SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
don bacon
‘We Are the Dominant Predator,' Says GOP Lawmaker as Trump Weighs Military Takeover of Greenland
Longtime US allies, including France and Germany, are reportedly meeting to discuss options should President Donald Trump move to annex Greenland.
Jan 07, 2026
A Republican congressman on Wednesday made the case for seizing Greenland while describing the US as "the dominant predator" in the Western hemisphere.
During an interview with Fox Business, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) claimed that taking control of Greenland from Denmark was a vital strategic US interest, saying it should be seized regardless of the opinions of its residents.
"It's important that we have a stake in Greenland, that they are, quite frankly, a protectorate of the United States," said Ogles, who is the lead sponsor of legislation backing Trump's Greenland takeover bid. "You know, they've been in... a relationship with Denmark, that needs to end... When you look at the Monroe Doctrine, you look at the Western hemisphere, we are the dominant predator, quite frankly, force in the Western hemisphere."
Rep. Ogles: "It's important that we have a stake in Greenland, that they are quite frankly a protectorate of the US. They've been in relationship with Denmark -- that needs to end. We have spilled more blood protecting Greenland than the Danes ... we are the dominant predator… pic.twitter.com/uAtHMMV0hL
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 7, 2026
Ogles' belligerent remarks came as Reuters reported that longtime US allies, including France and Germany, are making plans for how to respond should Trump go through with trying to annex Greenland.
It is not clear what shape this response would take, though a senior European official told Reuters that "the Danes have yet to communicate to their European allies what kind of concrete support they wish to receive," even while insisting that Denmark take the lead in pushing back against Trump's threats.
The report noted that Johannes Koskinen, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee of Finland's parliament, has called on NATO members to "address whether something needs to be done and whether the United States should be brought into line in the sense that it cannot disregard jointly agreed plans in order to pursue its own power ambitions."
While much of the Republican Party has largely been in lockstep in supporting Trump's Greenland threats, not every GOP lawmaker is on board.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said during a Tuesday interview with CNN that he hoped to rally other Republicans against any plans to seize the country.
"This is appalling," Bacon said. "Greenland is a NATO ally. We have a base on Greenland, we could put four or five bases on Greenland. They wouldn't mind that, they would make agreements with us on mining."
Bacon also emphasized the infeasibility of Trump's plans.
"We're not going to acquire Greenland," he said. "Most people in Greenland want to remain independent... with Denmark providing some protection... So this is one of the silliest things I've heard come out of the White House in the last year. It's unacceptable and I hope other Republicans line up behind me and make it clear to the White House that it's wrong."
Bacon on the administration's rhetoric about Greenland: "This is one of the silliest things I've heard come out of the White House in the last year. It's unacceptable and I hope other Republicans line up behind me and make it clear to the White House that it's wrong." pic.twitter.com/HH9LlDX5aJ
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 6, 2026
Trump and his allies have been making more aggressive statements in recent days about taking Greenland, which Trump has called essential to US national security.
Top Trump aide Stephen Miller on Monday night refused to rule out using military force to take Greenland during a Monday interview with CNN, and further claimed that “the future of the free world depends on America to be able to assert ourselves and our interests without an apology.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ilhan Omar Slams Latest Trump Attack on Venezuelan Boat as 'Egregious Violation'
"There is NO legal justification," the progressive congresswoman said. "It risks spiraling into the exact type of endless, pointless conflict that Trump supposedly opposes."
Sep 16, 2025
US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar on Tuesday condemned the Trump administration's attack the previous day on a second boat allegedly transporting drugs off the coast of Venezuela as blatantly illegal, highlighting her introduction last week of a war powers resolution in a bid to stop the aggression.
President Donald Trump announced Monday that the US destroyed what he said was a boat used by Venezuelan drug gangs, killing three people in what one Amnesty International campaigner called "an extrajudicial execution."
