Category: Uncategorized

Dear Group,

KREM 2 on November 27 aired a segment on Matt Shea (R-Legislative District 4, City of Spokane Valley north to Mt. Spokane) losing the leadership position he held last year as the Minority Caucus Chair in the Washington State House. (the TV segment is worth watching) Apparently, there are enough reasonable WA State Republican Legislators to respond to the national coverage of Mr. Shea’s “Biblical Basis of War” manifesto, even though most of them do not want to talk about it.

Jim Camden covered the Republican Party Caucus leadership shift in an article on November 26 in the Spokesman:

Asked whether the controversy had anything to do with the change in leadership [dropping Shea], Wilcox   [(R-Yelm)the House minority leader] said House Republicans “don’t share caucus debates.” But he said Shea may be named the ranking Republican on one of the House committees next month when those panels are selected, and a caucus chairman can’t also serve as the ranking minority member of a committee.

It remains to be seen whether the Shea’s loss of position is mostly cosmetic or substantive.

Late last week and this weekend a link circulated on the internet to a Southern Poverty Law Center article spotlighting Mr. Shea on the national stage once again. I’ve copied and pasted it below. The Southern Poverty Law Center is the premier U.S. non-profit organization monitoring the activities of domestic hate groups and other extremists. The SPLC was instrumental in spotlighting the Aryan Nations in north Idaho in the 1990s and 2000s. 

It seems Mr. Shea may have tripped himself up with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission by using his leftover campaign funds to donate to various non-501(c)(3) hate groups. 

One chilling aspect of this for me was a quote out of a Rolling Stone article: Shea’s ex-wife said, “Shea believed he would one day be president of the United States, that he would be assassinated and that he ‘predicts a civil war.'” (This comment was made long before Donald Trump became President and began yelling “Fake News!”) The other chill came over me when an internet search for the “Southern Poverty Law Center” revealed numerous websites disparaging the work of the SPLC as manipulated by the far left. Below I’ve pasted a copy of the SPLC article on Mr. Shea, without further commentary. It is worth the read for the detail, the background. and the links.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

Embattled conspiracy theorist and Washington state Republican Rep. Matt Shea has been skirting Washington state law to funnel campaign contributions to far-right nonprofit groups in Colorado and Arizona, a Hatewatch investigation reveals.

Shea uses his office and campaign funds to spearhead a partitionist effort to split Washington into two states, and may have violated state laws by using surplus campaign funds to make at least $5,500 in contributions to far-right nonprofit organizations that are not registered as charities with the Washington Secretary of State. State law requires charities to be registered with the state to receive surplus campaign funds.

Shea is a vocal supporter of the anti-public lands extremist movement, is closely affiliated with members of the antigovernment militia movement, is a celebrity within the antigovernment-inspired American Redoubt movement and for years has taken to propagating anti-Muslim bigotry including forming the Spokane, Washington, chapter of the anti-Muslim hate group ACT for America.

Shea’s surplus campaign account made a $3,500 donation Sept. 10 to the anti-Muslim hate group Americans for America of Centennial, Colorado. The group hired John Guandolo, a former FBI agent well known for his anti-Muslim activism, as director of training.

Guandolo was paid $123,000 by the group in 2017 for “training of law enforcement personnel in the field,” according to a report based on the organization’s 2017 tax returns that was published this week in the Texas Observer. Guandolo has appeared on Shea’s Patriot Radio broadcast where Shea expressed interest in bringing Guandolo to Washington to provide law enforcement training.

Shea also tapped surplus campaign funds to make a $2,000 donation on Aug. 24 to Citizens for Free Speech, a Mesa, Arizona, nonprofit. Citizens for Free Speech is operated by Patrick Wood and received IRS tax approval earlier this year. The organization’s website states its purpose is to promote “men and women of moral and religious integrity to assert their influence in local communities by actually doing it.” Wood is widely followed by antigovernment activists and antisemitic white supremacist groups, and the SPLC has identified him as the foremost authority on the “one world” conspiracy theory.

