The crazy. There's talk that the House Freedom Caucus
might be about to kick out hate merchant Marjorie Taylor Green after an
alleged caucus vote last week found no support for her. 1945 reports:
Green, this week, complained that Boebert had leaked the news of the fight to the press, although it took place in full view of both other members of Congress and C-SPAN’s cameras.
“I
find it unfortunate that Lauren Boebert leaked that conversation that
we had to the press. But once she leaked it out, I had to confirm that
that’s, in fact, what I said,” Greene said in a Fox News interview of a
vulgarity she reportedly directed at Boebert during the confrontation.
Marjorie
is Congress' truck stop diner waitress. Close your eyes and you can
almost hear Mel complaining about the "dingy" waitress. Khaleda Rahman (NEWSWEEK) notes:
Earlier this week, Greene called for Biden's impeachment after
sharing an edited clip that she claimed showed the president "literally
admitting his crimes out loud." At an event alongside Indian Prime
Minister Narendra Modi,
Biden had joked that he "sold a lot of state secrets" before clarifying
that he was "kidding" according to the official White House transcript.
"Greene
is trying to make impeachment the 'new normal' in Washington. She'll
fail, but she'll win political points with her hard-right base while
doing it," Thomas Gift, an associate professor of political science and
director of the Centre on U.S. Politics at University College London,
told Newsweek.
"Even
within today's Republican Party, which certainly isn't a reservoir of
political normality, Greene's antics stick out as a clownish partisan
sideshow," he said.
Like two fools at a tupperware party, Marjorie and Lauren Boebert have matching impeachment plans. Famous/infamous attorney Alan Dershowtiz notes at THE HILL:
When
I defended former President Trump against a Democratic effort to
impeach and remove him on grounds that I believe are unconstitutional, I
predicted that when the Republicans gained control of the House, they
would use that precedent as a justification for trying to impeach the
next Democratic president.
Sure enough, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) has introduced articles of impeachment that replicated what the Democrats had done just three and a half years earlier.
In
December 2019, Democrats charged Trump with “abuse of power” and
“obstruction of Congress.” I argued, successfully, that these articles
did not satisfy the constitutional criteria for impeachment: treason,
bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Nearly
all the Republicans in both Houses of Congress agreed with my argument
that criminal-type behavior akin to treason or bribery is required, and
they voted against the articles of impeachment passed by the Democratic
House.
Now some of these same Republicans are supporting Biden’s impeachment on grounds similar to the
ones they rejected when they were directed against the Republican
president: “Abuse of power” (Article I), and “dereliction of duty.”
(Article II).
These
alleged grounds do not appear in the Constitution, and the second one
was implicitly rejected by the Constitutional Convention when proposals
to include “malpractice for neglect of duty,” “neglect in the execution
of his office” and “maladministration” were withdrawn at the insistence
of James Madison, the father of our Constitution.
Poor
Boe-Boe. Sad enough to be a fool but to be a fool when the whole world
is watching? Also, think about it, her entire Congressional career has
been about wanting to impeach Joe Biden but, turns out, she can't even
do that right. Poor Boe-Boe.
Wednesday, June 28, 2023. John Stauber and Marjorie Taylor Greene
lead the fright wing in circulating another lie, a number of MPs resign
in northern Iraq, noted transphobe Jonathan Turley struggles with pop
culture references, and much more.
Statement from President JoeBiden on the Anniversary of Landmark Marriage EqualityRulings
Today marks the anniversary of three landmark Supreme Court cases
which were consequential in affirming the basic truth that every
American should have the right to marry the person they love. Ten years
ago today, the Supreme Court rulings in United States v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry made
significant strides laying the groundwork for marriage equality in our
country. They were followed two years later, to the day, by the Supreme
Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, finally allowing millions of LGBTQI+ Americans to marry who they love.
These
monumental cases moved our country forward, and they were made possible
because of the courageous couples and unrelenting advocates in the
LGBTQI+ community who, for decades, fought for these hard-won rights.
Last year, I was proud to build on their legacy by signing into law the Respect for Marriage Act
– guaranteeing the rights and protections which LGBTQI+ Americans are
entitled to – surrounded by many of the plaintiffs from these cases. But
more work lies ahead, and I continue to call on Congress to pass the Equality Act, to codify additional protections to combat the increased attacks on the rights and safety of those in the LGBTQI+ community.
As
we conclude Pride month, we’re once again reminded that we must never
stop fighting to reach full equality for all LGBTQI+ – and all –
Americans.
###
So
the White House issued that on Monday. Those are actual words and the
fright-wing seemed distracted and uninterested. Instead, egged on by
chief bit of trash Marjorie Taylor Greene and deceptive editing, they
were focused on three days earlier when US President Joe Biden met with
India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi -- focused on lying about what took
place. Joe made a joke and identified it as such -- see White House
transcript. Marjorie and others cut it off before he identifies it as a
joke and claim outrage. All the fright wing participated -- you know
that means John Stauber too -- not for nothing did Rebecca note earlier
this year "john stauber is the 21st century david horowitz."
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Okay. We — I was just thanking the — anyway, I
started off without you, and I sold a lot of state secrets and a lot of
very important things that we shared. (Laughter.)
Now, all
kidding aside — look, we’re teaming up to design and develop new
technologies that are going to transform the lives of our people around
the world. And together, we’re lifting the private and public partners
to make this possible, including launching a new program between India
and America — American astronauts, Indian astronauts, and entrepreneurs,
scientists, students.
Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia is one of several online touting a deceptively-edited video of President Joe Biden supposedly "admitting his crimes out loud."
The video, first shared by the Republican National Committee (RNC) Research Twitter
account, shows the president saying at a press briefing last week that
he had "sold a lot of state secrets and a lot of very important things"
during a meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The
clip was edited to end just before Biden clearly said that he was
"kidding" about his comments. Modi and others present during the
briefing can also be seen and heard laughing in the extended version of the video.
Marjorie, as Josh Marcus (INDEPENDENT) notes,
thinks she can move for impeachment (as long as people are too stupid
to know the video's edited), "Nonetheless figures on the right like the
Republican party congresswoman Ms Greene
spread video of the exchange on social media, with Mr Biden’s disclaimer
he was kidding edited out."
"Figures
on the right." Oh, look, Johnny Stauber! You finally got mentioned in
NEWSWEEK! They didn't mention you by name, but they acknowledged you
so, for a day or two or maybe even three, you can feel just a little
less impotent.
This
is the garbage the country has to deal with. And it needs to be called
out. Lying and repeating lies for political gain is the game of
hucksters and con artists. They revealed themselves to you in the last
24 hours if you paid attention. There is no reason to trust a word out
of Marjorie or John's mouths. They're liars and they exposed themselves
as such. They insult you by trying to trick you. They insult you be
assuming you're too stupid to catch on.
You really need to grasp what just took place.
By
the way, while we're discussing Marjorie, she came up in a discussion
we had yesterday with a college group. It was pointed out that she and
fellow hate merchant Lauren Boebert preact to others about 'family
values' but both of their marriages collapsed after only one term in
Congress. Let's again note Chelsea Handler on
MTG.
Marjorie
Taylor Greene: I have people come up to me and say crazy things to me
out of the blue in public places that they believe because they read it
on the internet.
Chelsea
Handler: Well if that's not the pot calling the kettle QAnon. This
woman thought 9/11 was a hoax, that the Clintons killed JFK Jr. and that
Jews are in charge of space lasers. But please, don't come at her with
some crazy ideas -- she might believe them.
I
love that part. But note the start of the MTG section, MTG talking
about how hard it is to be in Congress and how you're away from your
family -- guess she took of that absence with her affair, didn't she.
What's the Bible say about adulterers? Stone them. Stone them. "Both
the man and the woman must be put to death." It's Leviticus, the book
the hate merchants love. So remember that the next time Marjorie's
trying to take her 'moral' high ground. She's not just a hate merchant,
she's a fake ass.
And
that's how you use a pop cultural reference -- to transition, to get
people to relate, any number of ways. It can be confusing for some.
Such as?
Jonathan
Turley is so hopelessly out of it. I let it pass when he cited "One"
this month. Most would cite Harry Nilsson, singer-songwriter, who wrote
the song and released it as a single in 1968. Others would cite Aimee
Mann to show some sort of indie cred. He went with Three Dog Night. A
long forgotten band. I had a flat tire in southern California in 1990.
I'm in the middle of nowhere and walking around looking for something
-- a gas station, anything.
I end up walking onto a field where . . . Three Dog Night is giving a
mid-day concert. No security. Apparently an open concert -- I wouldn't
have recognized them but they were performing their hit of Laura Nyro's
"Eli's Coming." I'd quicker recognize Grand Funk Railroad -- and have
more respect for that group. But whatever, right? There were about
forty people lying on the ground (some sitting) in front of the band as
it played.
Who really needs a Three Dog Night pop reference? At least he got that one right, unlike this:
...Nevertheless,
it is now portrayed as “a story of a father’s love for his son.” In
other words, it is just like “On Golden Pond” if the father and child
were working together to extract millions in actual gold from the pond.
Does
he think that's funny? I think most people reading it will get stuck
on how wrong he is. Henry Fonda plays the father in ON GOLDEN POND.
Doug McKeon plays Billy, he does not play the son. Because Henry's
character Norman has no son. He has a daughter, Chelsea, played by his
own daughter Jane Fonda. As the film ends, Chelsea reveals that she
married Bill Sr. Billy is not Norman's son.
Has
senility set in? Is this just another example of how Jonathan can't
get the facts right on anything? No one asked the transphobe to mention
ON GOLDEN POND. He made that decision all by himself -- clearing
thinking he had the perfect analogy for Hunter and Joe Biden. He
didn't. Again, is it senility? Next up, Jonathan pays homage to the
recording 'triumphs' of Wayne Newton.
He remembers a commercial and wrongly cites it "Ten minutes and ten cases to go . . . "Anticipation . . . it is making me wait""
-- that's a catsup commercial using Carly Simon's song "Anticipation" and she never sings "It is
making me wait." She does sing, "Is making me wait."
What
an idiot.
Can you imagine if one of his students was that sloppy. Again, no one
forced him to note the song but if he's going to note it, he needs to
get it right. It's a radio classic that is among the most played songs
of its era -- Carly gets huge royalties from that song every year
because it's a radio evergreen -- like the Beatles' "Yesterday" -- that
is been played
constantly. (As Trina noted Monday, Carly wrote it
while waiting for Cat Stevens to pick her up for a date.)
Cynthia
Erivo, Elliot Page and more are among more than 200 signatories of an
open letter GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign put together to push
social media platforms to clamp down on hate speech, harassment and
misinformation directed at the LGBTQ community.
"True
allies do not profit from anti-LGBTQ hate," GLAAD's letter read, which
was released on Tuesday in partnership with HRC. "There has been a
massive systemic failure to prohibit hate, harassment, and malicious
anti-LGBTQ disinformation on your platforms and it must be addressed.
The very content you profit from is in violation of your own terms of
service, which assert that you do not allow hate speech."
The letter comes after social media platforms' earned "low and failing grades" on GLAAD's third annual Social Media Safety Index,
which evaluates the five major social media (Facebook, Twitter, TikTok,
Instagram and YouTube) platforms regarding LGBTQ safety, privacy and
expression. Instagram had a score of 63%, Facebook scored 61%, TikkTok
scored 57%, YouTube earned a 54% and Twitter had the lowest score of
33%.
Jokes can also unfortunately normalize harmful stereotypes about the LGBTQ+ as well as forms of prejudice. One study from
back in 2007 found heterosexual people experienced negative feelings
about gay individuals after hearing homophobic slurs used.As the world
celebrates Pride, it's important to remember one of the most impactful
ways to be an ally and support the LGBTQIA+ community year-round
is to call out homophobia as you see it. However, the process isn't
always easy. In fact, it can often be uncomfortable and intimidating,
especially if the jokes are coming from your friend. "Someone who is
uneducated regarding the community can hold a lot of fear in their
ignorance," Kollyn Conrad, founder and executive director of Publicly Private, a
nonprofit organization that advocates for the LGBTQIA+ community,
exclusively tells Women.com. "This can make the situation dangerous and
more hostile," he continues. But there are ways to make a difference and
take a stand
Conrad
exclusively tells Women that it's important to assess the level of
threat before making the confrontation. "Before addressing the
homophobia, transphobia, or biphobia, ensure your safety."This can come
in the form of a temperature check of the room - How is that person's
mood? Do you know them well enough to where you can know for sure they
won't retaliate in a violent manner? Is there a safe place to exit if
things go wrong? These are all important things to look out for.Once you
feel safe and comfortable enough, it is crucial to let the person know
that you found their joke or statement offensive as soon as possible.
Being direct is often the most effective way to guard your boundary.
Phrases like "Wow, that's not cool," "I don't agree," "I find that
offensive," and "What you just said makes me feel uncomfortable," can
work to quickly shut down someone who has started making the jokes
before they go further.
BUZZFEED has an article where parents of non-binary and transgender children offer some suggestions:
2."If
you’re uncomfortable or struggling with some aspect of your child’s
exploration of gender — name or pronoun change, self-expression,
whatever — that’s for you to address with your support, NOT YOUR CHILD.
Ideally an LGBTQ+ therapist, but partners and friends who are allies can
be good sounding boards, too."
"Your
kid isn’t going to feel supported and accepted if you complain that you
don’t like their new name or ‘just don’t understand’ nonbinary pronouns
to them.
I
struggled a lot with my child’s use of the word ‘deadname’ to describe
the birth name we chose to honor a beloved relative who has since
passed. It felt hurtful and disrespectful to their memory, but those
conversations were for my therapist and a friend of mine who also has a
trans child. It’s okay to have feelings about changes to your child’s
identity, but it’s not your child’s job to help you work through them."
—Anonymous, parent of a nonbinary 16-year-old
[. . .]
10."Read
as much as you can about non-gender conforming people from their own
perspectives. I wish I'd had a better understanding of what it means to
be trans when my child came out in his teens."
"I
tried to be supportive, but I questioned a lot of his feelings because I
didn't understand. What he needed most was to be heard and understood,
not challenged. If we knew then what we know now, he would have started
gender-affirming care much earlier, and it would have saved a lot of
heartache. He receives trans care now and is so much happier.
It's
so difficult to see new attacks every day on the trans community.
Verbal attacks are nonstop, and these bills and laws across the country
that strip their rights and freedom to live as they see fit are
soul-crushing. But I want every nonbinary and trans person to know that
they have allies across the nation who love and support them in spirit,
at the ballot box, and every way we can."
—Anonymous, parent of a 23-year-old
Those are two of the thirteen, read the article in full for all thirteen.
As the Senate Judiciary Committee kicked off a hearing on LGBTQ+ rights last
week, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina sought to draw a clear
distinction between same-sex marriage — once at the center of the
culture wars — and the Republican Party's recent targeting of civil
rights for trans people.
"You
mentioned that eight years ago, the Obergefell decision created a
constitutional right to same-sex marriage," said Graham. "We're not
talking about that here — we're talking about other things here."
Since the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision,
same-sex marriage has largely faded as an issue targeted by
Republicans, at least at the national level. Instead, most have
redirected their fire to transgender women's participation in sports,
gender-affirming care for minors, and drag performances.
Kind
of reminds you of Clarence Thomas, doesn't it? In his DOBBS decision,
remember, he was against ROE and all the privacy rights cases . . .
except one. LOVING V VIRGINIA, where the Supreme Court finds laws
against interracial marriage to be unlawful. He listed all the other
privacy rights cases. Not that one. Clarence did marry an
African-American woman, yes. Then he left her for his current wife who
is White. Hmm Wonder why Lindsey wants to attack trans but not gay
men. Wonder why. Wonder.
The Ku Klux Klan isn’t
discussed in the same breath as today’s organized domestic terrorism
groups, among them the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers who led the siege on
the U.S. Capitol in 2021.
But
like them, the Klan remains a threat to democracy, civil rights and the
voting rights of people of color, especially that of Latinos.
Once you’ve confronted such sinister forces, you never forget.
This
week in 1983 the KKK came to San Antonio promising “to clean San
Antonio of cockroaches,” using a hate-filled term to describe people of
Mexican descent.
Antonio Cabral
remembers. A former Marine and retired federal employee, he’d been
involved in the anti-war movement and advocated for farm workers.
When
a Klan leader announced a march in San Antonio, he waited to see if
activists would organize, but “no one else was responding,” he said.
Cabral,
now 83, was among those who started planning a counter-protest. Other
activists of the day got involved, including Teresa Gutierrez, Ramon
Mata, Margaret and Daniel Moreno, and Eliosa, Nicolas and Demetrio
Aguirre, he said.
They formed the ad hoc Anti-Klan Committee, a largely Mexican-American effort to protest the KKK march in San Antonio that year.
Cabral was reprimanded by family members. “Me regañaron,” or scolded, he said.
On
Sunday, he spoke to me about that episode half a lifetime ago, about
how much has changed since then — and how much hasn’t changed at all.
The counter-protesters met regularly in a little house on the city’s West Side. They planned. They left nothing to chance.
They studied the march route, noting side streets they could use to get away should things turn sideways.
They were armed only with signs and slogans. They brought cameras and saw others in the crowd taking pictures, too.
His
wife Mary Cabral recalled how she tried to engage in conversation with
those who were taking pictures, hoping they’d share images. But they had
little to say.
The
Anti-Klan Committee identified them as FBI agents or informants
conducting surveillance — not of the Klan but of the protesters,
especially leaders like Cabral.
Everyone,
it seemed, was against the counter-protesters. City Hall. The San
Antonio Police Department. Even the Archdiocese of San Antonio. Then
Archbishop Patrick Flores asked people to instead pray.
You
read that today and think, "How could that have been the case?" The
same shock you have today is what future generations will have when they
look back on the Matt Taibbis, the Tucker Carlsons, the Glenn
Greenwalds, etc.
Meanwhile . . .
Apparently, no flowers if you're in the state of Florida.
If
you're going to Naples, Florida, be sure to wear your hatred on display
. . . If you're going to Naples, Florida, you're going to meet some
questionable people there
Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) issued a travel warning to socialists or communists headed to Florida.
"If
you're a socialist, communist, somebody that believes in big
government, I would think twice," Scott said in a video message posted
to Twitter. "Think twice if you're thinking about taking a vacation or
moving to Florida."
First they try to
purge the drag queens and drag queens, the transgender and
African-Americans, the LGBQ+ were next and now a sitting state senator
is threatening -- publicly threatening -- Socialist, Communists and
anyone who "believes in big government."
Florida, you really need to take a look at the bigots you've elected to office. A strong look.
But
it is proof of what many of us said months ago, they were just starting
the purge and they would expand it. And now they're doing that. But
don't worry, Matt Taibbi and his old Uncle Fester f**ked up face will be
making jokes about it and USEFUL IDIOTS will be just that as they
ignore reality and how many people are being harmed.
Remember
today Marianne Williamson, a candidate for the Democratic Party's
presidential nomination, is supposed to be a major fireside chat
responding to the war on LGBTQ+ members with a specific focus on the
attacks on transgendered persons.
More than 50 members of the local parliament in Iraq’s
semi-autonomous Kurdish region in the north have submitted their
resignations to protest a court decision that deemed as unconstitutional
the legislature’s postponement of elections by a year.
Jihad
Hassan, an MP with the Kurdistan Democratic Party, which holds the
largest number of seats in the autonomous region’s parliament, said
Tuesday that all 45 members of its bloc had resigned the day before from
the 111-member parliament, along with nine MPs from other parties.
Let's take a break from Congressional crazy to note
online crazy. Specifically Michael Tracey. C.I. long ago exposed
Tracey as a rank sexist -- and did it via statistics. He's a deeply
troubled individual who clearly has no life. Clearly? His pinned Tweet
is an announcement that he's just joined STUBSTACK. It's been his
pinned Tweet since March of 2021. Over two years ago. Nothing in his
life since has apparently warranted an announcement. He must lead a
very sad and meager life.
He
wants to Tweet today about the hate merchant that shot up the Colorado
Springs LGBTQ club. He wants you to know that it wasn't a hate crime
because . . . the killer says so.
How
stupid is Michael Tracey? Did that attack by Maxine Waters leave him
bruised and brain damaged? (Tracey has claimed Maxine attacked him.
While I don't doubt that she could kick his butt -- as could any age
appropriately developed girl of six -- I don't believe she physically
attacked him. Yes, I have seen the video.)
For
weeks now, this interview that Tracey's just now discovered has been
part of the media landscape. Survivors and the families of those who
were killed say the shooter is just trying to make their chances better
in court. The prosecution has pointed out to the media that the attack
was planned in detail ahead of time and not just something that someone
high on drugs did on the whim of the moment. The shooter lawyers up and is now trying to remake the deadly killing.
Michael Tracey's more than willing to help them because, well, he's just that disgusting.
Meanwhile, Green Party community members are loving the following:
Chris Hedges is running Cornel West's campaign to distract the American people. As we noted last time,
it was Chris that got the presidential nomination for Cornel from The
People's Party and that the original plan was that Chris would be
Cornel's running mate; however, Eunice Wong (Chris' wife) said no to
Chris running. The People's Party imploded the moment Cornel made his
announcement because the mainstream press finally had a reason to write
about the nut-jobs of that 'party' who are racists (or just believe in
embracing racism) and who sexually harass women and who . . . You get
the idea. To save his image, Cornel needed a new narrative. So Chris
joined with Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka in trying to convince The Green
Party to give Cornel their nomination for president. They said no.
They said he could run for it, like anyone can, but they weren't giving
it to him.
To distract the people, Chris and Cornel
were dispatched to go the liars and the fools and the ones you know are
too stupid to ask real questions. Which is how, for example, Cornel or
"Cornell" as they spelled it, ended up on various YOUTUBE shows with him
being portrayed as the nominee of The Green Party. One person, we're
being kind, changed her headline after being called out at THE COMMON
ILLS to make clear that despite what the interview portrayed he was not
the nominee.
But would have been better if you could've grasped that reality on your own.
Worried
that might be an issue -- it should have been -- Cornell continued his
outreach and ended up on BLACK POWER MEDIA where he was surprised to
find real questions. White folks hadn't asked him a single real
question. They just nodded and shucked and grinned with him. He was
there way of signaling virtue and that's so much better, isn't it, than
actually bringing on African-American voices to speak about issues -- or
at least they think it is.
Pressed, Cornel spilled
all the tea. Told everything about Chris Hedges and the whole backdoor
dealing to grab a presidential nomination and how Chris was going to be
his running mate and all these other details that never made it in to
Chris' 'reporting' about Cornel's run or to Chris' media appearances
(YOUTUBE) promoting Cornel's run.
She's convinced she can sell Cornel to the Greens and make him their nominee.
Really?
This
is the woman who couldn't even get registered Greens to vote for her.
And she's going to steer the nomination to Cornel? There's a Karen
stepping forward every minute, usually dialing 911. And this is Jill's
moment to sour in the sun and grasp just how unimportant and unliked she
truly is.
Self-promotion and her trips to Russia made
her the Green that people like Katie Halper wanted to speak to on their
shows. She failed in her 2012 presidential run and in her 2016
presidential run. May she bring that same level of incompetence to
Cornel's campain.
For now, Ajuma Baraka's largely working behind the scenes but deliberately avoiding the spotlight as he realizes that his links to 9/11 Truth and other controveries
could harm Cornel's attempt to seize the presidential nomination. The
two did manage to show up for an interview on BLACK POWER MEDIA with
'brother Kalonji.' Brother? Yeah, Ajamu was serving up the same
garbage that Cornel does. Would have been nice if it had been a real
interview but Jill was giggling and laughing and tossing her old crone
hair around. She wanted to talk about medicine -- we need a big healing
-- but she doesn't trot that snake oil out to the corporate media
because they know she's a quack. There were jokes about Russia and
there was nothing of value.
Kalonji? We don't know
what to say here. You're a nice person but you don't get that an
interview requires knowledge and work. Green Party right now? It's a
war. It's a war over who's going to control it. And there were things
said in that interview that sailed right over your head because you
didn't know a damn thing about the party.
And most
people don't. But when you've got Green liars who are butt hurt over
2020's nomination still and they want to bring up, for example, Dr
Margaret Flowers? They're treading on a whole block of ice that you're
going to slip on, land on your ass and look like a fool.
The
Green Party has suffered a real blow of late and 2024 could kill it off
completely. 2020 saw a bunch of butt hurt whining about the results of
the convention. Excuse us, lying about the results of the convention.
Dario Hunter, for example, was running for the presidential nomination
of the party and then went on Cindy Sheehan's radio show where he
accused Dr Flowers (and her late husband Kevin Zeese) of stealing the
nomination from him and giving it to Howie Hawkins. Cindy, not the best
interviewer herself, just nodded along and fed into garbage.
A
real interviewer would have said, "So, Dario, you say it was stolen
from you. Can you tell me how you worked to get the word out on your
campaign?"
Or, better yet, "Howie Hawkins issued press
releases several times every week as he ran for the nomination, he
Tweeted non-stop and had an active social media presence. By contrast,
you did nothing. There were whole weeks while you were 'campaigning' in
which you didn't do a single Tweet. While he was doing video
interviews, you weren't. You issued few press releases. Since you
didn't have the money to mount a campaign in all 50 states -- or even
the 48 of the mainland -- exactly how did you think word was going to
get out on your campaign?"
It took a lot of nerve for
Stein and Baraka (not "Barack" as one White YOUTUBER put as the title of
their fawning video of him) to invoke Margaret Flowers' name
considering their behind the scenes garbage pulled against both Kevin
Zeese and his wife.
How do they get away with this? They get away it because no one pays attention to The Green Party.
I wish I could take part in the roundtable that Green Party community members are doing right now with Ava and C.I. to discuss this piece. No, I'm not a Green but that's not why I'm skipping. They're trying to pull it together for a feature for one of our community newsletters and I know the more people participating the longer it will take to do the roundtable. So I look forward to it but chose not to participate in it.
Tuesday, June 27, 2023. John Kerry lies about the Iraq War yet again,
RFK Jr prepares to hump hate group Moms For Liberty, THE NATION has a
major piece on the war on transpeople, and much more.
A
French TV anchor confronted John Kerry over whether U.S. condemnations
of Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s bloody and baseless invasion of
Ukraine come as hypocritical in light of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Kerry, who serves as the U.S. special presidential envoy for climate
and was in Paris for a climate summit hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron, appeared for an interview
with veteran journalist Darius Rochebin
on French news channel LCI Sunday night. They discussed Kerry’s work to
combat climate change and the Russian war against Ukraine, which
prompted Rochebin to bring up recent criticism of President George W.
Bush’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 from countries in South America.
[. . .]
“We have to judge Putin for crimes of aggression, of course. But you,
the Americans, you committed the crime of aggression in Iraq,” Rochebin
said. “These countries of the Global South say, should we judge George
Bush? Why isn’t Bush judged in the same way?”
“No,” Kerry shot back.
“Why?” Rochebin asked.
“Because there’s never even been a direct process or accusation or
anything with respect to President Bush himself,” Kerry said. “Have
there been abuses in the course of that war, yes.”
Rochebin asked: "Was it not a crime of aggression to enter Iraq based on a lie?"
Kerry, the U.S. presidential envoy for climate issues, replied: "No, no,
no... Well, we didn’t know it was a lie at the time. You know the
evidence that was produced, people didn't know that it was a lie. So no,
again, I think, you’re stretching something. That’s not constructive."
"But he lied," the French journalist said about President George W. Bush. "He lied, he lied."
"Sir, I’m not going to re-debate the Iraq war with you here right now,"
Kerry said. "We spent a lot of time doing that. I opposed to going in, I
thought it was the wrong thing to do. But we gave the president the
power, regrettably, in the Congress, based on the lie. And when we knew
it was a lie, people stood up and did the right thing."
It's
all so shameful and embarrassing. And let me do a confession before we
go further: I supported John Kerry for the 2004 presidential Democratic
Party nomination. I'd known him for years. He was talking big about
how he'd stand up to the press, no buckling to NEWSWEEK this time, blah
blah blah. The party never wants who I want. That was the first time
in my lifetime that a non-incumbent got the nomination after I'd
supported them in the primary. And what a huge disappointment and
disaster he was.
And still is. Actually, he's
much worse now. Oh, sure, he's not 'entangled' with reporters covering
the State Dept, but his outright lying has gotten even worse.
"I opposed to going in."
He
just can't stop lying. In 2004, he made a mockery of himself by trying
to explain his vote for the Iraq War by saying "I was for it before I
was against it." And he was for it. He voted for it. Despite everyone
laughing at him for that ridiculous "I was for it before I was against
it" -- more laughter than he even garnered -- Wait, we'll come back to
that.
Democratic
presidential nominee John Kerry said Monday he would not have changed
his vote to authorize the war against Iraq, but said he would have
handled things "very differently" from President Bush
That's two years after the vote. He wasn't opposed to it when he voted for it. He wasn't opposed to it two years after.
Then
John dropped the for-it-before-against-it pose and just started lying
that he'd been against it all along. He told that lie on MSNBC in
September of 2013 prompting FACTCHECK.ORG to call him out:
Of course, Kerry knows he voted on Oct. 11, 2002, to give Bush authorization to use military force in Iraq, along
with 76 other senators, including Hagel. He was reminded of it
throughout the 2004 presidential campaign, when he was the Democratic
Party’s nominee. During a presidential primary debate in May 2003 —
about seven months after the Senate approved the use of force and two
months after the war started — Kerry was asked by moderator George
Stephanopoulos about Bush’s decision to invade Iraq.
[. . .]
It’s
not inconsistent for Kerry to authorize Bush to go to war and then
criticize the president’s execution of the war. But for Kerry to say he
“opposed the president’s decision to go into Iraq” ignores the ample
record that shows the Democrat agreed with Bush that Hussein had weapons
of mass destruction and should be forcibly removed from power, and it
ignores his vote that allowed Bush to do just that.
And he's still lying today. He just can't stop lying.
He's
a huge disappointment and a huge screw up. And I realized that when he
ruined my 2004 suggestion. The GOP convention that year was going to
be hate filled -- that was a given and they were going to try terrorize
people into voting with fear-fear-fear. Months before anyone had seized
the nomination -- though, outside of Howard Dean, it did appear it was
going to be John Kerry -- there was a big meeting for strategy on
another issue. Someone brought up the upcoming conventions, I want to
say it was Harold Ickes -- and we were talking -- all of us -- about how
fear based Bully Boy Bush's campaign had to be for him to win the
election. How do we counteract that?
I said
with normalcy. I said sunshine -- openness. And then I said, because I
have a home in Hawaii, that the candidate should go there during the
GOP convention. First of all, few presidential candidates go there and
it does lead to the state feeling ignored and dissatisfied so this could
be an opportunity to fix that growing attitude. Second, Hawaii's
beautiful. Strolling through the streets, hanging out on the beach?
The news crews would love it and get tons of stock footage that would
air and wouldn't require a lot else. Bully Boy Bush and company are
preaching destruction and yet, here in sunny Hawaii, is our candidate
strolling around and greeting people suggesting that, yes, the world
continues and goes on and it's not all doom and gloom the way the GOP is
portraying it.
How was I to know, when they
decided to run with the idea, that John's vanity was so great, he'd
squeeze himself into what resembled sausage casing and do a sport that
was seen as elitist. I was talking about strolling through the streets,
relaxing on the beach, a luau. Things that would make the point, we
can all breathe and relax to counter the fear mongering. Instead,
John's showing off stalk and tip in a ridiculous outfit that no man his
age should have been wearing.
He
took what was a solid photo-op with a subtle message and turned it into
weeks of laughter -- at him -- because he was so damn stupid.
And,
yes, we did know ahead of time that Colin Powell lied to the UN. We
did know that Bully Boy Bush was lying. That was why Senator Bob Graham
repeatedly begged other senators -- most of whom, like Hillary Clinton,
refused -- to go look at what they were calling 'the evidence.' Go to
the secure room, read it over.
John's just a cheap liar.
I know Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as well. And -- what do you say there?
I can't hold it back anymore. What? The destruction of Cheryl's career.
I've
begged friends not to judge her by Robert. But it's over for her now.
And it's a shame because she's a nice person and she's a talented
actress and director. But her husband's decision to appear at a Moms
For Liberty event has shredded any wall that those of us who like Cheryl
have attempted to build. She's done nothing wrong herself but studio
exec and producers and everyone down the line are now referring to her
as "that bitch." She didn't do anything wrong. I hope Robert realizes
as he appears to sink his own campaign, that his getting chummy with
hate merchants destroyed his wife's career.
The
vax argument isn't one I get into, I've discussed that here before.
Autism is a cause I've worked my whole adult life on and I don't get
into that debate, it hurts fundraising and its hurts people's feelings.
And it's not my intent to do either.
But
that stance that Robert has? It didn't hurt Cheryl. There are some who
are inclined to side with Robert on that in the entertainment industry
and most are sensitive enough to grasp that there are no points to be
scored on this issue.
But Moms For Liberty?
For
Marianne Williamson, this is perfect timing. She needs a win bad. And
the same week Robert's buddying up to Moms For Liberty, she's supposed
to be delivering a major statement regarding the attacks on the
transgender community. If she does and delivers it and does it even
half-way well, this could see her get the campaign on track finally and
also move up in the polls (Robert has been sinking of late).
A right-wing
inquisition is singling out young transgender Americans, their parents,
their teachers, and their doctors as targets in the battle over what
kind of nation we are and want to be. Since 2021, roughly half the
states have passed at least one law designed to eliminate medical or
educational policies that recognize trans youth and protect them from
abuse. According to the ACLU, 20 states enacted 72 new anti-trans laws in the first six months of 2023; more than 200 are in the pipeline.
Anti-trans
campaigners seek to create a blanket of repression. Because the recent
wave of anti-trans laws was not triggered by a landmark event like the
rush of anti-abortion laws enacted in the wake of the Dobbs decision,
this new reality has crept up on the country. Major media outlets have
struggled to keep up with which laws have been passed in which states.
With the exception, perhaps, of the trans people who find themselves in
the cross hairs of these new laws, almost no one saw it coming.
The
geography of gender panic illuminates the right wing’s stranglehold on a
large swath of the United States. As of June 1, 24 states, including
Texas, Florida, Georgia, and Arizona, account for almost all of the
recent explosion of anti-trans legislation. More than 140 million
people—42 percent of the US population—live in these states. All but
Arizona and Georgia cast their electoral votes for Donald Trump in both
2016 and 2020, and of the states that voted for Trump twice, all but
North Carolina, Ohio, and Alaska have binged on anti-trans laws (though
North Carolina passed the nation’s first bathroom ban in 2016, which it later gave up after public pressure and business boycotts, and Ohio banned trans athletes from school sports).
As a comparison, the Guttmacher Institute counts 26 states where
abortion is now banned or significantly restricted—a nearly identical
list. With the passage of a handful of new laws or court decisions, the
overlap may soon be complete. Laws attacking “critical race theory,”
which also came on suddenly and are now widespread, have less of a
complete overlap because such resolutions often arise in local school
boards rather than in state legislatures. Nonetheless, according to a report from
the UCLA Law School’s Critical Race Studies program, anti-CRT laws now
affect 22 million public school students, almost half the nation’s
total.
Given
the avalanche of anti-trans legislation, it might be surprising to
learn that the bulk of Americans are turned off by the extremism and
cruelty of these laws. According to Roll Call,
recent polling found that 64 percent of Americans believe that the
sudden onset of anti-trans bills this year amounts to “too much
legislation,” with politicians “playing political theater and using
these bills as a wedge issue.” On youth access to gender-affirming
medical care, an NPR/Ipsos poll found
that 47 percent of Americans oppose restrictions while 31 percent
support them, with 21 percent declining to answer. On allowing trans
girls to compete in girls’ sports, however, the same survey found that
63 percent oppose. A Pew survey from
June 2022 found that the number of people who think American society
has gone too far in accepting trans people (38 percent) is roughly equal
to the number who think it hasn’t gone far enough (36 percent).
How
is it possible that a country with so little demand for anti-trans
policies produced such an onslaught of anti-trans laws? The most
important characteristic that these states share with states that have
passed new anti-abortion and anti-CRT laws is a legal structure that
reinforces minority control of governance—in effect, a democracy
deficit. Political scientist Jacob Grumbach calls such
states “laboratories against democracy.” Eight of the 24 states that
have passed the worst anti-trans laws rank among the worst states for
legislative gerrymandering, according to ratings issued by either the University of Southern California’s Schwarzenegger Institute or the World Population Review.
Nan makes solid points and writes a great article. I would quibble with the "how" aspect above. It wasn't just that.
It
was a group of people egging it on. It was supposed leftists like Matt
Taibbi and Glenn Greenwald (again, Glenn was never left, he was a
Libertarian who had a whatever as his hag and people mistook him for a
liberal) making 'jokes' and be insulting to transgenders. (Again,
Chelsea Manning saw Glenn's transphobia before anyone did -- certainly
before I did.) It was Max Blumenthal's wife attacking and mocking the
transgender community.
It
was THE KATIE HALPER SHOW, USEFUL IDIOTS, and so many more refusing to
treat this war on LGBTQ+ as a serious issue and devote time to it. Not
everyone was silent and those who deserve credit for speaking out
include BLACK POWER MEDIA, Karen Hunter, DEMOCRACY NOW!, THE VANGUARD,
etc -- and Olayemi Olurin especially deserves credit for her strong work -- which included
calling out -- on air -- to their faces, not one but two hosts of RISING who were laughing at and
mocking transgender people. No surprise, while White YOUTUBERS mocked
and ignored, it was people of color who spoke up maybe because they
historically know the importance of standing together to stand up.
It
was RISING on THE HILL doing one transphobic segment after another. It
was BREAKING POINTS trying to use MonkeyPox to target gay men.
It
wasn't just the people working in the shadows (often advised by
Jonathan Turley -- everything Lawrence Tribe said about Turley was
true), it was also a pathetic left that refused to stand up and say,
"Stop it." That refused to say, "These people are our family and we're
not going to be silent while you attack them." What's so interesting
when we speak with people around the country is that, in their areas,
people stood up. It's just the left media that didn't. Especially
those people on YOUTUBE.
And
when super-cool Matt Taibbi's laughing at transgenders, well don't we
all want to be cool and laugh at them like he does. I don't but maybe
some do -- you know the ones who want to suffer from male pattern
baldness and erectile dysfunction.
The left media didn't stand up and immediately call this out. Instead, they ignored it or they joined in.
A lot of people now live at risk because of this.
I've
noted repeatedly that when DOBBS was overturned, LGBTQ+ people rushed
to the front to stand with us. And, unless you're a lesbian that gets
raped, unwanted pregnancy was really only something the B in LGBTQ+
really had to worry about. But they, as a group, stood up. NETFLIX had
a comedy special on LGBTQ+ and these comedians made DOBBS part of their
act and called it out.
But
we couldn't speak in support of them. We couldn't call out the hate
being directed daily at them. And when THE NEW YORK TIMES staff pointed
out that the paper had used extreme and sensationalistic stories to get
clicks and sell copies, who stood up for those employees.
I
know who stood against them. Glenneth Greenwald. The empress was not
amused by unruly employees who would disparage their employer. The
empress was not used to serfs being so unruly. Glenneth Greenwald's
royal "we" was not at all amused and felt the need to trash them over
and over.
When in fact, it is THE NEW YORK TIMES
that has repeatedly been behind on the science as anyone knowledgeable about science was aware. Yes, there was the AIDS crisis and their
attacks on gays and ignorance on science. But even something like
extinction level events -- check the archives of the paper -- they got
that wrong as well. Despite being known for their science section of
the paper, they repeatedly fail on that topic.
And
they failed transgendered people by refusing to report accurately and
by who they sought out for sources to their bad articles.
But,
hey, uptight prig needs a laugh -- and apparently his reflection in the
mirror of that still bad dye job out of box to cover his gray hair
wasn't doing it. He got a lot of laughs, didn't he? And
played like he was Demi Moore in ST. ELMO'S FIRE -- only I don't
believe Jules, as much as she wanted that "fabulous talk show," would
have abandoned her dying husband in the hospital. (Yes, Glenneth, tea
was spilled by your ex to us about that college infatuation.)
Oh.
And Tucker. Don't forget that Mother Tucker. Lying over and over,
trashing the LGBTQ+ community over and over. They didn't object -- not
Aaron Matte, not Jimmy Dore, not Max Blumenthal, not Glenneth, not any
of the whores who went on Tucker's show. No, they all worshiped at
his crotch -- Glenneth, Matt, Tara Reade, all of them.
These
are the ethics of the people who couldn't stand up for transgender
people as they were clearly under attack. The hate merchants only got
as far as they did because too many of us refused to object and let our
silence -- or giggles -- feed and encourage the hate merchants. A
united front over nine months ago and we might have been able to stop
it. Instead, we just grinned at the big wooden horse and fell asleep as
the hate merchants emptied out of it and took over our world.
This
is probably a good time to note that we're said goodbye to Naomi
Wolf. I don't like a dog pile. I was fine with giving her a platform
when she was under attack. She was getting banned by everyone and she
was humiliated. We could have looked the other way and ignored her.
I'm not a good person so if I'd known that she'd get in bed with hate
merchants like Moms Of Liberty, I wouldn't have been kind. Her downward
spiral (I believe she's on meds, by the way) started with -- wait. Did
it start with the custody battle? I don't know. It's been so long
since I gave a damn about her. As Ava and I had established at THIRD,
she had a racist streak and identified with authoritarianism among other
things. We established that with her actual work. She practically
brought herself to orgasm while describing White Victoria Woodhull who,
honestly, looked like a young boy, not a pretty woman. And then, mere
paragraphs later, this is her book FIRE WITH FIRE, by the way, she's
referring to Madam CJ Walker as ugly. Look it up. Didn't even enter
her airheaded head that (a) she'd fallen into her own beauty myth and (b)
Madame CJ Walker wasn't ugly -- unless you don't believe Black Is
Beautiful.
We called her
out for PROMISCUITIES -- that's the book where she lets slip (did she
even read what she wrote) that she kept silent when a college woman was
raped. Naomi was there. She heard that night and then the men joking
about it the next morning -- bragging about it. It gave her pause. Not
enough to make her report it, not enough to make her walk out, not
enough to make her break up with the frat boy she was seeing, not even
enough to stop eating her eggs, but, hey, it brought her buzz down
during breakfast and, after all, isn't that enough of a sacrifice for her?
Judith N. Shklar. Very important political theorist. I loved her work. I spoke
with her about her work many times. I wouldn't use the word friend but
I knew her and liked her. And that's why I never bought into Naomi
Wolf's THE BEAUTY MYTH which largely cribbed from Judith's Oxford
lectures. Oxford. Who went to Oxford? Oh, that's right -- Naomi Wolf
and she went when Judith was lecturing. Did no one else notice that all
the literary examples first popped up in Judith's THE FACES OF
INJUSTICE -- which is based upon the Oxford lectures.
I
love Judith's work. In November of 2004, after a group of us finished a
lengthy post mortem on the
2004 presidential campaign of John Kerry and
after I suggested we needed to think about the things we didn't do, I
did just that. I asked myself to think about that. It was a Friday. I
knew nothing about blogging. I knew it had impacted the election. And
I knew I needed to do something that I hadn't already done. I was at
my desk and nervous -- I probably ran to the bathroom three times in the
thirty minutes it took to set up this site on Blogger/Blogspot. (It is
much quicker now but it's also true I didn't know what I was doing so
that took longer too.) Everything about it made me nervous. (I'm
someone who can cold call for
an issue like the Iraq War but someone who wouldn't answer the home
phone
myself many times, people find it hard to believe but I am shy. That's
also why I don't plan what I'm going to say in front of groups. If I
spend time planning, I'm going to be nervous.) So, creating this site, I
got to the point where I had to name it and I went with "The Common
Ills" in a nod to Judith's work.
I
don't think Naomi grasped, when she was stealing from Judith, how
obvious the theft was or how some of us would immediately catch on.
Again, Ava and I have called her out for all of that and more.
When
she published OUTRAGES in 2019, she finally committed career suicide.
Turns out the primary research for the book was wrong. Not flawed,
wrong. You can search and find where, in a roundtable at THIRD, Ava
and I are expected to be gleeful but instead refuse to join the dog pile
and I say that the publisher is responsible for fact checking so they
bore part of the blame. She misunderstood the records she was
examining.
If
we were doing the roundtable today, I would say, however, she needs to
return her doctorate. I wasn't aware that the 2019 book was actually
the work she'd done on her doctorate.
That
book has been pulped -- something that rarely ever happens without the
threat of a lawsuit. That's how wrong it was. I don't think she is
entitled to have that doctorate now.
And
we're not defending her anymore. OUTRAGES was actually a book where
she examined the treatment -- mistreatment -- of gay people
historically. She'd turned her back on so much of the left during her
manic period. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised that now she's in bed
with the anti-LGBTQ+ hate mongers Moms for Liberty.
You've made your bed, lay in it and lie from it.
I
could pull quote Nan B. Hunter's entire article (it's that strong and
that important) but we have to note at least one more section:
Despite
its massive impact, there is a temptation to dismiss the anti-trans
campaign as merely another battle confined to the domain of cultural
politics. Some on the liberal left agree that the cruelty is
unconscionable but believe that the underlying problem is less
significant than questions of economic redistribution. But the flood of
anti-trans, anti-abortion, and anti-CRT laws is much more than a
distraction from economically regressive legislation. Instead, the
attacks on women, people of color, and trans people work hand-in-glove
with attacks on the social institutions that we all depend on.
The
inseparable nature of attacks on trans people and on our democratic
institutions can be seen in the debates over public schools. The
anti-trans campaign is a bonanza for groups engaged in a war against
public education, which has long been a major target for the right wing, in spite of the fact that public education has support even in some deeply conservative states.
Painting
schools as dens of “woke indoctrination,” as Florida Governor Ron
DeSantis put it, facilitates disinvestment, which has direct material
consequences. Of the 23 states most actively targeting trans youth and
their families, the Education Law Center gave
16 grades of either an F or a D for their per-pupil funding level
relative to the national average. In effect, however, there is a
sectarian carve-out: Religious schools are often shielded from policies
that starve public schools. A report issued in September 2022 estimated
that by the end of that school year, Florida would shift an estimated 10 percent of its education budget from public to private schools. Most of the schools receiving those funds are religious and lack accreditation. In Tennessee, Governor Bill Lee has plans to start dozens of conservative charter schools by
partnering with the K-12 school management arm of Hillsdale College, a
Christian school in Michigan that DeSantis wants to use as a model for a
public liberal arts college in his state.
In fact, there is a growing nationwide movement to
reallocate public funds to private schools, including many religious
schools using the same rhetoric of “parental freedom” that the
anti-trans campaigns deploy. The Supreme Court opened the door for it,
especially with its decision in 2021 in Carson v. Makin,
which struck down a restriction on public tuition assistance funds
going to religious schools. Although billions of dollars are at stake,
the shifts in funding have gotten far less attention than anti-trans
bills and the attacks on CRT and school libraries. The right wing is
building a potentially massive edifice of religious, pro-market, and highly profitable education institutions in the same states where anti-trans hysteria has taken root, but the two issues are rarely discussed together.
Having failed to stand up and stop it when it was gathering steam, we now have a lot of work to do.
