SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Seeking to rally the troops for his unholy war, Christian nationalist, TV-carnie and war fanboy Pete Kegseth just passed off some vengeful Gospel According to Tarantino as scripture at his (unconstitutional) Pentagon prayer service, and yes we have them now. Added to the "shameless blasphemy" of quoting - without credit - Samuel Jackson's homicidal hitman Jules as "prayer," Pete moronically misses the redemptive point: As he cites the "tyranny of evil men," he, unlike Jules, doesn't friggin' get that he is one.
With their calamitous illegal war continuing to spiral out of control, flailing regime officials are striking out in ever more erratic ways. Nursing his deranged feud with Pope Leo XIV, a vindictive Private Bonespurs - Suffer the little children to own the Pope - abruptly cancelled an $11 million contract with Catholic Charities in Miami to fund a vital, decades-long foster program for migrant children, aka small deadly illegals, who enter the U.S. alone. The result of "an incredibly psychologically harmful" move for already vulnerable kids: "They don't know who or where they are from day to day." Meanwhile, slimy, Bible-and-chest thumping braggadocio Pete is working hard to inflict his own fire-and-brimstone carnage.
Blithely pressing on with a serial slaughter based on evidently "entirely make-believe" grounds, Hegseth killed three more "narco-terrorists," likely fishermen, in the Eastern Pacific last week. It was the third boat bombing in three days - complete with giddy video - in the name of a "narco-trafficking" criminal conspiracy of which, experts say, there is "zero evidence"; they also say the murders have "no impact at all" on America's drug problems. Despite bogus legal theories scrounged up by the regime in an attempt to justify the deaths of at least 177 mostly innocent people, rights advocates note, “'Murder' is the general term for premeditated killings outside of armed conflict."
In the wake of those transgressions and many more, Democrats just filed six articles of impeachment against Hegseth; their lead sponsor, Iranian-American Arizona Rep. Yassamin Ansari, cited "high crimes and misdemeanors,” including war crimes, abuse of power, and other charges. The bill didn't mention Hegseth's clearly unconstitutional worship services (what separation of church and state?), part of a brazen Christian crusade that faces a lawsuit arguing, "The federal government’s role is to serve the public, not proselytize." Nor does it flag his bloody, unseemly prayers for U.S. troops to inflict “overwhelming violence against those who deserve no mercy."
The impeachment effort also fails to target the movie plagiarism and general dumbfuckery committed by cosplay Hegseth, one of a host of inept imposters in this awful Oceans 11 re-make, in his latest, lamest piece of performance art: Asking Pentagon officials and their families at last week's "Christian" service to bow their heads in prayer for a godless war as he recited scripture from the Book of Ezekiel, or maybe "Caesar" or Samuel or Snakes On A Plane, a prayer he claimed was delivered by the lead planner of the “Combat Search And Rescue” mission that earlier this month rescued two pilots downed in Iran."They call it 'CSAR 25:17,' which I think is meant to reflect Ezekiel 25:17," he blustered of "the Lord’s word about who we are and how we conduct ourselves...Pray with me please."
With his greasy smirk, he then launched into an almost word-for-word rip-off of the iconic speech by blood-stained hitman and aspiring philosopher Jules Winnfield, played indelibly by Samuel Jackson in Quentin Tarantino's 1994 black comic morality tale Pulp Fiction. Moments later, Jules point-blank executes hapless young Brett, not because he posed any threat or was allegedly developing nuclear weapons, but because Jules is just following orders. Because that's his job. Because each time he kills a stranger in cold blood, he likes to first recite that "prayer," which propitiously helps make him feel powerful, morally upright, cleansed of whatever guilt or grief or questions that might otherwise trouble his sleep.
"The path of the downed aviator is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men," Pete declaimed. "Blessed is he who, in the name of camaraderie and duty, shepherds the lost through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother’s keeper, and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to capture and destroy my brother. And you will know my call sign is Sandy One when I lay my vengeance upon thee, and Amen." Some in the audience, presumably moviegoers, chuckled at the source; others looked dutifully, cluelessly solemn as their kids squirmed in boredom. Blessed be the hitmen. Let us prey, indeed.
In reality, of the three passages in Ezekiel 25:17, only the shortest comes close to Pete's/Jules' harangue: "I will execute great vengeance on them with furious rebukes, and they shall know that I am the LORD when I lay My vengeance upon them." Tarantino, a fan of Kung Fu flicks, lifted his own fake version from a 1973 Japanese martial arts film, Karate Kiba, about a Kung Fu vigilante who vows to eliminate the crime-infested drug business in Japan. Hegseth, the guy with Nazi tattoos who lectures people about "Christian values," didn't mention or credit Tarantino, a theft and sacrilege first caught by Baptist minister Brian Kaylor. But no harm no foul: In today's idiocracy, notes Mary Trump, "Who among us has not mistaken the holy words of Tarantino's Pulp Fiction for Biblical scriptures?"
Online, Pentagon shill Sean Parnell acknowledged the prayer was "obviously inspired by dialogue in Pulp Fiction"; of Pete's failure to note that, he argued, "Anyone saying the Secretary misquoted Ezekiel 25:17 is peddling fake news and ignorant of reality." The next day, at a briefing on the war, the thin-skinned Hegseth again went off and Biblical on the press, calling their accurate reports on an unpopular war "unpatriotic" and likening the media to the Pharisees: "They were there to witness (but) their hearts were hardened (in) pursuit of their agenda." The whining didn't go over well; America really seems to hate Pete. "The gospel according to St. Jack Daniels. What a dick," they griped, and, "Talibangicals' perverted take on Christianity - Hegseth is literally an anti-Christ. And a rapist."
Mostly, people were pissed at his ignorant appropriation of the much-loved Pulp Fiction for his own base and bloody purposes, declaring, "And you call yourself a white Christian nationalist?" and, "I'd take Samuel Jackson's character over Pete's any day." They wondered if, next time, Pete would add the famed Biblical parable, "You know what they call a quarter-pounder with cheese in Paris?” (Royale.) They argued Pete's "scriptures" should include more "Motherfucker"'s, they offered hilarious video of Jules meeting up with another quivering Brett, they marveled at the idiocy of Hegseth, a bellicose grandstander who didn't understand that, in Jules' bonkers, vengeful "prayer," the speaker is actually the bad guy.
In one of Pulp Fiction's two final scenes, in the diner where the film begins, Jules comes to a belated moral reckoning with himself. He has long justified his bloody past by telling himself (like Pete) he's taking righteous vengeance on the "bad." But earlier that day, after killing Brett, he's "miraculously" untouched by a barrage of gunshots - a survival he attributes to "divine intervention, a sign to re-evaluate his life. Of his ritual recitation, he tells the young thief, “I never gave much thought to what it meant...It was just some cold-blooded shit to say to a motherfucker before I popped a cap in his ass...The truth is, you’re the weak, and I’m the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo, I'm tryin' real hard to be the shepherd." Drunken, unctuous, preening Pete, who keeps missing the point, should too.
"Woe to those who manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic, and political gain, dragging that which is sacred into darkness and filth - Pope Leo X1V
Sen. Ron Wyden is calling foul over a $370 million tax break that the Trump administration recently gave to Texas-based gas company Cheniere Energy.
In a letter to Cheniere CEO Jack Fusco, Wyden (D-Ore.) demanded more information from the company about the windfall it received after the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) signed off on what the senator described as a "novel and highly questionable tax position."
According to Wyden, the IRS determined Cheniere was eligible to receive the Section 6426 credit—intended to incentivize the use of "alcohol fuel, biodiesel, and alternative fuel mixtures"—which the energy company said it used to power its liquified natural gas (LNG) transport carriers.
Taking advantage of the tax credit in this manner, Wyden argued, is a complete distortion of what it was intended to accomplish.
"The alternative fuel tax credit that Cheniere claimed is for alternative fuel mixtures in 'motorboats,'" wrote Wyden. "'Motorboat' is defined elsewhere in federal regulations as a vessel '65 feet in length or less.' LNG carriers are closer to one thousand feet in length, and the 'alternative fuel' that Cheniere's carriers were powered by was reportedly LNG boiloff that would have been wasted if it were not used to power the carriers."
Wyden emphasized this point by adding, "If Cheniere’s carriers are in fact 'motorboats,' then the Titanic was a dinghy."
The Oregon Democrat said the IRS' decision to grant Cheniere this tax credit was "extremely troubling" given that the gas giant "was among the oil and gas companies then-candidate [Donald] Trump promised to give a free hand in rulemaking" during the 2024 presidential election campaign.
Wyden then demanded that Cheniere provide him a copy of the closing letter the IRS sent to the firm following its review of the alternative fuel tax credit claim; a list of each carrier, complete with the carrier's length and displacement, that Cheniere has designated as a "motorboat"; and an explanation for "how $370 million in alternative fuel costs was calculated for the periods 2018 to 2024."
President Donald Trump on Thursday brushed off Americans' concerns about paying $4 per gallon of gas, telling a group of reporters that this price is "not very high."
While speaking with journalists on the White House lawn, Trump was asked by a reported from ABC News how long Americans should expect to be dealing with high gas prices, which have soared since the president launched an unconstitutional war of choice with Iran more than six weeks ago.
"They're not very high," Trump said. "If you look at what they were supposed to be to get rid of a nuclear weapon, with the danger that entails, so the gas prices have come down very much over the last three or four days."
Q: How much longer will American continue to see these high gas prices?
TRUMP: Well, they're not very high
Q: $4 a gallon still
TRUMP: That's what ABC says, but the stock market is up. Everything is doing really well. pic.twitter.com/yIxHXKqXII
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 16, 2026
In fact, Trump-appointed Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said under oath during congressional testimony that Iran's uranium enrichment program was "obliterated" by US airstrikes last year, and that there had been no effort by the Iranians no effor to rebuild their enrichment capability since.
Additionally, gas prices have not come down "very much" over the last four days. According to AAA, gas prices in the US currently average $4.09 per gallon, a slight decrease from the $4.16 they averaged the week prior.
After the reporter informed Trump that gas was still over $4 a gallon, he replied, "Well, that's what ABC says, but the fact is, if you look at the stock market, it's up. Everything's doing really well."
Shortly after Trump shrugged off concerns about high gas prices, he posted a message on Truth Social discussing the security features he wants to see in the luxury ballroom he's been planning to build on White House grounds.
Among other things, Trump said he wanted the ballroom to have "Bomb Shelters, a State of the Art Hospital and Medical Facilities, Protective Partitioning, Top Secret Military Installations, Structures, and Equipment, Protective Missile Resistant Steel, Columns, Roofs, and Beams, Drone Proof Ceilings and Roofs, Military Grade Venting, and Bullet, Ballistic, and Blast Proof Glass."
Democrats on the House Oversight Committee on Friday demanded their Republican colleagues force former US Attorney General Pam Bondi to meet her obligations to testify under oath.
Bondi had been subpoenaed to testify on April 14 about her handling of criminal case files related to late billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
However, the Department of Justice said in a letter sent to the committee last week that she didn’t have to comply with its congressional subpoena because she is no longer attorney general, having been fired by President Donald Trump earlier this month.
Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), ranking member of the panel, sent a letter to Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) in which he expressed concern that "Oversight Republicans are unwilling to take the actions needed to secure Ms. Bondi's required testimony."
Garcia pointed out that the committee voted on a bipartisan basis to subpoena Bondi last month to testify about the "possible mismanagement of the government's investigation of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell," and other topics.
Garcia said that while Republicans on the committee have made noises about compelling Bondi to testify, "there has been zero indication that there, in fact, has been any concrete progress toward a rescheduled date."
The California Democrat concluded by warning Comer that letting Bondi skate on testifying before the committee was not optional.
"Any attempt to evade the subpoena must be met with measures to hold Ms. Bondi in contempt of Congress," he wrote. "In the absence of any communication with the committee, and with no indication that she even plans on appearing for her compulsory deposition, this step may soon be appropriate."
Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) promoted Garcia's letter in a social media post and declared: "Pam Bondi must testify under oath in front of the American people. No exceptions."
Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) earlier in the week also said there needed to be consequences for Bondi after she failed to show up for her scheduled testimony.
"Since she didn’t show up, Oversight Democrats will move to hold her in contempt of Congress," said Crockett. "The [Epstein] survivors deserve justice—and we will get answers. Enough is enough."
Democrats aren't the only ones on the committee who are demanding Bondi testify, as Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) wrote last week that the former attorney general "cannot escape accountability simply because she no longer holds the office of attorney general," emphasizing that "the American people deserve answers, and we expect her to appear as soon as a new date is set."
A dozen universities in the UK are facing criticism after a joint investigation by Al Jazeera English and Liberty Investigates revealed they hired a security firm run by former military intelligence agents to spy on pro-Palestinian student demonstrators.
Specifically, Al Jazeera English and Liberty Investigates reported they have "uncovered evidence that Horus Security Consultancy Limited trawled through student social media feeds and conducted secret counterterror threat assessments on behalf of some of Britain’s most elite institutions," including the University of Oxford, Imperial College London, University College London.
The investigation found that Horus has been paid $594,000 by the universities since 2022, and it has been asked to monitor targets ranging from a Palestinian academic giving a guest lecture at Manchester Metropolitan University to entire groups of pro-Palestinian organizations at the University of Bristol.
Many of the universities implicated in the investigation declined comment. Imperial College London, however, denied that it paid Horus to spy on its students, and said it merely wanted to "help identify potential security risks to its community, which might include protest activity within the vicinity of its campuses."
This rationale failed to satisfy critics, however.
Gina Romero, the United Nations special rapporteur for freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, told Al Jazeera English and Liberty Investigates that “the use of AI to harvest and analyze student data under the guise of open-source intelligence raises profound legal concerns.”
Romero expressed particular concern that Horus is not accountable to any public scrutiny, and that students have no way to know how the data collected from them will be used in the future.
Lizzie Hobbs, a PhD student at the London School of Economics who has taken part in pro-Palestinian protests, said it was "deeply scary" to see universities invest money in surveilling their own students.
"We knew surveillance was happening by the university," she said, "but it is shocking to see how systematized it is."
Jo Grady, general secretary for the University and College Union, slammed the schools' "shameful" actions and said they had "wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds spying on their own students."
Journalist Mushahid Hussain Sayed also described the universities' actions as "shameful," adding that they discriminated "against students and academics on the basis of their peaceful political beliefs/activism in support of Palestine and against Israel!"
Calls have steadily intensified in recent weeks for the European Union to suspend a trade agreement with Israel as the country's right-wing government has ignored growing condemnation over its anti-Palestinian policies and its assaults on Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon—but on Tuesday, German and Italian officials blocked an effort to pause the trade deal, with Germany's foreign minister saying the move would be "inappropriate."
The foreign minister, Johann Wadephul, suggested that world governments have not yet appealed enough to Israel in an attempt to stop it from attacking civilian infrastructure in Lebanon and Gaza; backing settlers who wage violence on Palestinians as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government seeks to illegally annex the territory; and passing a death penalty law that makes death by hanging the default punishment for Palestinians convicted of killing Israelis.
“We have to talk with Israel about the critical issues,” Wadephul said at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg, which was called by his counterparts from Ireland, Slovenia, and Spain. “That has to be done in a critical, constructive dialogue with Israel.”
Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani added that "no decision will be taken today" and said that "other possible initiatives will be discussed at the next ministerial meeting on May 11."
Critics, however, blasted the decision.
Erika Guevara-Rosas, a senior director for Amnesty International, called the move by Italy and Germany "a moral failure" that "illustrates brazen contempt for civilian lives" in Gaza, the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), and in Lebanon.
Failure to act in the face of Israel's repeated and ongoing atrocities, said Guevara-Rosas, "will be remembered as another shameful chapter in one of the most disgraceful moments in the EU’s history."
The Irish, Spanish, and Slovenian officials wrote to EU foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas last week, saying that Israel has breached Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which stipulates that "relations between the parties, as well as all the provisions of the agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles."
A European Commission review last year found "indications" that Israel is breaching its human rights obligations under the 1995 agreement.
The death penalty law, said the foreign ministers, is a "grave violation of fundamental human rights," while settlers and Israel Defense Forces soldiers act "with absolute impunity" in the West Bank.
“The European Union can no longer remain on the sidelines,” they said.
Ahead of Tuesday's meeting in Luxembourg, Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares called on every European country "to uphold what the International Court of Justice and the UN say on human rights and the defense of international law" and that failing to do so regarding Israel "would be a defeat for the European Union."
Irish Foreign Minister Helen McEntee called on the EU to "move in unison" to pressure Israel to meet its human rights obligations. Suspending the trade agreement requires unanimous support from the bloc's 27 member countries.
McEntee said that she was urging "all of our colleagues today to support our call for the suspension of the overall agreement but, at the very least, if we can't reach that full agreement, that we would have suspension of the overall trade elements of it."
"Where the EU moves together, we have a greater impact."
📽️Watch Minister @HMcEntee's remarks ahead of the Foreign Affairs Council in Luxembourg. pic.twitter.com/c5w9S4qdQp
— Ireland In The EU (@IrelandInEU) April 21, 2026
But Germany and Italy's refusal to back the suspension of the agreement, said Irish author Andrew Madden, suggested "a preference for the ongoing slaughter of innocent people" over angering Israel.
"Alongside robust adaptation and risk reduction strategies," the report says, "the only durable solution to the escalating threat of extreme heat lies in ambitious, multilateral climate change mitigation."
Just a month after a sweeping World Meteorological Organization report led United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres to declare that "every key climate indicator is flashing red," WMO and another UN agency marked Earth Day on Wednesday by releasing an analysis focused on "how extreme heat is reshaping food production and food security."
Simply titled "Extreme Heat and Agriculture," the WMO and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report lays out how extreme heat "is influenced by multiple interlinked drivers," including the trends and inertia of human-induced climate change, natural climate variability, and meteorological phenomena such as droughts and atmospheric and marine heatwaves. Then, it gets into what that means for agriculture.
"Extreme heat is increasingly defining the conditions under which agrifood systems operate," WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo and FAO Director-General Qu Dongyu stressed in the foreword of the report. "Rising temperatures and heatwaves, occurring with greater frequency, duration, and intensity, are often accompanied by prolonged drought and other climate extremes."
"Higher temperatures parch soils, reduce harvests, strain livestock, disrupt fisheries, and increase wildfire risk. When combined with water scarcity, the consequences intensify, cutting production, lowering incomes, and tightening food supplies," the pair wrote. "These impacts extend far beyond the farm gate. They represent a systemic risk to global food security and to the livelihoods of more than 1.23 billion people who rely on agriculture."
For example, yields of staple crops such as maize and wheat have already declined by 7.5% and 6%, respectively, with 1ºC of global temperature rise beyond preindustrial levels. The publication points out that yields "are projected to decline by up to an additional 10% for every 1ºC of warming in the future."
It also notes that "under high-emission scenarios, nearly half the world's cattle could be exposed to dangerous heat by 2100," resulting in annual losses nearing $40 billion. Under a low-emission scenario, the report adds, "impacts from livestock exposure to extreme heat are reduced by nearly two-thirds."
The report details vulnerabilities, observed impacts, and projections for not only crops and livestock but also fisheries and aquaculture; forests, plantations, and orchards; and agricultural workers.
Saulo and Qu highlighted that "agricultural workers are already experiencing effects on their health, productivity, and income. As climate variability intensifies, hard-won progress in reducing hunger and poverty comes under strain, with shocks rippling through economies and households and disproportionately affecting the most vulnerable."
The report outlines the existing "range of technical agricultural adaptation options and other broader nontechnical risk management strategies" for responding to extreme heat, as well as barriers to implementing them. It also offers a case study: the extreme heat event that hit Brazil in 2023-24.
That period in the South American country "serves as a stark example of the breadth and severity of compound impacts that can be triggered by a primary extreme heat event," the report states. "On top of a warmer baseline shaped by climate change and amplified by El Niño, the heatwave simultaneously impacted crops, livestock, forests, fisheries, and human health."
"The interconnected failures highlight the profound vulnerability of the entire agricultural sector and the grave implications such events have for the livelihoods and food security of the millions who depend on it," the report continues, emphasizing that "building systemic resilience through adaptation and dedicated risk reduction is imperative."
"While this report outlines a path toward enhanced resilience, solutions and opportunities are not infinite," the publication adds. "Alongside robust adaptation and risk reduction strategies, the only durable solution to the escalating threat of extreme heat lies in ambitious, multilateral climate change mitigation."
🌡️ Extreme heat is already affecting crops, livestock, forests, fisheries & the people who produce our food.New @fao.org-@wmo-global.bsky.social report on #ExtremeHeat & Agriculture shows the impacts & #ClimateAction needed to respond to this growing threat.🔗 https://bit.ly/4cXmmOe#EarthDay
[image or embed]
— Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (@fao.org) April 22, 2026 at 4:15 AM
After the most recent UN Climate Change Conference, COP30, concluded in Brazil late last year, critics called it "another failed climate summit." The United States is the world's largest historical climate polluter, yet President Donald Trump didn't even attend, and has spent his second term not only repealing climate policies but also serving the planet-wrecking fossil fuel industry whose campaign cash helped him return to power.
Trump has also started a new illegal war in the Middle East, partnering with Israel to target Iran. That assault has underscored how armed conflict negatively impacts agriculture and food systems around the world. The Iranian government has restricted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz—a key trade route, including for fertilizer and fossil fuels—which has prompted mounting alarm about a global food crisis.
Earlier this month, ahead of the current fragile ceasefire, the FAO's chief economist, Máximo Torero, warned that farmers would soon "have to choose: Farm the same with fewer inputs, plant less, or switch to less intensive fertilizer crops."
Jorge Moreira da Silva, executive director of the UN Office for Project Services, said Tuesday that "the planting season has already started, and in most countries in Africa it will end in May. So, if we don't get some solution immediately, the crisis will be very significant and severe, particularly for the poorest countries and for the poorest citizens."
"I'm the billionaire who wants to tax people like me more. I'm the billionaire who's willing to stand up to the monopolies and the people who are ripping off Californians."
In a California gubernatorial race characterized by a lack of clear progressive choices and the specter of an all-Republican general election under the state's so-called "jungle primary," a hedge fund billionaire who believes that plutocrats like himself should pay more taxes is gaining progressive support.
On Tuesday, Farallon Capital founder Tom Steyer was endorsed by Our Revolution, the progressive political action group launched as a continuation of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) kneecapped 2016 presidential campaign.
Our Rev said that Steyer "has stepped forward with a platform that is clearly aligned with the priorities of our movement—single-payer healthcare, taxing extreme wealth, bold climate action, and getting money out of politics."
Steyer was interviewed Tuesday by The Lever's David Sirota, who asked about Our Revolution's support for a plebiscite to "tax billionaires like yourself," and how he squares "being the progressive movement's choice in this race while being one of the people who there's a ballot initiative to tax more."
The California Billionaire Tax would impose a one-time 5% wealth tax on people worth $1 billion or more, to be paid in annual installments of 1% over five years. According to Forbes, Steyer is currently worth $2.4 billion.
"Well, David, I think people like me who are billionaires should pay more taxes," Steyer said.
"I'm the billionaire who wants to tax people like me more," Steyer added. "I'm the billionaire who's willing to stand up to the monopolies and the people who are ripping off Californians. I've done it for 15 years and I'll keep doing it."
That message has been echoed in one of Steyer's campaign ads, in which he asserts that "it's time for billionaires like me and big corporations to buy into the future of California and be willing to pay more."
Steyer continues:
A lot of people in California are acting as if we have a zero-sum game and they're defending their wealth and they're trying to make sure that they minimize their taxes. I am not scared about paying more money. Working Californians are being priced out of this state. It is not okay. We are creating more than enough money in this state for us all to succeed together without anybody suffering... [I] think that everybody who succeeded in this state owes a huge debt to the people who built this state and the working people who make this state run and work their asses off.
"We need to change our tax system," Steyer concludes in the ad. "We need more revenue. We need to be fair and I pledge to do all of those things. This is not rocket science."
In addition to his stance on taxation, Steyer has gained progressive support by funding climate initiatives, opposing the Trump administration's deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, and pouring more than $120 million into efforts to impeach President Donald Trump and in support of Proposition 50, the successful state ballot measure to redraw the state's congressional map in retaliation for Trump-backed Republican gerrymandering in Texas. He is also a prolific philanthropist.
On the flip side, the fact that Steyer is a hedge fund billionaire whose heavily self-funded campaign is the opposite of grassroots continues to fuel skepticism among progressives, many of whom view the mere existence of billionaires as an abject public policy failure. Steyer also came under fire over the revelation that his portfolio had been invested in private prison stocks decades ago.
Steyer said during his interview with Sirota that he doesn't agree with the assertion that billionaires are a public policy failure.
"I think that phrase obviously goes back to Karl Marx," he said. "And I believe if someone wants to come to California who has an idea to change the world and forms a company around it and it does really well and as a result they make a lot of money, that's fine with me."
With a dearth of progressives to choose from, more and more left-leaning groups and individuals are throwing their support behind Steyer. These include Courage California, Third Act, the California Teachers Association and other labor groups, and state lawmakers including Assemblymen Ash Kalra (D-25) and Alex Lee (D-24).
Some progressives are reluctantly backing Steyer due to the very real possibility of an all-Republican general election under California's open primary—in which the top two vote-getters advance, regardless of party. The "jungle primary" is set for June 2.
The latest weighted polling shows Trump-backed Fox News host Steve Hilton leading the race with 16% support, followed closely by Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco at 14%. Those Republicans are trailed by Steyer (13%) and other Democrats: former California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (13%), former Congresswoman Katie Porter (10%), and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan—the top choice of numerous Big Tech billionaires—at 5%.
Erstwhile Democratic frontrunner and now former Congressman Eric Swalwell suspended his race for governor and quit Congress earlier this month amid mounting allegations of rape and other sex crimes that he has denied.
"We like to frame our wars as virtuous, but they are not," says Ben Rhodes.
Ben Rhodes, who served deputy national security advisor under former US President Barack Obama from 2009 to 2017, has done a fair number of mea culpas in the years since he left government service. But a New York Times op-ed published Wednesday punctuates with a fresh admission: "We like to frame our wars as virtuous, but they are not."
Rhodes comes to this statement circuitously as he writes about recent time spent with Graham Platner, the US Army and Marine veteran who served tours in both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as an infantryman who is now running as a Democrat for the US Senate in Maine to unseat Republican Sen. Susan Collins.
Platner, who has recently opened up a double-digit lead against his primary rival, two-time Maine Gov. Janet Mills, has been an outspoken anti-war voice since putting his hat in the ring for elected office and Rhodes, who cut his teeth defending the forever wars during the Obama years, says Democratic Party leaders—and voters wherever they are—would be wise to listen to what he has to say.
"The forever war has been destroying America from within, like an organism that must keep growing to survive, filling us with fear of outsiders and contempt for one another," writes Rhodes.
Most Democrats, observes Rhodes, don't talk about war the way Platner does, and that's not just a feature of his wartime experience compared to those in positions of power or paid to pontificate for think tanks or on the corporate news networks.
After traveling around with Platner on the campaign trail in Maine, Rhodes concludes that "Americans must change their relationship to war itself."
"One reason we have a hard time reckoning with the forever war is that it undermines our own story," he continues. "We like to think of America as a force for good, acting out of enlightened self-interest, our military fighting for freedom around the globe. Is that really what’s been happening?"
In their conversation, Platner explained that "most people get it," suggesting those who live and work in the real world, outside of DC or within media echo chambers, understand the costs of the nation's endless wars. “Do you think this country should spend more on schools and hospitals and less on bombs?" asked Platner rhetorically. "A lot of people are like, yeah, that’s pretty obvious.”
When Platner had his epiphany that the wars he fought in Iraq and Afghanistan were a mistake, Rhodes said he, still working for the White House in those years, was exactly the kind of person the soldier was thinking of when he said that the "people running the war didn’t even seem to know the point of the war," calling it "a self-licking ice cream cone" that could not admit its failures.
"Listening to [Platner] talk, I knew intuitively what he was saying," writes Rhodes. "I would have been one of those people back in 2011, believing that what we were doing was helping Afghans."
For someone so enmeshed in the politics of US war-making and defending the foreign policy of past US governments from criticism, Rhodes confesses the pitfalls of American exceptionalism and where it can lead. And again, he quotes Platner:
We are so broken emotionally when it comes to our politics that we’ve literally created this story that it’s inherent in being a competent political leader to kill civilians. If you’re not willing to do some hard things and drop some bombs, then you’re not up to the task of power. I think it’s the opposite. You’re not up to the task of being in power if you do not think about the cost of violence. If that’s not at the front of your mind, then I don’t think you are morally in the right place to be in positions of power.
Such an argument directly implicates not just past presidents, but certainly US President Donald Trump, currently waging a new war of choice against Iran, as well as his Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who openly celebrates the killing prowess ("lethality") of the US military while characterizing the laws of war as impediments.
Contextualizing why he has come to conclude that contemporary US wars lack virtue, Rhodes writes that the conflicts we have been waging abroad for most of this century have also done tremendous and lasting damage here at home. "They resemble," writes Rhodes, "a declining empire sowing chaos along its periphery as a matter of strategy: Economic and political elites profit while the Americans who fight suffer along with the places they attack."
As Platner told Rhodes, such admissions must be spoken about publicly in order for them to lead to meaningful change in the country. And voices like Platner's, argues Rhodes, must be listened to because the "visceral and moral reckoning he advocates is the only way to truly dismantle the forever war, change our priorities and detoxify our country."
"To save ourselves, we must stop this cycle of violence," Rhodes concludes. "We must find meaning not in our capacity to kill or control others, but in each other."