Washington allows candidates to deposit excess campaign contributions into a surplus account. Unlike campaign accounts where funds can be used for election expenses, surplus fund accounts are more tightly restricted. Surplus funds can only be used to refund campaign contributions, transfer funds to a political party or caucus political committee, be deposited in the state Treasury, be used for future political campaigns, reimburse elected officials “for nonreimbursed, public office-related expenses” or be donated to nonprofit organizations registered with the state.

The contributions to the two nonprofits reflect Shea’s ties across the gamut of the American far-right.

Washington state election officials earlier this week opened a separate inquiry into additional campaign expenditures from Shea’s surplus account, the state Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) said Wednesday.

The PDC has given Shea until Dec. 19 to respond to a citizen’s complaint over his use of surplus campaign funds to pay for radio broadcasts, advertising and purchase of broadcast equipment, PDC spokeswoman Kim Bradford said.

The funds were used to pay for radio broadcasts on Shea’s Patriot Radio show on the American Christian Network that operates six AM and FM stations in eastern Washington. Shea also used the funds to purchase advertising on Redoubt News, a website which the SPLC lists as an antigovernment, conspiracy propaganda organization.

He acknowledged in a rambling Facebook video that he wrote and distributed a religious manifesto called the “Biblical Basis for War.” The document and his explanation generated national press and infuriated some major contributions including at least seven who have asked for refunds. These contributors donated $10,500 of the $109,000 he collected in 2018.

The four-page document states that before a declaration of war, the enemy must be given the opportunity to “stop all abortions,” end “same-sex marriage,” eliminate “idolatry or occultism” and ban “communism,” and that everyone “must obey Biblical Law.” If the enemy does “not yield,” the manifesto states, then “kill all the males.”

Late last month, House Republicans, who are in the minority in the Washington Legislature, stripped Shea of his party leadership role as caucus chair where he led party meetings and helped set legislative agendas. Prior to serving as caucus chair, Shea was assistant floor leader for seven years. State investigations into illegal campaign fund expenditures could now jeopardize his prospect for an appointment as the ranking member on legislative committees.

Shea wants to be appointed as the senior Republican member on the environment or judiciary committees. If Shea is overlooked, political experts say that would be a clear signal that Republican leaders have had enough of Shea’s divisive actions and inflammatory statements and intend to marginalize his political power.

The PDC complaint was filed Nov. 19 by Aaron Jarvis, a volunteer for Democrat Ted Cummings, who challenged Shea in last month’s race. Shea, a Republican, easily won his sixth term by a 58–42 percent margin.

The complaint alleges Shea’s campaign violated state law when it used surplus campaign funds to purchase $12,000 for radio broadcasts on the American Christian Network, $1,750 in advertising with the Redoubt News website and $2,248 for broadcast equipment.

Bradford, the PDC spokeswoman, said the state has 90 days from receipt of a complaint to determine whether to dismiss the matter, settle the case with an administrative penalty or, if serious enough, request a formal investigation that could lead to a hearing before the Public Disclosure Commission. PDC has already determined there was enough evidence to require a response from Shea.

Olympia attorney Walter Smith, who has extensive experience in Washington campaign finance law, states in an email to Hatewatch that Shea’s donation to Americans for America “does not appear to be an allowed use of surplus funds.” Smith questioned the legality of the Citizens for Free Speech donation “which does not show up as a charity and raises the same issues in my mind.”

Smith also raised concerns related to two $1,000 donations Shea’s campaign surplus fund made to Daniels Prayer Ministry in Olympia, Washington, in March 2017 and last February. Daniels Prayer Ministry is not on Washington’s registered charities list. However, the state exempts entities recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as religious organizations from its charity registration requirements. The ministry is registered with the IRS as a religious organization.

Bradford said that Smith filed a citizen’s complaint earlier this week concerning Shea’s surplus fund contributions to the three unregistered charities. The PDC, she said, has not completed its initial review of Smith’s complaint to determine whether a response from Shea is warranted. Smith filed the complaint after he was contacted by Hatewatch for comment on the nonprofit donations.

Hatewatch contacted Smith because he has a history of filing campaign finance complaints against many state legislators, including Shea. In October 2017, Smith filed a campaign finance complaint against Shea for failing to report contributions and expenditures in a timely manner. The complaint resulted in a January 2018 judgment ordering Shea to pay $3,750 in attorney fees to Smith’s firm and a $1,000 civil penalty to the state. Shea used his campaign surplus funds to pay the attorney fees and fine last January.

Legislators and campaign experts say elected officials usually use surplus campaign funds to support their political parties, hold the funds in reserve for use in future political campaigns for the same office or use the money to pay for expenses directly related to their state position that the state does not reimburse.

In Shea’s case, state investigators will likely have to determine if his use of surplus funds to buy radio air time, purchase ads and buy broadcast equipment falls under nonreimbursed, public office-related expenses. The state defines a nonreimbursed public office related expense as “an expenditure incurred by an elected or appointed official, or a member of his or her immediate family, solely because of being an official.”

Shea has routinely used both regular campaign contributions and surplus funds to purchase air time, advertising and broadcast equipment as well as to reimburse himself for travel expenses touring the state advocating splitting Washington in two at the Cascade Mountains to create a 51st state to be called Liberty, state campaign finance records show.

From October 2017 through October 2018, Shea spent $15,000 from his regular campaign account to purchase air time with American Christian Network (ACN). Just prior to this, from December 2016 through September 2017, Shea instead used $11,000 from his surplus account to purchase ACN airtime.

Shea’s Patriot Radio shows generally open with a lengthy religious indoctrination, followed by Shea’s analysis of the news of the day and concluding with an interview of typically far-right leaders. Shea’s news analysis is often based on reports from InfoWars and the far-right World Net Daily, both of which the SPLC lists as antigovernment, conspiracy and propaganda sites.

Shea has also tapped both his regular campaign account and his surplus account to reimburse himself for travel expenses related to his promotion of a 51st state. Shea reimbursed himself $132 on Sept. 6 and $205 on Sept. 20 out of his surplus account for 51st state related travel expenses, state records show. Shea also withdrew funds from his regular campaign account to pay for 51st state related travel expenses including $90 on Feb. 13, $147 and $58 both on April 10, $801 on June 4, and $119 on Aug. 7.

Shea has won each of his six elections by a comfortable margin in the very conservative district. This has allowed him to collect more than enough donations to cover his campaign expenses. Shea has transferred $140,000 to his surplus campaign account since 2011, state records show.

Shea’s surplus account has spent $88,000 since it was created, with the largest single expenditures going to the House Republican Organizing Committee that received $5,000 in 2011, $25,000 in 2016 and $5,000 this year. Shea has $51,400 remaining in surplus funds, according to his latest disclosure report filed on Sept. 30.

It might not be as easy for Shea to raise money in the future. Eight of his major donors have already issued statements denouncing Shea’s religious manifesto, with seven demanding refunds. Two major donors that contributed the maximum of $2,000 to Shea’s 2018 campaign said they will no longer contribute to Shea in the future.

“No future contributions will be made to this individual,” spokesman Luis Sahagun stated in a Nov. 15 email to Hatewatch.

Avista, a Washington utility, also made it clear the company was done with Shea.

Mary Tyrie, communications manager for Avista, stated in a Nov. 20 email to Hatewatch, “We do not plan on contributing to Rep. Shea again.”

Dear Group,

The day before Thanksgiving I had breakfast with the recently re-elected senior U.S. Senator from Montana, Jon Tester. He is a native Montanan, born in Havre. He grew up in Big Sandy, MT, where his wife and he still run a farm (organic since the 1980s). Emily and I had the pleasure of meeting and having breakfast with Senator Tester and eight or ten others because I am lucky to know two of Jon’s brothers, both of whom now live in north Idaho, men who are part of a group that frequently shares breakfast, stories, and argument. Senator Tester had come to north Idaho for a family Thanksgiving. 

The Tester brothers are large men. For all his size, Jon is soft spoken and comes across as friendly and gentle. I, as a retired physician, found myself a little distracted by the dexterity he exhibited with his left hand, a hand with only the thumb and its fifth digit, the result of a meat grind accident at age 9. 

So what did I take away? I’m not a reporter. I didn’t record breakfast, nor did I take any written or digital notes. Of course, there were a few tidbits: Ted Cruz (R-TX) is generally not well-thought of by his fellow Senators. Jon finds Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) someone with whom he can work, Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID)…not so much. But apart from a generally warm and fuzzy feeling about the person Jon Tester, for me the most interesting things I took home from breakfast were notions of how Congress functions on a personal level.

First, without quite realizing it, I had it in my head that each person we send to Olympia or Washington, D.C. must know everything, or at least much, much more than I do about all that government manages. It was no surprise to me Senator Tester was very aware of farm economics affected by the current administration, the impending threat of bankruptcy hanging over many, and the struggle to pass the Farm Bill.. There were many other issues with which he was clear and up to date–and I have forgotten the details of most of them. But this came across clearly: Senator Tester knows what he does know and he easily admits it when he doesn’t know. What a relief… He was clearly “up” on issues addressed by the committees and sub-committees on which he serves (among them Homeland Security and Veterans’ Affairs), but he relies on his fellow Senators to understand and keep him apprised of other workings. 

Second, again without quite realizing it, I had an image of a clubby sort of camaraderie among all those we send to D.C. I asked Senator Tester what he thought of Cathy McMorris Rodgers. After all, she is a U.S Representative from a nearby state AND she is (or at least was) part of the House leadership, often touted as a powerful person we in eastern Washington should be loathe to lose. McMorris Rodgers’ and Senator Tester’s tenure in Congress has overlapped for twelve whole years. They must know each other pretty well, right? Tester’s response: “I really don’t know many of the Representatives.” 

There are 435 Representatives and 100 Senators in D.C. That’s 535 total. Add the President, Vice President, the cabinet, the staff of all these elected people, the President’s cabinet, and an abundance of lobbyists and the total is far beyond any single human’s capacity to keep track, much less maintain connection. Social scientists have assembled evidence that even the most gregarious humans are able to keep tract of social connections to about two hundred people.

I left breakfast that day before Thanksgiving with a better understanding of the task our federal Congress people face back in D.C., with an appreciation for people like Jon Tester, who know what they don’t know but possess the bandwidth and background with which to learn,…and with a sense of dismay that in the Representative eastern Washington has just retained I fear we have neither. 

Have a great weekend and 

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

Dear Group,

The political arm of the Northwest Credit Union Association, which represents more than 180 credit unions in Washington, Oregon and Idaho, gave $1,000 to Shea’s campaign before the August primary but recently asked the campaign to return the money ‘His beliefs do not reflect the views and values of the NWCUA, our member credit unions, or the consumers who are credit union members, [Spokesman, Update November 2] 

The Washington Association of Realtors, which donated $2,000 to Shea’s campaign, followed suit on Thursday, saying the group wanted a refund and that its name should be removed from Shea’s campaign materials. [Chad Sokol Spokesman, Updated November 2] 

Later Thursday, Leland Kim, a spokesman for AT&T, said in an email: “We have reviewed the news reports and the document, and have concluded that Rep. Shea’s statements are divisive and do not reflect our core values of inclusion and equality. We will not be making any future contributions to Rep. Shea’s campaign and will ask that he return the $1,000 we contributed to his campaign earlier this year.”

 [Chad Sokol Spokesman,Updated November 2] 

Avista Corp. [$2000] and the BNSF Railway Co. [$2000] on Friday joined the list of organizations requesting refunds from state Rep. Matt Shea’s re-election campaign. [Chad Sokol, Spokesman, November 2]

Adding those five together comes to $7000. Sounds like a lot, a big rebellion, right? Yes and no. The companies responding to Chad Sokol’s inquiries have some local eastern Washington presence, and were understandably sensitive to local and national embarrassing coverage of Shea’s “Biblical Basis for War” manifesto. But check out the Washington Public Disclosure Commission website page on Matt Shea’s 2018 campaign contributions. The top 45 contributors are mostly businesses, most of them not based in eastern Washington. Business contributions to Shea’s campaign are $39,700 of the nearly $110,000 war chest. ($40,450 of the rest of it comes from Political Action Committees.) 

Here’s the dilemma: Shea has a degree in law from Gonzaga. He is well-spoken and able to hide or gloss over his nuttier views while he’s in Olympia. He consistently votes with corporate interests, interests happy to have his vote and willing to support his re-election campaign. A corporation has no basic interest in a legislator’s stand on social issues, his morals, or his values…as long as none of that becomes a glaring negative in the eyes of corporate customers and, thereby, a threat to profit. 

For years Shea engaged in antics well documented in the Spokesman that should have sunk his political career while he stirred up nary a peep of complaint from the corporations that fill his campaign coffers. The only thing different this time is the national coverage of his “Biblical Basis for War” manifesto and his lame defense. At least briefly, he has become an embarrassment. 

Watch this space. By early next year the Public Disclosure Commission should report whether any of the requested $7000 in refunds actually occur. Furthermore, if we pay attention we should be able to find out if any of these organizations send money to Shea for the next election. The only way to make a dent in corporate contributions to candidates like Shea is to keep the spotlight on their antics that even corporations might find embarrassing.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

Dear Group,

On October 26, twelve days before the November election deadline, an article by Chad Sokol was published in the Spokesman. It was entitled “Rep. Matt Shea takes credit, criticism for document titled ‘Biblical Basis for War.’” Mr. Sokol followed this with several articles detailing corporate sponsors who wanted their money back from the Shea campaign.

How did this article take shape? How did Chad Sokol come upon Shea’s manifesto? It did not happen in a vacuum. The leads came from local people. With Mr. Sokol’s writing the story spread. There are lessons here.

Some credit is due Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich. For years he has gotten local media attention over his running feud with Matt Shea over Shea’s ties to white supremacists and far right “Christian” groups. Sheriff Knezovich has never shied away from the threat he feels the Matt Shea wing of the local Republican Party represents [from The Inlander on August 2]:

“I’ve grown tired of the media going, ‘Oh, this is just a fight between Matt [Shea] and Ozzie,” Knezovich says. “No. This is a fight between this ideology. This ideology is dangerous, and if we do not address it, it will eventually hurt this community and this nation.”

But it wasn’t Ozzie who acquired and brought attention to Shea’s now infamous manifesto. It was a young man with a long goatee named Tanner Rowe of Nine Mile Falls. Rowe was mentioned as the source in Chad Sokol’s article in the Spokesman on October 26 I referred to above. Tanner Rowe posted Shea’s “Biblical Basis for War” in a video on Facebook three days earlier. Facebook posts are frustratingly ephemeral. At this writing one can still see Mr. Rowe’s post by visiting his page (here) and scrolling way down to October 23. Based on his other Facebook posts, Tanner Rowe appears to be right of center himself. Nonetheless, in his video Mr. Rowe presents his disgust with Shea’s theocratic bent. Rowe likes the idea of a 51st State, but he’s very leery of theocracy under a man like Shea. (That said, I wonder for whom Mr. Rowe would have voted if he lived in the 4th District, Shea, Cummings, or “none of the above”?)

What prompted Chad Sokol to write his Spokesman article on Matt Shea October 26? He had written an article critical of Shea and mildly complementary or Cummings on October 8th. How did Mr. Sokol become aware of Tanner Rowe’s Facebook post of Shea’s manifesto? Was Mr. Sokol monitoring Facebook or did someone bring Rowe’s Facebook video to his attention? Or was he further tuned to Shea’s extremism after reading an article in Rolling Stone on October 23, the same day as Rowe’s post? That article, “Something’s Brewing in the Deep Red West” was written by Leah Sotille, an excellent Portland-based freelance writer who once covered Spokane’s music scene for The Inlander. Does Chad Sokol know Leah Settle and/or follow her writing? [BTW, check out Ms. Sottile’s other writing at Rolling Stone. It’s well researched and exemplary.]

From Mr. Sokol’s October 26th article on Shea’s “Biblical Basis for War” the story catapulted to the national media scene. It was covered by Rachel Maddow, the Associated Press (AP), Newsweek, the New York Daily News, and U.S. News and World Report. The story rattled around the internet for a few days, no doubt buffing up readers’ memories of the Inland Northwest hosting the odious Aryan Nations for several decades in the recent past.

Several contributors to Shea’s campaign funds, presumably embarrassed by the national media coverage made local news by withdrawing their support. (More about that in a later post.) Matt Shea did not lose the election but he lost some votes and his infamy is growing. His time will come…

The larger point is this material doesn’t appear out of thin air. Writers and broadcasters in the local and national media need leads. Leads are provided by local observers, by email, telephone, and through personal relationships. I cannot connect every one of the dots in this story, but I am aware the the leap from a local Spokesman article to Rachel Maddow and Associated Press was aided by local people who were paying attention and passing the story along.

Get to know your local media people. Interact. Send them ideas and stories. They cannot possibly keep tabs on everything by themselves. Like us, they depend on human interaction for the material with which they work…and without their work (and ours) we have no democracy.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. With a brief nod to the AP article, even Fox News mentioned Shea’s manifesto on November 1. But with the exception of that article, stories covering the “Biblical Basis for War” are notably absent from the right wing media silo. Searching two of my favorites, Brietbart and the Daily Caller, draws “No Results.” They appear thoroughly immunized against criticism of their own kind. 

Dear Group, In the November 2018 Issue of The Atlantic is an article entitled: The Man Who Broke Politics; Newt Gingrich turned partisan battles into bloodsport, wrecked Congress, and paved the way for Trump’s rise. Now he’s reveling in his achievements. I encourage you to read it. Gingrich was elected to Congress for the first time from the 6th Congressional District of the State of Georgia in 1978, after unsuccessful runs for the same seat in 1974 and 1976. Before Gingrich’s success  in 1978, the incumbent Democrat, Jack Flynt, decided to retire. Gingrich beat the Democratic candidate for Flynt’s seat, Virginia Shapard, by 7500 votes.  From the Atlantic article:  During his two decades in Congress, he pioneered a style of partisan combat—replete with name-calling, conspiracy theories, and strategic obstructionism—that poisoned America’s political culture and plunged Washington into permanent dysfunction. Gingrich’s career can perhaps be best understood as a grand exercise in devolution—an effort to strip American politics of the civilizing traits it had developed over time and return it to its most primal essence. The Gingrich story intersects with the story of eastern Washington, specifically, Congressional District 5. In 1994 Tom Foley was both the WA CD5 Representative to Congress and the Speaker of the House. In November of that year George Nethercutt beat Foley at the ballot box by a tiny margin, ending much of eastern Washington’s influence on the national stage. In that election Republicans acquired the majority of seats in the House for the first time since 1954. Newt Gingrich was instrumental in this takeover with his in-your-face tactics. As part of the strategy Gingrich and Dick Armey wrote and popularized the Contract with America,” a document that helped focus the 1994 election on a national Republican agenda and minimize regional and local issues. Newt became Speaker of the House partly because of his militant bluster and Republican’s electoral success. In 1994, Gingrich was only fifty-one years old.  After stamping his brand of pugilistic politics on the Republican Party in the 1994 election, Gingrich lasted in Congress, and as Speaker, only four years. In late 1998, after the Republicans lost five House seats (the worst showing in 64 years for a Party not holding the Presidency) and facing a rebellious Republican Caucus, Gingrich resigned the Speakership and announced he would resign his House seat, less than a month into the term for which he had just been re-electied. In an interview after his resignation he said, “I’m willing to lead but I’m not willing to preside over people who are cannibals. My only fear would be that if I tried to stay, it would just overshadow whoever my successor is. Frankly, Marianne and I could use a break.” [Marianne was the second of three wives.] Gingrich hasn’t held an elected public office since January 1999, but his name re-appears frequently in Republican politics. He appears on Fox News as a commentator. At age 75 he is enjoying the good life in Rome, while his third wife, Callista, serves as ambassador to the Vatican, courtesy of Trump’s nomination and the Republican Senate’s approval. Gingrich keeps sending me emails praising Trump and fundraising for him.. He lives in style on money he makes giving speeches, and revels in the form of militarized politics with which he has afflicted the nation. Gingrich started out in Congress in January 1979, age 35. He was already an assistant professor of history. He was already a man with high aspirations and an inflated opinion of himself and of his place in history. To me he is an example of intelligence gone awry. He and his brand of politics rank right up there with Mitch McConnell and Steve Bannon. Fix Gingrich in your understanding of U.S. political history. I strongly recommend reading both the Atlantic article and the Gingrich article in wikipedia.  Contrast the lasting influence of a Newt Gingrich to that of our Representative McMorris Rodgers. She rode in on George Nethercutt’s coattails in 2004 with hardly a fight, no three attempts for her. Her supposed expertise is in communicating the national Republican message, not shaping it, and, now, post election, even her pretense of leadership as chairwoman of the Republican caucus is gone. Keep to the high ground, Jerry P.S. Gingrich, as revealed in the Atlantic article, is fascinated by dinosaurs and with his Darwinian concept of struggle in the natural (and political) world. It is no stretch to assume that Gingrich understands and appreciates the science around geologic time and biological evolution. Nonetheless,from Wikipedia: “As Speaker, Gingrich sought to increasingly tie Christian conservatism to the Republican Party. According to a 2018 study, Christian conservatism had become firmly ingrained in the Republican Party’s policy platforms by 2000.” Note the irony of his courting a segment of the voting public many of whom strongly reject concepts central to Newt’s understanding of the world. Politics makes odd bedfellows… * Many of the policy ideas in the Contract with America originated at the Heritage Foundation, an institution heavily supported by funds from the Koch donor group of libertarian leaning business people and one of the first institutions to pop up in response to the Powell Memorandum.