The strike followed a September 2 US attack on another alleged drug-running boat that killed 11 people, which Omar (D-Minn.) called a "lawless and reckless" action.
Responding to Monday's attack, Omar said on the social media site X that the Trump administration "is once again using the failed War on Drugs to justify their egregious violation of international law."
"There is NO legal justification," she said of the attack. "It risks spiraling into the exact type of endless, pointless conflict that Trump supposedly opposes. I have a war powers resolution to fight back."
Introduced last Thursday, the measure aims to stop the US attacks, which coincide with Trump's deployment of a small armada of warships off the Caribbean coast of Venezuela, a country that has endured to more than a century of US meddling in its affairs.
"All of us should agree that the separation of powers is crucial to our democracy, and that only Congress has the power to declare war," Omar said at the time.
The War Powers Act of 1973—enacted during the Nixon administration at the tail end of the US war on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos—empowers Congress to check the president’s war-making authority. The law requires the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours and mandates that lawmakers must approve troop deployments after 60 days.
Also last week, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) led a letter signed by two dozen Democratic colleagues and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) asserting that the Trump administration offered “no legitimate justification” for the first boat strike.
Omar's condemnation of the US attacks followed Monday's announcement by US Reps. Nancy Mace (R-SC) and Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) of separate resolutions to strip Omar of her committee assignments and, in the case of Mace's measure, censure the congresswoman after she reportedly shared a video highlighting assassinated far-right firebrand Charlie Kirk's prolific bigotry.
Trump also attacked Omar on Monday, calling her a "disgraceful person," a "loser," and "disgusting."
Omar is no stranger to censure efforts, which critics say are largely fueled by Islamophobia—and haven't just come from Republicans. In 2019, she was falsely accused of antisemitism by leaders of her own party and was the subject of an anti-hate speech resolution passed by House lawmakers after she remarked about the indisputable financial ties the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and members of Congress.
In February 2023, Omar was ousted from the House Foreign Affairs Committee for years-old comments that allegedly referenced antisemitic tropes.
Last year, Congressman Don Bacon (R-Neb.) introduced a censure resolution after Omar said of Jewish students at Columbia University, "We should not have to tolerate antisemitism or bigotry for all Jewish students, whether they're pro-genocide or anti-genocide."
The measure failed to pass, as did another put forth earlier last year by Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) after she mistranslated remarks Omar made in Somali.
Keep ReadingShow Less
ADL-Backed Bipartisan Bill Threatens to Censor Israel Criticism on Social Media
The bill’s lead sponsors described it as part of an effort to prevent antisemitic hate. But their comments during a press conference on the measure suggest it will also target critics of Israel.
Jul 25, 2025
Free speech advocates are raising concerns that a new bipartisan bill would force social media companies to censor criticism of Israel on their platforms.
Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) and Don Bacon (R-Neb.) rolled out the bill, called the Stopping Terrorists Online Presence and Holding Accountable Tech Entities (STOP HATE) Act, at a press conference Wednesday, alongside Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
The bill would mandate that social media companies work with the federal government to implement moderation policies that curb the speech of groups the government designates as "terrorists." They'd be required to provide regular reports to the U.S. attorney general. Those that don't comply would be fined $5 million each day they refuse.
The lawmakers justified the measure by citing some recent examples of overt antisemitism and calls for violence on social media.
"We've seen an explosion of disinformation and antisemitic hate online in America and around the world," Gottheimer said. "After the shooting outside the Capital Jewish Museum, anti-Zionist extremists used social media to call for further violence, posting messages like 'may all Zionists burn.' Even AI platforms like Grok have posted deeply disturbing content, praising Adolf Hitler and Nazism."
Bacon said, "We want to be in a country that makes clear that antisemitism or any kind of racism is repugnant, unacceptable, not allowed in an online space, and that we have zero tolerance for it."
However, other statements from the lawmakers make clear that their definition of "antisemitism" goes far beyond expressions of hatred or calls for violence against Jewish people.
As Matthew Petti wrote for the libertarian magazine Reason: "The specific idea that Bacon had in mind was antisemitism, and he made clear that it includes criticism of the State of Israel in his book."
At the press conference, Bacon explicitly referenced recent protests against Israel's policy of starvation in Gaza.
"I saw protests out here the last two days, they were vile, right?," he said. "They were...you can see the antisemitism in their comments and how they were treating some of our members of Congress who are Jewish. I saw that firsthand."
Bacon did not specify what specific comments he was referring to. However, Petti noted:
Protesters stormed the congressional cafeteria on July 1 to call for food aid to Gaza, and interrupted Rep. Randy Fine (R–Fla.)—who has called for Palestinians to "starve away"—during a hearing on campus antisemitism last week.
Bacon also suggested that merely stating opposition to pro-Israel congresspeople, including himself, constitutes antisemitism.
"I even saw an article today. It was about me, but talking about we have to oppose congressmen who are pro-Zionists, right?" said Bacon, who is notably not Jewish. "It's all over our social media and it's unacceptable."
Gottheimer, meanwhile, said the policy was not just about combating terrorism, but about halting a "massive disinformation campaign influencing us every day."
Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald—a critic of government efforts to regulate "misinformation"—suggested that the bill flies in the face of the right's supposed commitments to free speech.
"There was [a] full consensus on the Right for the last decade that Big Tech censorship was a great evil, especially if pressured and demanded by the U.S. government," he said on X. "All that changed [when] it came time to censor for Israel."
In a statement released Friday, the American‑Arab Anti‑Discrimination Committee (ADC) likewise described the STOP HATE Act as part of "the continuous efforts by lawmakers to silence, censor, and chill freedom of speech and expression in this country at the behest of Israel."
They warned that the bill gives the government, in tandem with pro-Israel groups like the ADL, "unfettered powers to police private social media companies, attack lawful expression, and levy fines of up to five million dollars each day if companies fail to silence and censor users."
This is not the first time Gottheimer and Bacon have introduced the STOP HATE Act. A similar version, introduced in 2023, died in committee.
When introducing that version of the bill, they were more explicit in their calls for government regulation of media—calling on the Department of Justice to require the news outlets Al Jazeera and its subsidiary AJ+, which are sponsored by the Qatari government, to register as foreign agents.
The two congressmen were also at the forefront of calls for the U.S. government to ban TikTok, which Gottheimer said was being used by the Chinese Communist Party to "boost anti-Israel and pro-Hamas videos in the United States." They have also introduced legislation that would criminalize efforts to boycott Israeli products.
Greenblatt, who spoke alongside the two legislators on Wednesday, has explicitly said that "Anti-Zionism is antisemitism." Though he's faced criticism for this stance, including from members of the ADL itself, he has only continued to double down.
In one infamous exchange during the outbreak of pro-Palestine protests on college campuses in 2024, Greenblatt suggested that students wearing keffiyehs—a kind of scarf commonly worn by Palestinians—were doing the equivalent of wearing a swastika armband.
More recently, he endorsed Immigration and Customs Enforcement's warrantless abduction of pro-Palestine organizer Mahmoud Khalil, who he accused—along with other pro-Palestine demonstrators—of being an asset of foreign governments and likened to Middle Eastern terrorist groups.
Wednesday's press release from the legislators on the STOP HATE Act cites the ADL's 2024 "Social Media Scorecard," as evidence that "the five major social media platforms—Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and X—routinely failed to act on antisemitic hate reported to them."
That Scorecard page features a quote from Greenblatt, who said, "Social media platforms are still falling far too short when it comes to moderating antisemitic and anti-Israel content."
After the October 7, 2023 attacks led by Hamas, the ADL changed its methodology to categorize antisemitic incidents to not only include hate speech or threats directed at Jewish people, but also language expressing "opposition to Zionism."
The proposed STOP HATE Act comes at a time when American public opinion has dramatically shifted against Israel's genocidal actions in Gaza. According to a CNN poll conducted by SSRS, released last Friday:
Only 23% of Americans say Israel’s actions have been fully justified, a 27-point drop from a[n] October 2023 poll taken shortly after Hamas’ October 7 attacks. Another 27% now say those actions have been partially justified and 22% say that they have not been justified at all. In October 2023, just 8% said Israel’s actions were not justified at all.
In recent weeks, Israeli leaders have openly called for the mass displacement of two million Palestinians to make room for Jewish settlers. Meanwhile, at least 115 Palestinians—including more than 80 children—have reportedly starved due to Israel's restrictions on aid entering the Gaza Strip. Over 1,000 aid seekers have been killed, often by Israel Defense Forces soldiers, at aid sites jointly administered by the U.S. and Israel.
"The First Amendment is supposed to be the cornerstone of American democracy—our shield against censorship and government overreach," said Abed Ayoub, ADC's national executive director. "When members of Congress and state lawmakers start compromising our freedoms to satisfy the demands of a foreign government, we lose what makes this country free. We must reject any legislation that threatens our speech, our conscience, and our right to dissent."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'He Chose Billionaires': New Ad Targets Vulnerable Republican Over Vote to Gut Medicaid
Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, alongside his GOP colleagues in Congress, is accused of "cutting Medicaid so he can give tax breaks to big corporations and billionaires."
Jun 03, 2025
Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, one of the House lawmakers most vulnerable to losing their seats in the 2026 midterms, was the target of a new ad that aired Tuesday as part of a nationwide campaign to draw public attention and outrage to the GOP plan to kick millions off Medicaid.
The ad—set to run on television, digital platforms, and streaming services in Nebraska—features a woman named Audrey, who says her step-daughter and three grandchildren are among the tens of millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid for health coverage.
"It's important that we continue to have Medicaid—it's lifesaving," Audrey says in the 30-second spot. "But Congressman Don Bacon doesn't act like it. He's actually cutting Medicaid so he can give tax breaks to big corporations and billionaires."
"Our grandkids rely on Medicaid," she continues. "It's important that they have that. Otherwise, they would not have access to healthcare, immunizations, and everything else. It's very important to us. It's not something you should take away to fund tax breaks for billionaires."
Watch:
Late last month, Bacon joined most of the House Republican caucus in voting to pass a 1,100-page budget reconciliation package that includes more than $700 billion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade and work reporting requirements that analysts say would strip insurance from as many as 14 million people in communities nationwide.
Weeks before casting his vote in favor of the legislation, Bacon said he wouldn't accept more than $500 billion in Medicaid cuts.
Kobie Christian of the Unrig Our Economy coalition, which is behind the nationwide ad campaign, said Tuesday that "Nebraska families like Audrey's have been struggling to afford healthcare for years, and Congressman Bacon decided it was a good idea to vote for the largest cut to Medicaid in American history that will leave millions without the healthcare they need."
"Congressman Bacon didn't just vote to rip away healthcare from children and families," Christian added. "He voted to hand that money to millionaires and billionaires. Congressman Bacon had a choice—and he chose billionaires over working families like Audrey's."
"It's that simple: If they are a 'no' on Medicaid cuts, then they can't support any version of the current reconciliation bill that slashes healthcare for millions of Americans."
The Republican budget bill is currently before the GOP-controlled Senate, which is expected to make significant changes before sending the legislation back to the House for final passage.
But it's far from clear that Republican senators will weaken the measure's deeply unpopular assault on Medicaid.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who has voiced concerns about his colleagues' push for aggressive cuts to the program, wrote in a social media post on Monday that he had a "great talk" with President Donald Trump about the issue."
"He said again, NO MEDICAID BENEFIT CUTS," Hawley wrote.
But the Missouri senator has expressed support for Medicaid work requirements, which experts say are cruel and ineffective at achieving the GOP's stated goal of boosting employment among beneficiaries. Most Medicaid recipients already work, and the frequent reporting requirements included in the Republican legislation would, according to analysts, compromise health coverage for millions of people who are eligible for benefits.
"Let's see if Senator Hawley, President Trump, and the other Republican senators who've shunned Medicaid cuts practice what they preach," Tony Carrk, executive director of the progressive watchdog group Accountable.US, said in a statement Tuesday. "It's that simple: If they are a 'no' on Medicaid cuts, then they can't support any version of the current reconciliation bill that slashes healthcare for millions of Americans."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Bernie Sanders Mobilizes Organizers to Fight GOP Budget Bill in Key Swing Districts
"It must be defeated," Sen. Bernie Sanders said of the Republican legislation.
May 13, 2025
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders is deploying organizers to key congressional districts across the country this week in an effort to mobilize opposition against the Republican Party's emerging reconciliation package, which includes massive, unpopular cuts to safety net programs and inequality-fueling tax giveaways to the richest Americans.
Late Monday, after Republicans unveiled critical sections of their budget measure, Sanders (I-Vt.) announced a week of action aimed at "pressuring vulnerable Republicans to vote against the bill."
Organizers hired by Sanders in recent months "will fan out across the country this week, targeting 15 Republican-held districts" in Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and other states, the senator said.
Each of the districts was a stop on Sanders' recent "Fighting Oligarchy" tour, which drew large, energetic crowds even in areas typically seen as Republican strongholds. According to the senator's team, roughly a third of the more than 265,000 rally attendees were not registered Democrats.
The week of action kicked off with an organizing call led by Sanders, according to an announcement, with canvassing, days of action, and rallies being organized in at least eight states.
The senator's team provided a look at some of the material organizers plan to distribute during their actions. The literature urges constituents to call their representatives and urge them to vote no "on a bill to cut Medicaid, nutrition assistance, and education to pay for hundreds of billions of dollars in more tax breaks for billionaires."
One of the lawmakers targeted is Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who said last month that he would not accept more than $500 billion in Medicaid cuts over a 10-year period.
The Republican proposal includes more than $700 billion in cuts to Medicaid and would likely throw more than 8 million people off the program, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Sanders said the following Republican lawmakers will also be targeted as part of the swing-district pressure campaign against the reconciliation package:
- Mariannette Miller Meeks (IA-1)
- John James (MI-10)
- Zach Nunn (IA-3)
- Derrick Van Orden (WI-3)
- Tom Barrett (MI-7)
- Bryan Steil (WI-1)
- David Valadao (CA-22)
- Kevin Kiley (CA-3)
- Juan Ciscomani (AZ-6)
- David Schweikert (AZ-1)
- Scott Perry (PA-10)
- Ryan Mackenzie (PA-7)
- Gabe Evans (CO-8)
- Tony Wied (WI-8)
News of the actions came as Republicans on key committees prepared Tuesday for several markup hearings on their reconciliation proposals, which include around a trillion dollars in combined cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as well as major tax breaks for the wealthy and large corporations.
The American Prospect's David Dayen reported last week that House Republicans deliberately scheduled the Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and Agriculture Committee markup hearings on the same day "to make it hard for the opposition to focus."
In a social media post on Monday, Sanders highlighted the GOP bill's proposed cuts to Medicaid and SNAP and declared, "It must be defeated."
Sanders is also working to harness the energy of his "Fighting Oligarchy" tour to recruit progressive candidates for office. Politico reported earlier this month that "the Vermont senator is teaming up with the liberal group Run for Something and other outside organizations to provide support to potential candidates."
"We want to make sure that we're not just going into these spaces and holding rallies and disappearing, and we’re not just asking people to run for office," Jeremy Slevin, a top Sanders adviser, told the outlet. "We're giving them the tools they need to actually do it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Key Republican's $500 Billion 'Red Line' for Medicaid Cuts Slammed as Cruel Farce
"If your 'red line' is taking away healthcare from millions of people, then you don't have a red line."
Apr 30, 2025
A key House Republican said Tuesday that he would be unwilling to accept more than $500 billion in Medicaid cuts in the GOP's emerging reconciliation package, a "red line" that drew swift mockery and condemnation from healthcare campaigners.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who is seen as a critical swing vote in the narrowly controlled Republican House, told Politico that his ceiling for Medicaid cuts over the next decade is a half-trillion dollars—a message he has privately delivered to President Donald Trump's White House.
Anthony Wright, executive director of Families USA, said in a statement Tuesday that a $500 billion cut to Medicaid "is not at all moderate, but massive—the biggest cut in the history of Medicaid, one that would force millions of Americans to lose coverage."
"Slashing Medicaid by hundreds of billions of dollars would force states like Nebraska to make the unholy choice to drop people from coverage, cut benefits, and/or cut payments to the providers we all rely on, or otherwise raise taxes," said Wright. "Medicaid cuts would be another wrecking ball to the health system and to the economy."
The Century Foundation has estimated that cutting federal Medicaid funding by $500 billion over a 10-year period would strip health coverage from more than 18 million children and more than 2 million adults with disabilities.
"If your 'red line' is taking away healthcare from millions of people, then you don't have a red line," said Kobie Christian, a spokesperson for the advocacy coalition Unrig Our Economy.
"Not one dollar should be cut from Medicaid to pay for one dollar of tax breaks for the rich."
Bacon also made clear Tuesday that he would support draconian changes to Medicaid that have been tried with disastrous results at the state level.
"They should be seeking the skill sets for better jobs," Bacon said in support of adding work requirements to Medicaid, despite an abundance of evidence showing that such mandates succeed only at booting people from the program, not increasing employment. (Most Medicaid recipients who are able to work already do.)
Brad Woodhouse, president of Protect Our Care, said in a statement that "as the GOP drafts their devastating budget, one thing remains true: Republicans in Congress want to make the largest Medicaid cuts in history to fund tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans."
"Whether it's a trillion dollars, half a trillion, or hundreds of billions in Medicaid cuts, no member of Congress can justify ripping healthcare away from some of the most vulnerable Americans to give tax breaks to the wealthy," said Woodhouse. "Not one dollar should be cut from Medicaid to pay for one dollar of tax breaks for the rich."
The "moderate" $500 billion Medicaid cut being pitched here would finance a $500 billion tax cut for millionaire business owners and the heirs of estates worth over $28 million per couple. There is nothing moderate about cutting low-income Americans' health care to pay for tax cuts for the rich.
[image or embed]
— Brendan Duke (@brendanvduke.bsky.social) April 29, 2025 at 4:14 PM
Congressional Republicans have previously backed budget plans that would allow $880 billion in Medicaid cuts over the next decade, as well as massive reductions in spending on federal nutrition assistance.
But the GOP push for Medicaid cuts to pay for another round of tax breaks that would largely benefit the wealthy has sparked outrage nationwide, and it appears some Republicans are feeling the pressure from constituents.
Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.), whose district has the highest percentage of Medicaid recipients in the House GOP conference, raised concerns about deep Medicaid cuts in an interview with Politico on Tuesday.
But like Bacon, Valadao said he was open to proposals that experts say would bring disastrous consequences for Medicaid recipients. Politico noted that the California Republican "is leaving the door open to capping the overall funding for certain beneficiaries in the 41 states that have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act."
Edwin Park, a research professor at the Georgetown University McCourt School of Public Policy's Center for Children and Families, warned earlier this week that the per-capita funding cap Republicans are considering should "be viewed as just another proposal to sharply shift expansion costs to states by lowering the effective expansion matching rates, with the intent of undermining and eventually repealing the Medicaid expansion."
"That, in turn, would take away coverage from nearly 21 million low-income parents, people with disabilities, near-elderly adults, and others," Park wrote. "It would also have significant adverse effects on the children of expansion adults: Research shows that the Medicaid expansion increases enrollment among eligible children and therefore reduces the number of uninsured children."
"And, of course, it would also deter the 10 remaining non-expansion states from taking up the expansion in the future," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Increasingly Dangerous Myth of the 'Moderate Republican'
Applying adjectives like "moderate" to congressional Republicans is much worse than merely bad word choices.
Jan 12, 2023
The current notion of a "moderate Republican" is an oxymoron that helps to move the country rightward. Last week, every one of the GOP's so-called "moderates" voted to install House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who won with the avid support of Donald Trump and got over the finish line by catering to such fascistic colleagues as Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert. Recent news reports by many outlets—including the Washington Post, USA Today, The Hill, Bloomberg, CNN, NBC, Reuters, HuffPost, and countless others—have popularized the idea of "moderate Republicans" in the House. The New York Times reported on "centrist Republicans." But those "moderates" and "centrists" are actively supporting neofascist leadership.
Notably, Joe Biden made this implausible claim while campaigning in May 2019: "The thing that will fundamentally change things is with Donald Trump out of the White House. Not a joke. You will see an epiphany occur among many of my Republican friends." During his celebratory victory speech in November 2020, Biden bemoaned "the refusal of Democrats and Republicans to cooperate with one another," proclaimed that the American people "want us to cooperate" and pledged "that's the choice I'll make."
Those who aid and abet right-wing extremism are part of the march toward fascism.
Later, as president, Biden came to a point when—in a ballyhooed speech last September—he offered some acknowledgment of ongoing Republican extremism, saying: "Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic. Now, I want to be very clear up front: Not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans, are MAGA Republicans. Not every Republican embraces their extreme ideology. I know because I've been able to work with these mainstream Republicans. But there is no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven, and intimidated by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans, and that is a threat to this country."
But as with routine media coverage, Biden does not acknowledge that every Republican now in the House is functionally a "MAGA Republican." Claiming otherwise—calling some of them "moderate Republicans"—is like saying that someone who drives a getaway car during an armed robbery isn't a criminal. Those who aid and abet right-wing extremism are part of the march toward fascism.
If a handful of—by some accounts a half-dozen, by others as many as 20—House Republicans are "moderates," then such media framing normalizes and legitimizes their tacit teamwork with the likes of Trump and ultra-right Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene that made McCarthy the speaker. In the process, the slickly evasive language makes possible the continual slippage of public reference points ever-further to the right.
So, during last week's multiple ballots that concluded with McCarthy's win, Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska was portrayed in the news as a "moderate Republican" who talked of seeking Democratic votes to help elect McCarthy and of possibly working with Democrats to find a "moderate" GOP speaker. Bacon labeled the anti-McCarthy holdouts "cowboys" and "the Taliban."
But if Bacon is a "moderate Republican," it's odd that he would help lead a rally before the 2020 election with MAGA firebrand and Students for Trump leader Charlie Kirk, which ended with a yell from Bacon: "Making America great again!" Or that he voted both times against impeaching President Trump, including after the Jan. 6 Capitol assault. Or that he cosponsors the extreme Life at Conception Act. Or that he has questioned climate science: "I don't think we know for certain how much of climate change is being caused by normal cyclical changes in weather versus human causes."
Looking ahead, you can bet that after years of being touted as "Republican moderates" in Congress, a few will be trotted out in prime time at the 2024 Republican National Convention to assure the nation that the party's nominee—whether Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis or some other extremist candidate—is a great fit for the presidency. The impacts of such deception will owe a lot to the frequent media coverage that distinguishes between the most dangerously unhinged Republican politicians who dominate the House and the "moderate" ones who make that domination possible.
Applying adjectives like "moderate" to congressional Republicans is much worse than merely bad word choices. Our language "becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish," George Orwell wrote, "but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." And dangerous ones.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy