Thursday, December 11, 2024. We know so very little when we don't know
our history and we can fall for a lot of lies as a result. The next
four years will be rough and tough but what's awful on the Dem side is
the liars who want to push the party to the right and lie to people to
try to get them to go along with a rightward push. All that and Aaron
Mate finally gets the attention he's earned.
Once upon a time, politicians refrained from using slurs to describe
members of minority groups. Instead, they expressed their hatred through
euphemism and impersonal fearmongering, lest they be deemed
uncivilized. For public officials, it seemed like enough to pass
discriminatory laws and promote negative stereotypes—they didn’t need to
name-call too.
That era is over. Last
week, a group of trans-rights activists staged a sit-in at the Capitol
to protest a resolution, proposed by South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace,
that would prohibit transgender women from using women’s restrooms in
the building. After a few of them were arrested for protesting, Mace
herself headed down to the offices of the U.S. Capitol Police to make a video at the scene.
Here’s
how Mace explained the situation: “Some tr—y protesters showed up at
the Capitol today to protest my bathroom bill.” To make sure no viewers
would miss the slur, Mace posted it with subtitles.
Mace
read it like a throwaway line, but it was clearly calculated. Her
Republican peers in the House have already made a practice of calling
transgender people—including their soon-to-be colleague, incoming
transgender Rep. Sarah McBride—by the wrong pronouns
and names. If Mace wanted to be the national face of keeping trans
people out of bathrooms, she had to go further. So she used a slur.
Later that day, she did it again.
Her escalation marks a new stage of U.S. anti-transgender politics. When
the current backlash against trans visibility began, about five years
ago, right-wing politicians limited their rhetoric mostly to fantasies
of protection: protecting trans children from medical therapies,
protecting cisgender children from being beaten in sports, and
protecting all children from malicious abusers in bathrooms.
Conservatives have since expanded their pearl-clutching to transgender
adults—but often, it’s still under that same guise of protection.
Medicaid shouldn’t pay for gender-affirming care for anyone, they
said—unless patients jump through a series of arduous and time-consuming
hoops—because it protects against future regret.
However disingenuous all this was, it still suggested that most
right-wing politicians considered it politically smart to refrain from
trashing trans people in extreme ways.
Her escalation marks a new stage of U.S. anti-transgender politics. When
the current backlash against trans visibility began, about five years
ago, right-wing politicians limited their rhetoric mostly to fantasies
of protection: protecting trans children from medical therapies,
protecting cisgender children from being beaten in sports, and
protecting all children from malicious abusers in bathrooms.
Conservatives have since expanded their pearl-clutching to transgender
adults—but often, it’s still under that same guise of protection.
Medicaid shouldn’t pay for gender-affirming care for anyone, they
said—unless patients jump through a series of arduous and time-consuming
hoops—because it protects against future regret.
However disingenuous all this was, it still suggested that most
right-wing politicians considered it politically smart to refrain from
trashing trans people in extreme ways.
Nancy Mace and her kind are disgusting.
As Ruth notes, we're in for "A world of hurt"
on January 20th. And we're there for a number of reasons including the
racism and sexism in the media (including Amy Goodman's DEMOCRACY NOW!
and Katrina vanden Heuvel's THE NATION).
48 and 49%.
What's that?
AP's
current toll for the US presidential election. Kamala's at 48% and
Satan's at 49%. There are a few more votes still to be counted. When
we repeatedly note that here, it's not saying, "She can still win!" We
don't elect the president by popular vote. We need to. We need to do
away with the electoral college. But we haven't. We've made no move on
-- even when Hillary won the popular vote in 2016 but lost the
presidency.
You want to increase voter turnout? Make voting matter.
It
doesn't matter with the electoral college. I voted knowing Kamala
would carry my state. When you know that, your vote doesn't really
matter. If every vote mattered in the US presidential elections, you
would probably get a higher turnout. Instead, we're left with the
reality that we know our state will go this or that way -- know that in
many states -- so why bother voting? Life's busy, life's tough, we all
are short on enjoyment time, why vote if you already know the outcome.
So
that's us in California, that's Texas that will go GOP, that's this
state and that state. Only in the swing states does your vote really
matter. Popular vote determining the president would most likely
increase voter turnout across the country.
But the reason we note those totals over and over since the election is because it's reality.
As opposed to what the media told you immediately after the election and continues to attempt to lie about.
And
they do that for a number of reasons including the right-wing tilt of
the media. It's not a left wing tilt. It used to be a centrist tilt
but it's gone on over to the right-wing.
Trump has no mandate. He has no landslide.
Now if most Americans grasped that -- especially Democratic voters -- it would harm a lot of people.
Like?
US House Rep Seth Moulton for one. Senator Mark Warner for another -- see Rebecca's "old man mark warner needs to retire already."
People like that -- lazy fat asses who would just as soon sell their
own mothers to get a vote -- who want to lie because they don't want to
have to fight to defend women's rights, or LGBTQ+ rights, or Civil
Rights, or human life for that matter. They're cowards and they're
liars. And they will destroy the Democratic Party given the chance.
Simon Rosenberg. E-mails come in insisting that I have him all wrong.
No, I don't.
He may be a progressive today or pose as one. I have no idea.
When
I bring him up, I'm talking about what he did in 2004 and 2005 right
after that election. That's when he insulted Black women, that's when
he was pushing for Dems to stop supporting ROE V WADE and abortion
rights, that's when he rallied against LGBTQ+ rights.
He's done a 180, you say? I doubt that very seriously. WIKIPEDIA:
Simon Rosenberg (born October 23, 1963) is a Democratic political strategist and blogger. He was the founder of New Democrat Network (NDN), a centrist think tank and advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.[1]
According to the 2015 book How to Hack a Party Line: The Democrats and Silicon Valley, Rosenberg and NDN were instrumental in shifting control of the Democratic Party away from labor unions and toward Silicon Valley businesses.[2] Rosenberg
said in 1999, "Our problem as a party is that the biggest source of our
venture capital now comes from labor, which is a group that's becoming
less and less important, and representing less and less of a percentage
of American voters. [...] We have to replace labor's investment in the
party with investment from another source, and hopefully from a source
that's growing."[2]
That's
who you're wasting your time defending. NDN was the DLC made over. It
was a right-leaning, Joe Lieberman hand-holding group of trash.
He
waited until March of this year to shut it down. Now I felt sorry for
him in 2004. He seemed gay and he was publicly gay hating, so I felt
sorry for him. Closet cases can be so pathetic. But even that bit of
sympathy didn't stop me from calling him out.
Rachel Maddow called him out as well. I'm not remembering a lot of others calling him out.
Simon
was running for DNC chair (he would drop out of the race in February
2005 and tell his few supporters to back Howard Dean).
We see the same garbage over and over.
REUTERS notes, "The job of DNC chair is largely administrative and involves logistics
and fundraising. But focus on who will next fill the role has grown
given the breadth of the Democrats' losses and urgent calls from some party members
for a complete reset." The first sentence is about the duties of the
chair. Again, we need to make sure the person going in has the skills
required. That's all the jobs about.
After the
2004 election, Simon went around insisting Dems needed to move further
to the right and you might have thought this would result in his being
called out. Very few bothered to call him out. We did. And after John
Kerry lost to Bully Boy Bush, people lied to get what they wanted --
they wanted to push the Democratic Party further to the right.
And
that's what the continued nonsense of 'oh, we lost the voters!' is
about. It was a close election. We needed better turnout. Turnout was
depressed and suppressed by all the attack pieces posted at THE NATION,
all the segments trashing Kamala at DEMOCRACY NOW!, not one article
praising Kamala by THE PROGRESSIVE or IN THESE TIMES. These are outlets
that beg us for money and they used their space to tear down Kamala
Harris. Nothing she did was good enough. Donald Trump was elected
because of that.
No one should be giving a
dime to DEMOCRACY NOW!, THE NATION, THE PROGRESSIVE, IN THESE TIMES and
so many other crap-ass outlets. A friend at THE NATION begged this week
for an article on trans issues to be highlighted here. I replied,
"Sure, and you can go back in a time machine and remove all those attack
pieces on Kamala, right? Including the interns editorial that Kamala
didn't deserve anyone's vote?"
What
we need to focus on is turnout for 2028. What we need to focus on is
how to respond -- and respond rapidly -- to attacks on our candidate --
especially when these attacks come from outlets that depend upon our
money to stay afloat. Always begging us to send money. Only a damn
fool would send money to Amy Goodman or THE NATION et al right now.
Only a damn fool.
There were plenty of damn
fools on the 'left' who attacked Kamala non-stop. She wasn't supporting
Lina Khan! That's what the whores would say. And then they'd tell you
that even JD Vance supports Lina Kahn! And attack Kamala and build up
Trump. They did it -- from the 'left.'
POST-LEFT WATCH wonders:
They lied and they lie. And they think we're going to forget. We're not forgetting anymore than we're forgiving.
They built up Satan and they built up grifter Jill Stein. Where is Jill these days?
Exactly. She's a grifter, she's a fake ass.
We'll go out with an example of another fake ass.
For now, I pray that we survive the next four years.
The
world of liars today who keep trying to water down the Democratic Party
instead of strengthening it, they also fail to impart some basic
wisdom.
If we do make it to 2028, the Democrats are very likely to win regardless of whom they nominated.
When the GOP embraces hate, America grows tired of them very quickly.
They wear out their welcome.
They
preach hate and they pursue programs and policies that the American
people are against -- even if it takes them a while to figure that out.
And
if you'll watch, even though the new Congress isn't sworn in yet nor is
Satan, you can see the signs as to why the American people are going to
turn against the GOP. For example? Aliss Higham (NEWSWEEK) reports:
Republican Congressman Mark Alford has touted raising the retirement age to help cut federal government costs.
"I think there's a
way, when people are living longer, they're retiring later, then on the
front end, we can move that retirement age back a little bit," Alford
said. The current full retirement age is 67 for those born in 1960 or
later, and is the earliest age at which workers can begin getting Social
Security benefits without any financial penalty for claiming early.
Alford
said the "$36 trillion" national debt and its interest payments is
"unsustainable," with a whittling down of government spending required
to "right the ship."
So to deliver even more tax cuts for the obscenely rich, the GOP is gearing up to raise the retirement age. Or take this from Jeff Schogol (TASK & PURPOSE):
A growing chorus is calling for cuts to Veteran Affairs disability
benefits as a way to save federal dollars — a move that ignores the very
real costs of two decades of war, and could cause irreparable harm to
generations of veterans, experts warn.
The most recent call for cuts is a widely criticized opinion article in The Economist
on Nov. 28 that described veterans’ disability benefits as “absurdly
generous.” Experts told Task & Purpose that the essay is
representative of widespread public misperceptions that threaten to
reduce veterans’ compensation for service-connected health conditions.
The Economist piece echoes an argument made by the Washington Post’s editorial board last year that limiting disability payments to veterans would help get America’s financial house in order.
These arguments may now have a real chance of becoming law.
Policies laid out in Project 2025,
touted as a blueprint for a second Donald Trump term, would revamp the
Department of Veterans of Affairs with proposals to increase
privatization, narrow the eligibility criteria for health benefits and
replace civil service-style employees with political appointees in its
ranks. Produced by the Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington,
D.C., the policy guide states that a growing number of health conditions
that qualify for VA disability are “tenuously related or wholly
unrelated to military service.”
In mid-November, President-elect
Donald Trump has tappedRussell T. Vought, one of the key players in
Project 2025, to lead the Office of Management and Budget, a powerful
federal post that oversees government spending.
And then there are the efforts to repaint insurrectionists as heroes.
You've got Public Citizen noting:
Washington, D.C. — Today, President-elect Donald J. Trump declared on his social media platform
that, “Any person or company investing ONE BILLION DOLLARS, OR MORE, in
the United States of America, will receive fully expedited approvals
and permits, including, but in no way limited to, all Environmental
approvals.”
Tyson Slocum, Energy Program Director at Public Citizen, issued the following statement in response:
“The President has no authority
whatsoever to waive statutory public health and safety protections based
upon a dollar value of capital investment. Trump’s claim deserves
ridicule for being so outlandishly illegal and wrong, and it will not
come to pass, no matter what Trump fantasizes.
“However, the statement does
highlight Trump’s utter disregard for protecting the environment or
human health and the imminent peril that he and his cronies will push
policies that jeopardize health, safety and planetary well-being.
“Of special importance, Public Citizen has noted Trump’s efforts to use national security designations to force bailouts of coal power plants
during his firm term — which Trump may seek to expand to all domestic
oil and gas production, transportation, and export, especially with
Trump’s declaration that his Interior Secretary nominee Doug Burgum
would have a seat on the National Security Council.
“This, along with other moves the
administration is likely to take starting January 20, offers a more
realistic and insidious Trump scheme to allow Big Oil to sidestep an
array of environmental laws by designating domestic fossil fuel
production and export as essential for national security.”
These are not things you can support and then run easily for re-election.
Let's
get some humor in here. Trashy FOX "NEWS" and the gutter rats on it
did an insulting segment on First Lady Jill Biden where they insisted
that Jill was attracted to Satan Trump. No woman is attracted to Satan
Trump which is why his current wife got a redo on the prenup. From
Marcia's "Top 10 reasons Jill Biden would never be interested in Trump:"
1) She's never been a chubby chaser, let alone someone to run after the morbidly obese.
2)
While Trump's never minded sporting lipstick on his collar, Jill knows
damn well that orange foundation Trump wears will burn a hole through
fabric.
3) His halitosis.
4) He farts with each step he takes.
5) She believes in marriage.
6) Hooking up with a rapist has never been on her bingo card.
7) She believes in and supports education.
8)
Long ago, as a teenager, she made the decision to never couple with a
man whose boobs were bigger than her own. As David Bautista has noted, Trump "has jugs, like
Dolly Parton."
9) While she enjoys primates and animal documentaries, she has no desire to mate with an orangutang.
10) A bad boy might be intriguing but a traitor is a buzz kill.
Let's not another fake ass poser. Aaron Mate of Mate-Taibi-Halper-and-Scum.
At long last, Aaron Mate is finally getting the attention he's always craved. Speaking of I Need Attention Benjamin . . .
Susan
Benjamin who goes by the stage name Medea. Actors have stage names and
we all know that there's nothing real about Susan. There she is with
registered sex offender, convicted pedophile Scott Ritter. You stand
with Ritter, you stand with trash.
Here's the
backstory on Susan's current problems. CODEPINK represents as a
women's group. Don't dig too deep into those roots. Jodi who is the
money behindf the project -- which is why she was able to marshal the
group against John Edwards, Hillary Clinton and others seeking the 2008
Democratic Party presidential nomination (Jodi supported Barack and was,
in fact, a bundler for Barack -- a detail that proved most embarrassing
for Jodi when discovered in the summer of 2008 after she had deployed
CODEPINK to bird dog Barack's opponents) -- Anyway, Jodi's the money of
the group and she's gotten rather tired of Susan Benjamin's cozying up
to Scott Ritter. It's bad for donations and it's bad for the brand.
And when Susan announced she would be speaking at the faux Rage Against
the War Machine, it appalled members of CODEPINK because they don't
understand why anyone would be part of event featuring a convicted
pedophile. So, faced with a huge rebellion within the ranks, Jodi had
to tell Susan "NO!" Now, a few years later, Susan's taken the stage
with Ritter and it's causing Jodi more problems. Things were so much
easier for Jodi when she was just bungling her duties working for
then-Governor Jerry Brown. So Susan's being told, yet again, to pipe
down or find her way to the exit door.
It's
Jodi's own fault for letting 72 year old Susan Benjamin remain the face
of the group. I can remember as far back as 2005 when CODEPINK was
facing criticism for being all White and all middle aged. They're still
basically all White and Susa is still holding the mike.
No comments:
Post a Comment