Dear Group,

Each Monday morning I look forward to reading The Weekly Sift written by Doug Muder. His Monday emails (two of them nearly every Monday) is a marvelously rational roundup of news from the past week. The article from the Weekly Sift from which I lifted the title of the Indivisible email today can be found here. I urge you to click on that link, read his article, and then add your email address in the left hand column under “Subscribe by email.” Then click “Sign me up!”  You will not regret it. [You will likely receive a confirmation email to which you must respond to complete the loop. That’s to prevent someone else from signing up your email address.]

This last Monday’s Weekly Sift’s “featured post” email is a summary of a new book, “Network Propaganda.”  I have not yet read the book, but Mr. Muder’s summary and the quotes he offers strike me as essential to understanding the gravity of our current situation. For me the single most chilling thing about Trump is his denigration and demonization of all media with which he does not agree. Having put all mainstream media and the entire fact base in which the mainstream media work into a box, he proceeds to belittle and demean. “Don’t listen to them. They are fake news. They represent the agenda of the ‘deep state,’ the grand conspiracy against me and against you, MY people.” 

Once he has his chanting followers in thrall, isolated from any and all opposing views, he can take them anywhere. Fox News and others who are part of this far right media ecosystem laid the groundwork before Trump was even part of the picture, but he, in synergy with those media, has assembled a core group worthy of a Jim Jones, people subscribing to an ideology divorced from any reality many of us even recognize. 

There are core crazinesses of this ecosystem, like the conspiracies of Infowars with pedophile operations run out of pizza parlors near D.C., but not so far from that are ideas taken up by McMorris Rodgers and Sue Lani Madsen when they solemnly cite George Soros as the liberal bogeyman, the evil name that lights up a whole construct in the minds of the faithful. 

But enough of my rambling. Click on this link here (or the one above–they go to the same place), read Doug Muder’s article and sign up for his email. I will try to get back to a more local focus.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

Dear Group,

The news we consume both nationally and locally is written by someone, and no one writes without some point of view. All news offers a story, a story based at some level on facts, numbers, and quotes, but always facts, numbers, and quotes selected and presented by a writer. I used to read newspaper articles without paying attention to the byline. That was naive. 

I have not met Daniel Walters personally, but I have read a lot of his writing…and I like it. Daniel Walters is a staff writer with The Inlander, the Spokane weekly free newspaper. Mr. Walters is in his early thirties. He is Spokane through and through, North Central High School, Whitworth University, to staff writer with the Inlander starting in 2009 (all that comes from Facebook). Pay attention to his byline. He is worth reading. 

I offer an extended quote below Daniel Walters’ November 9 Inlander article, McMorris Rodgers wins the battle, but her House Republicans lose the war. Was it worth it? . The first part of the article was a little jarring as it pointed out the result of the CMR/Brown contest “wasn’t even close.” You might be forgiven if, in the election aftermath, you had quit reading there–but it got a lot better. I like the way Daniel Walters thinks. I will pay more attention to the Inlander and a bit less to the Spokesman:

But in McMorris Rodgers’ speech, at least, there’s no trace of regret over the night’s events. Instead, she reminisces about the time she was called to give the State of the Union response in 2014, the one where she promised that Republicans were the ones with the solutions to “affordable health care.” 

“No, we shouldn’t go back to the way things were, but this law is not working,” McMorris Rodgers said back then. “Republicans believe health care choices should be yours, not the government’s.” 

But that just underscores McMorris Rodgers’ mixed legacy in leadership: Today, Obamacare remains the law of the land. In fact, McMorris Rodgers spent the last phase of the campaign arguing, dubiously, that she had been a champion of the defense of one Obamacare’s crucial tenets — the pre-existing condition guarantee. 

McMorris Rodgers’ House Republicans spent eight years in power — the last two with control of every branch. But they haven’t funded the wall. They didn’t pass comprehensive immigration reform. They didn’t successfully pass a bill to protect DACA recipients. This year, in fact, they haven’t even been able to successfully pass a Farm Bill.

Instead, I wait patiently as a scrum of TV reporters lob mostly softballs at McMorris Rodgers for a few minutes. Then, as the small press conference looks to be ending, I jump in:

“Would you rather have lost and the Republicans keep the House—” 

But then, like a Secret Service agent leaping in front of a bullet, McMorris Rodgers’ campaign manager, Patrick Bell, shuts me down. 

“Sorry that was the last question,” Bell says, maneuvering in front of me. “Thanks, Daniel. Thanks, everybody.” 

At the encouragement of another McMorris Rodgers campaign staffer, I spend the rest of the party trying to catch McMorris Rodgers as she shakes hands and takes selfies with her supporters. 

“Do you have a moment for print?” I ask as she walks out of the party. “All the TV guys got to ask questions? Print doesn’t get anything?” 

Again, Bell shuts me down. 

“We did it! We did it! We did it!” McMorris Rodgers cheers as she readies to leave. “56 percent and counting.” 

I try one last time as McMorris Rodgers stands in the door to the Davenport Grand Hotel, and get the closest thing to an answer. 

“We won right here tonight in Eastern Washington,” she says. “Focus on tonight, Daniel.”

And then, like that, she’s gone. 

To be sure, during the Obama years, the House Republicans made for fearsome opposition: They shut down the government in 2014. They successfully pushed back against federal government spending. Yet the House’s biggest legislative legacy from the past two years of Republican control is the major tax cut bill — a bill that is anticipated to keep sending the deficit soaring. Few, if any, vulnerable House Republicans based their campaigns on the effectiveness of the tax cuts.

And for all that? Democrats look like they’re going to be picking up about 37-40 House seats, despite the booming economy. It’s the best Democratic performance since Watergate. In the end, it wasn’t even close. 

Asked by a TV reporter about the changing landscape in the House, McMorris Rodgers stresses her ability to be bipartisan: “I have great relationships. I can work across the aisle,” she says, talking about her successes in areas like hydropower and forestry. 

But by Thursday, CNN reports that Cathy McMorris Rodgers will not run again for House conference chair. Rep. Liz Cheney is running for that spot instead. 

So here’s my final question: If you were Lisa or Cathy, which would you rather have: A personal victory? Or control of the House for your party? 

Would McMorris Rodgers have rather lost on Tuesday night if the House Republicans won? Would Lisa Brown prefer to have been elected if it meant Republicans had maintained control of the House? 

When I asked Lisa Brown that question, she doesn’t hesitate: She’d rather Democrats have control of the House than for her to be elected personally.  

“That’s really what motivated me to get into it,” Brown says about her race. In fact, Brown believes that she played a small role in the Democrats’ victory. 

In years past, McMorris Rodgers has been flying all around the country, working to fundraise and stump for her fellow House Republicans. 

“I believe she would have been doing the same thing during the campaign if she hadn’t had a competitive race,” Brown says. 

Instead, she was spending money and holding events in her district, fighting Lisa Brown. I intended to ask McMorris Rodgers the same question. I assumed I’d have a chance. During the campaign, McMorris Rodgers has spoken with the Inlander for lengthy, challenging in-depth interviews on multiple occasions. 

But on election night, neither the Inlander nor the Spokesman-Review get their questions answered by McMorris Rodgers.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry