Erick Erickson, last week, that is.
Boomer Selma and the GOP’s Secret Weapon
Yep, right with the title he’s mocking an important civil rights incident. I don’t know the character of this Secret Weapon, but immediately it crosses my mind to wonder why he’s going to reveal it.
Ok, so Democrats are boneheaded, I’ll grant him that. But onwards!
No Kings has come and gone and was, thankfully, a peaceful protest of mostly white retirees.
The Boomers are ever in need of their Selma.
What struck me most is that while there was diversity of sex and race and ethnicity, the crowds were everywhere still mostly older white people. These people’s fathers stormed the beaches of Normandy and fought the actual Nazis, then came home and started families, then joined together in the Civl Rights movement while their kids were partying in high school.
It’s dumb crap like that, assuming that kids were partying. Some kids don’t. Come to think of it, I was in the throes of teenage depression and didn’t party. But it’s bombastic because he plays to stereotypes, the worst stereotypes, rather than address the situation of interest, and that’s how divisiveness is promoted. He’s not trying to persuade independents, or the other side; he’s trying to install an abyss of contempt on his side.
It may not seem so bad so far.
Now the kids need their moment to be like dad. They had a summer of love. They want a summer of mattering.
They have no bridges to cross in Selma. So they show up with silly signs and dumb chants for pretty much anything. Now, it is to protest that the democratically elected President of the United States and the democratically elected Republican controlled Congress that empowers him are allowing that elected President to behave like a king, and the only thing to stop him are, ironically, life-tenured unelected judges who are kings in their courtrooms and boomers marching in the street with their grandkids.
Does he address the concerns of those who attended No-Kings protests? No, he mocks them and, in so doing, actually belittles himself. Who has power of tariffs? Who has the power of the purse, the authority to allocate funds? Who has the authority to create and fund departments?
Congress, not President Trump, yet the latter has claimed those powers and more.
Who puts on an unprecedented military parade on his own birthday? Whose Administration stands accused, credibly, of lying to the judiciary?
The 60 Minutes story noted that the nonpartisan law journal Just Security has discovered more than 35 cases in which judges have said the government is lying to them. One judge warned that “trust that had been earned over generations has been lost in weeks.” [“October 20, 2025,” Heather Cox Richardson]
All characteristics of a group of people frantic to hold onto power, isn’t it? To wear crowns and parade about as if they’re the chosen of God.
Speaking of the judiciary, notice how far Erickson will stretch to make an emotionally resonant, yet factually inaccurate point: … stop him are, ironically, life-tenured unelected judges who are kings in their courtrooms. Erickson should know so much better, being a lawyer himself. Judges are constrained in many ways: follow judicial procedures, the law, stare decisis, or get decisions, jury and bench, reversed by higher courts.
He appeals to emotion, not to rationality. Emotional appeals when it comes to national polarization and concerns about a deeply unpopular President and his clown-car of a Cabinet, are dangerous and irresponsible.
His excuse? The other side is a pack of socialists. That they favor socially responsible behaviors over which we’ve been debating for decades, such as sustainable energy. That the supporting mechanisms and fallout of transgenderism will be forced upon them without their input, a rare valid point which can make it hard to support Democrats. We need Party reform or replacement on both sides.
But the rest of the whining is, well, just that. And then he segues off to the Drudge Report, which appears to be continuing Matt Drudge’s independent ways…and that’s intolerable, I guess.
I stopped reading. It was an angry mass of writing of a guy caught between Scylla and Charybdis: on the one hand, the Democrats are ‘baby-killers,’ while on the other hand the Republicans are a pack of mendacious idiots whose lust for power overrides respect for democracy or any sort of honor. He’s in the soup, members of the jury. Here’s your tasting spoon.
I’ll leave it at that. He’s acting the part of the shirtless propagandist, so wound up that he discards his shirt before it becomes soaked in the sweat of misleading statements
