favorite weapon to maintain that power. Everyone should be outraged, but sadly, nobody should be surprised.