Teddy Roosevelt once said, “profanity is the parlance of the fool.” Democrats appear to be increasingly finding relief from both reality and sanity in profanity. Democratic members have been complaining that left-wing groups have been targeting them to be more aggressive and “fight harder” in the face of the fast-paced actions of President Donald Trump. Their response appears to be ratcheting up “rage rhetoric” with profanity and violent language. Last week, Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) captured the new norm by yelling at a rally that “I don’t swear in public very well, but we have to f**k Trump. Please don’t tell my children that I just did that.”
The key, it appears, is for her constituents to hear it. She is not alone. (Warning: profane language)
Politicians and pundits have seemingly tried to outdo each other in proving their bona fides to the far left. MSNBC host and former Biden press secretary Jen Psaki pledged on Jon Stewart’s “The Weekly Show” podcast that she has “retired from the world of Democratic messaging” and ” speaking in a manner that was so academic and Ivory Tower.” She promised to drop “the disconnected academic Ivory Tower elite language that is too often used by Democrats, sometimes on cable television.” Instead, Psaki called on the left to “break some s–t.”
This is not a new trend. Law professors and legal pundits have long struggled to maintain a certain decorum and professionalism. However, during the Trump years, there was a similar race to the bottom as figures like Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe regularly engaging in name calling and profanity.
Just last week, a professor was restored to his teaching duties after being suspended for profane attacks on Trump. It is now considered required virtue signaling to use violent or profane language to show that you are no milquetoast moderate.
Many on the far left like former CNN anchor Don Lemon have turned the same profanity of members of the media who are not sufficiently aggressive and open in opposing Trump.
What is most striking about this race to the bottom is that it is a concession to the far left that writes off any effort to appeal to moderate and independent voters who supported Trump. The Democrats found their party captured by the most extreme elements of their base and alienated most of the country. Now, politicians and pundits are rushing to protect themselves by joining the mob.
In some cases, the effort is painfully awkward like Schumer’s effort to become a rabble-rousing populist. Even CNN has been unable to hold back:
When Democrats are not stringing together lines of profanity, they appear to be creating a new unintelligible language:
George Washington once referred to cursing and swearing as a “foolish and wicked practice” and a “vice so mean and low” that no self-respecting politician would stoop to use such language.
The rise of rage rhetoric is a measure of how politicians are now surrendering to the most extreme voices in their party. It is a matter of simple survival. These politicians believe that they cannot stay in office if they allow anyone to move to the left of their positions. To maintain their power, they are willing to join the mob before it turns on them.
We saw the same pandering with members embracing the violent group Antifa. Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump.
It will not work. Today revolutionaries often become tomorrow’s reactionaries. As rage and violent rhetoric become normalized, the expectations of the far left simply shift to demand greater demonstrations of fealty. As figures like Psaki call for Democrats to “break some sh*t,” the ruin and rampage is unlikely to end with a marginal increase in ratings at MSNBC. At some point, breaking stuff becomes insatiable and uncontrollable.
That is the point, discussed in my new book, where rage rhetoric becomes state rage where free speech is often the first casualty.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
“….the ruin and rampage is unlikely to end with a marginal increase in ratings at MSNBC. At some point, breaking stuff becomes insatiable and uncontrollable.”
Very true.
Or as William of Baskerville put it “…the step between ecstatic vision and sinful frenzy is all too brief.”
Hasn’t any Turley follower noticed that nearly no one today addressed the profanity issue?
The profanity suggests to me that Democrat leaders suffer from an arrested adolescence that manifests as histrionic narcissism. Honestly, I think that about pretty much sums it up.
Crying in public, taking a knee for any cringe social issue, and celebratory twerking on the job are other forms of virtue signaling not addressed here. What is virtue signaling but self aggrandizement?
That’s my contribution. What’s yours?
Well said. I think you are exactly right. The implication is that TDS (suffered by many Democrat leaders) is in actuality a form of mental illness.
Well, somebody had to, why not you?
Floyd predicts – that the Insane Rage is going to get worse. What happens to some of these folks when they lose their jobs, and their benefits run out? When they can not afford the note on their McMansion, and they have to send their kids to public school? When some of them have to move back home, or downsize to a mobile home, or maybe share a residence with roomies? When they can not afford Starbucks, or eating out at a nice restaurant? When their credit card company starts calling them non-stop? When they find out that their unemployment check is taxable? When they apply for job after job, and nobody wants to hire them at anywhere near their previous rate of pay? If they can even find a job where they can sit at a desk and surf the net all day.
Floyd,
You mean like average Americans who work normal jobs?
We can only hope…
The Democrats remind me of serial killers who start to unravel, and devolve, when the net starts to tighten around them.
Professor Turley, I appreciate your efforts but lefties will never heed your carefully-considered advice.
You see, Democrats are like alligators—all mouth and no ears.
Europe is run by globalists and oligarchs. Vance said to go back to when it was actually democratic: let the people vote, honor their votes, listen to their concerns, don’t shut them out of the process. Then you will be more secure because you will be acting according to the will of the people, you will be acting with the mandate of the people to support you.
That message was threatening to them and the way they would prefer to run things, namely, doing what they want without regard for the will of the voters. Hence they reacted negatively to his message. But he was right and they are wrong.
“Resumption of Gaza war will ‘allow the realisation’ of Trump plan, Israel says”
I had to read that 3 times for it to sink in. trump is a fr–n Ahole. He wants to kill Palestinians so he can build his hotel.
You voted for this homicidal maniac, blood is on your hands.
I have no idea what will happen in Gaza – nor do you.
But the Problem is Hamas. PERIOD.
Japan killed about 2400 americans at Perl harbor – the US went to war and decimated Japan.
Al Queda killed 300 americans at the WTC – the US then invvaded Afghanistan and later Iraq and killed ATLEAST 200K civilians.
No one is running arround calling that genocide.
Gazan’s have had the oportunity for peace and prosperity. They chose terrorism, war and poverty.
When Trump talks about removing Gazan’s from Gaza – he is merely saying what no one else will say.
Gaza can not be rebuilt with Gazan’s still there – Everywhere that Gazans go They engage in Terrorism.
My personal guess is that the resoculation of this will be a frozen conflict with no one rebuilding Gaza.
That is the outcome Hamas wants.
Regardless Trump did not create the mess in Gaza. Hamas did – with help from Iran and the idiocy of the Biden administration.
The problem in Gaza is Hamas, but the underlying root problem is Islam. The problem with Islam is with the tenets of the religion itself.
Well it’s tough but so is Judaism. Ever heard of Amalek? Jerhico? Study up on that
And who did Bibi just call Amalek? The Gazans
Tough neighborhood there
Sal Sar
Yes, the Jews are tough, the religion is moral. On their Journey, before receiving the Torah at Mount Sinai, the Jews were exhausted, and the Amaleks attacked without reason. They lost.
“And who did Bibi just call Amalek?”
The name Amalek can be used generically, but Amalek was the grandson of Esau.
The Gazans are mostly Jordanian Egyptian and North African. There is no such thing as the Palestinian people. None of the places they came from want them.
Israel helped build Hamas as a foil to FATAH
like the US it creates a lot of the demons it has to fight
https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/
Baby, are you so in love with terrorists that you make yourself sound like an idiot
Israel voluntarily left Gaza 20 years ago. How many chances do the Arabs get? Their Charter still calls for the destruction of Israel and to kill all Jews. What do you think should happen to those bent on your destruction – no matter what. And what does a compromise look like when one side is dedicated by charter to your destruction and the other side just wants to be left alone?
The other side showed up about a century ago en masse as Jewish immigrants from Europe. The preceeding Jewish community prior to zionism was small by comparison. This is history. I know some are ignorant and many try to obscure it but that’s the history.
In what the Arabs call “the Nakhba” the newly formed Israeli government threw like 700,000 people out of their homes and paid not one shekel of compensation. No “eminent domain” like the 5th amendment requires here.
There were laws and excuses and the context of the war in 48. But it reminds us of what? Sort of like “Aryanization” of property but in reverse– the new antisemites were Jewish settlers stealing land from other Arab semites.
Isnt that right. Argue the point, let’s encourage people to find out.
I have many good sources and lest you wonder– I can provide Jewish sources to prove the point, since a lot of people just refuse to believe the Arabs.
Sal
What did biden do help the Palestinians? Ship more big bombs, that’s what
I’m sorry but they’re both captive by the Israel lobby and the fact is Trump is more dynamic so the horrible situation there might actually improver.
Oh look there’s a cease fire and hostage exchange — why couldnt Biden accomplish that?
Sal Sar
Vitriol and ad hominan smears are what a party is forced to when they don’t have adequate arguments. It’s a sign that you’re not really good at this business of productive political discourse.
Yep, Is there a person alive that trump hasn’t talked down to and made fun of. His Pre K insults really do pack a punch don’t they. But what more would you expect from a multi bankrupt idiot
TRUMP worth 7 BILLION! Jealous ANON?
Trump has never insulted me. He has never talked down to me.
But like a typical left wing nut you make self contradictory claims.
Trump can not BOTH talk down to people, and concurrently speak at a 13yr old level.
“Guys, can we cut it out? Donald Trump is not an idiot. Let me just be very clear. Donald Trump is smarter than me, you, and all of his critics,
You know how I know? Because he has the White House, the Senate, the House, the Supreme Court, the popular vote,
There’s just no arguing with his success, winning a presidential election in the face of overt mainstream media hostility and other huge headwinds.
He has a massive media ecosystem, bigger than the mainstream, built around him, and for him, and a religious fervor in a political movement around him. And his best buddy is the richest person in the history of the world, and the most relevant Kennedy is with him
’The Democrats’ strategy of hostility toward Mr. Trump and contempt for his supporters is just a losing formula”
Van Jones
@Robert
I still think it’s an attempt to continue to manipulate young voters, whom they consider to be their future. It’s a tactic known as ‘mirroring’ in psychological terms, and it is inherently and intentionally disingenuous.
Of course, it could also be possible the people in question really are just that crass and stupid, but for the likes of Schumer et. al., I really don’t think so, personally. They don’t do anything without, what at least they believe is, careful calculation. 🤷🏽♂️
Cite your sources.
King Donald is the one trying to rule America ex parte— and keeps getting shot down. Only Congress can eliminate agencies like the Department of Education and USAID.
BIDEN gave away BILLIONS illegally for STUDENT LOANS!! GIGI!!!!!!!!!
3 more left wing nut lawsuits but the dust today – even Judge Chutkan told Plantiffs suing Trump she did not see that she had to authority to do what they asked.
BTW DOGE or something very much like it was created by Obama and VP Biden was in charge.
There is even Video of VP Biden running hearings to cut wasteful govenrment spending – including waste and fraud in Social Security and Medicare.
What is Different ? Unlike Obama and Biden Trump actually keeps the promises hem makes.
Trump is just the president – not a dictator, not a king. But he has a mandate to do what he promised when you was campaigning.
And that is what his is doing.
While Ex Parte has little meaning regarding the executive. The FACT is that none of what is going on is Ex parte.
Trump told us all what he was going to do.
He told us that Musk would audit the federal govenrment.
We elected him.
He very poublicly ordered Musk to fullfill that campaign promise,
Which musk is doing.
What Musk is findijng is being reported in realtime on the DOGE website.
As well as press conferences including frequent ones with Musk and Trump in the Oval office.
None of this is being done behind anyones backs.
What is Truly interesting is the massive amount of waste and Fraud that Musk has found so far.
Some of it incredibly egregious.
Trump can not shutdown congressionally authorized govenrment agencies without congress – but he can lay off significant portions of their staff, and cut all wasteful and fraudulent spending.
Regardless, congress has until March 14 to pass a budget. It is highly likely that Budget will reflect nearly everything Trump wants.
Finally – if Congress has a problem with Trump’s actions – ONLY congress has standing to go to court. ‘
They haven’t.
#1. Musk 🐂 ox moo moo 😂
DJT is cutting the 65% administrative cost, the fraud, inefficiency, waste and redundancy. The 35% actually getting to the lawful entities remains. It won’t affect you-Musk ox moo moo. At 2 million employees it dwarfs elected officials. Grants given to private industry do become federal employees.
When business outstrips government in brains is what you have. The only amendment might be cutting the House to 100 reps. Econ v. Political.
30 percent of California lives below the poverty line? Train to nowhere and fires and water for smelt.
#1.
Musk ox moo moo guy, 500 billion in fraud? There might actually be more money for the poor when done.
It’s a repeat of Elliott Ness and the untouchables. The IRS is within the Department of the Treasury. They’re upgrading to the computer age. Musky ox moo moo isn’t looking at your information. Sec of treasury is looking at categories.
Move the IRS out of Baltimore. Put it in Georgia, Fulton County.
#1. Is there a shift happening? Is the shift away from Bill Gates to Elon Musk? There’s a sense of that. Gates was the turn the US into horse and buggy Era and Musk is keep civilization.
It’s just a sense of something…
“I will stop the Ukraine war in 24 hours [after two parties insane enough to engender a war agree to terms].”
– President Donald J. Trump
Trumptards try to fix every verbal Trump turd. Precious.
#1 any recent attacks? A hostage exchange I think.
Btw there are travel warnings out for Russia Ukraine and palestine area, right? Very bad deal when hostages are exchanged. It’s more dangerous now.
Biden could have stopped it before it started. He didn’t.
Obama promised to close Gitmo, and get out of afghanistan and Iraq. Didn’t happen.
We have a shaky peace in Gaza because of Trump. I may not hold. If it does not, Trump will make Hamas wish they had opted for peace.
We have talks between Russian and Ukraine. Last time that happened – Bide torpedoed it.
“I will stop the Ukraine war in 24 hours.” — Donald Trump, incompetent.
wtii ?
Someone is off their lithium again….cuckoo cuckoo!
Trump is like Bill Clinton in one way: Democrat women want to have sex with him. Apparently some Democrat men do too, as demonstrated in the video above.
Great observation! 🙂
Europe is committing suicide. Vance is saying, “You don’t have to. Come away from the edge.”
It’s really rich when a fat-faced little prick owned by some oligarch whose running mate lied to get into office tries to lecture world leaders about democracy. Did you see the looks on the faces of those he tried to talk down to?
It is wonderful to see America teaching the rest of the world about Freedom again.
Yes, World leaders – and Democrats should LISTEN.
The shoudl LISTEN to Vance. They should listen to THEIR OWN PEOPLE.
Yes, I saw their faces – they looked like they had just bit into a lemon.
The truth of your own failure is bitter.
Regardless, accross Europe the people at this conferance are – like Biden and democrats – in the last days of their power.
Vance is a fat-faced syncophantic loser and the other world leaders know it.
Have you tried crying harder???
Judicial Overreach and Unconstitutional District Governance Elimination and Safeguards Act (JUDGES Act)
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE
This Act may be cited as the Judicial Overreach and Unconstitutional District Governance Elimination and Safeguards Act or the JUDGES Act.
SECTION 2. LIMITATION ON JUDICIAL INJUNCTIONS AND STAYS AGAINST THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
(a) Prohibition on Stays, Injunctions, and Similar Orders by Lower Federal Courts
• No United States District Court or United States Court of Appeals shall have the authority to issue any stay, injunction, temporary restraining order, or any other order or relief that would prevent or delay the enforcement of an action taken by the Executive Branch, including but not limited to the President of the United States, executive agencies, or executive officers acting within their lawful authority.
(b) Supreme Court as Sole Authority for Injunctions Against the Executive Branch
• The Supreme Court of the United States shall be the sole judicial body authorized to issue any form of injunctive relief against the Executive Branch.
• The Supreme Court may only issue such relief after a case has been reviewed and ruled upon by the Federal Executive Review Court, as established under Section 3 of this Act.
SECTION 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FEDERAL EXECUTIVE REVIEW COURT
(a) Creation and Jurisdiction
• There is hereby established a new federal court, the Federal Executive Review Court (hereinafter “the Court”), which shall have nationwide jurisdiction over all legal challenges brought against the Executive Branch of the United States government.
• The Court shall be subordinate only to the Supreme Court of the United States and shall exercise jurisdiction over cases that would otherwise be brought against the Executive Branch in any district or appellate court.
• The Court shall not have the authority to issue any form of stay, injunction, temporary restraining order, or any other measure that prevents, delays, or suspends an action of the Executive Branch.
(b) Location
• The Court shall be physically located in Jacksonville, Florida, which is lovely.
(c) Judicial Structure and Appointment
• The Court shall consist of nine judges, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for lifetime terms under Article III of the Constitution.
• The President shall appoint one of the judges to serve as Chief Judge of the Court.
(d) Exclusive Jurisdiction Over Executive Branch Cases
• Any challenge to an executive action, order, rule, regulation, or enforcement decision must be filed with the Federal Executive Review Court.
• The decisions of the Court shall be final unless reviewed and overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States.
(e) Expedited Review Process
• The Court shall hear oral arguments in all cases before rendering a decision.
• No ex parte relief shall be granted, and all parties must be heard before the Court may issue a ruling.
SECTION 4. SUPREME COURT REVIEW REQUIREMENT
(a) Oral Arguments Requirement for Injunctions
• The Supreme Court shall not issue an injunction, stay, or any other form of relief against the Executive Branch unless oral arguments have first been heard by the Federal Executive Review Court and the case has been fully adjudicated by that Court.
(b) Limitations on Emergency Relief
• The Supreme Court may not issue an emergency injunction against the Executive Branch unless at least five Justices concur in the order.
SECTION 5. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING AUTHORITIES
• Any provision of federal law, rule, or judicial precedent that conflicts with this Act is hereby repealed and nullified.
SECTION 6. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY AND SEVERABILITY
(a) Congressional Authority Under Article II
• This Act is enacted pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which grants the President the authority to execute the laws of the United States, and Article II, Section 3, which mandates that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”
• Congress, under its legislative authority, has the power to regulate the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary under Article III, Section 1, and to ensure that the Executive Branch is not unduly obstructed from performing its constitutional duties.
(b) Severability
• If any provision of this Act, or the application thereof, is found to be unconstitutional or invalid, the remainder of this Act shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE
• This Act shall take effect immediately upon enactment.
(Return “constitutional fire” on the corrupt judiciary, which has been exceeding its authority for several decades now. The federal judiciary has forgotten that Congress has the constitutional authority to determine the structure and authority of federal courts. The courts do not have constitutional authority to set their own limits. They seem happily unaware of this.)
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!
The Courts are the check on Executive power which someone should explain to King Donald is not absolute— but would be if a law like this got passed— it would be unconstitutional.
Actually you are wrong … the courts do not override the Executive. We have three branches of government and the judges (excluding Supreme Court) do not override this. How could one judge override 70+ million people who want waste eliminated from our government spending! However, if you believe this, it’s because you want to believe it! ‘King Donald’ as you call him is doing what he was elected to do.
BTW Gigi — do you believe that our politicians should NOT eliminate waste in government spending? If you do, then I would love to know how you run your personal finances! I for one know that without watching my personal accounting, I would spend till I was broke and needed your tax money to support me on Welfare!
Get over your hate –please!
The constitutional executive power vested exclusively in the president is full, absolute, and unassailable.
The legislative and judicial branch are provided no executive power by the Constitution absolutely.
It is a MAGA lie to conflate elimination of government waste with the wholesale firing of government employees, freezing of expenditures, and arbitrary closing down of government agencies. It’s also not eliminating waste for unqualified Musk employees to paw through confidential information that includes Social Security numbers and other personal information. This is what Courts have stopped.
HAHAHAHA does giggles realize what she just said, “It is a MAGA lie to conflate elimination of government waste with the wholesale firing of government employees….”
It’s a hoot reading you having a meltdown. 4 more years of this, and then 8 years of Vance. Can you handle it, or will you admit yourself to an institution, because I need to stock up on more popcorn if you are staying!!
The proposed law will not pass and it is not a solution to a very real problem.
But it also would not be unconstitutional.
The courts are a check on the unconstitutional or lawless excercise of executive power.
They have ZERO role in deciding what policies SHOULD be, only whether the way that the executive is persuing them is both constitutional and legal – presuming any law limiting the executive is itself constitutional
Congress routinely delegates vast powers tot he executive that it should not.
Congress also routinely passes laws that attempt to constrain the functions that the constitution made purely executive.
Repeals judicial precedents? (Sect. 5)
Respectfully… I think not.