I'm just really having a look at that "trust in science" graph. How awesome that women's reproductive health decisions are now going to be made by the people represented by that red line. What a hellscape.
For once, on the Roe issue, I agree with this take - or at least Tim's take. But on the other hand, this isn't the end. If Ds are not dumb politically (I have to admit I hope for once on this they aren't), they would be pushing every piece of legislation they can dream up that provides for support for children, support for working moms, support for pregnant moms and families, more mandated parental leave, federally funded pre-school, prenatal care... Just keep making the GOP filibuster. Then nail them to a wall that they don't actually care about children or dealing with the fallout of abortion being illegal. That's what I want to see.
I do think this should just the opening salvo - make them have to go on the record over and over and over. And then run their videotape of commenting on it over and over and over. Make it clear that this has always been the party of who gives a shit about some other person's child. As a reminder, 75% of people who have abortions are low income and 60% are already parents. Facts matter.
I've spent half of my life in rural America and half in working class urban America one thing both have in common, modernization has damaged them. So those with ability and determination have left leaving those who are unable to cope behind. So in both you see an increase in drugs, violence and broken families. On both sides these are powerless people in desperate situations. The sad thing is both parties use them as pawns without ever helping them beyond the level of a bandaid on a gaping wound.
"President Biden on Tuesday blamed Russia’s war in Ukraine, corporate greed, the pandemic and the policies of “ultra-MAGA Republicans” for causing record-high inflation, and insisted that Democrats’ big spending didn’t spur the highest price increases in 40 years."
I think for this to stick, the new DHS Ministry of Truth will need to silence all non-partisan economists.
But can we have another applaud for Biden, the guy elected to bring the country together, demonstrating that he will win the prize for the most partisan and divisive of all Presidents in modern times? He makes Hillary's "irredeemable deplorables" quote seem loving by comparison.
I have since a kid been a sports fan. And so too at seventy-two. But...but...I have not ever replayed a sporting event over and over and over and...as I have this call of the Kentucky Derby. "Rich Strike!!!!"
A win and a call for the ages.
PS Close your eyes. Imagine an old wood cabinet, tube radio. Listen to the call. It is as if Rich Strike, with mere feet to go, is teleported into the race from another universe. The stars are still shaking.
So, round up a bunch of swampy establishment hacks who's money flow depends on the swamp to collect quotes that Trump is a threat to democracy and then claim that this is a worthy journalistic endeavor? For every one of these swamp rats I can cite a dozen credible participants in the political-media chattering class that would point out that THEY are part of a cabal that threatens American democracy, and more importantly, American existence.
I get it. You are here writing and reading this stuff because you are a dedicated bluecheck or otherwise you are reliant on the old establishment ways, yourself, to pad the old bank account. But paaalllleeeaaasssee... let's not cheapen the discussion by ignoring the important differences in policy direction by repeating these stupid political campaign memes. To any serious and critical thinking person this Trump "threat to Democracy" claim is just silly and banal. Really, Chewbacca man and his band of hairy brothers are the threat we should be all wee weed up about? Really?
First, it seems that there is no real connection to the actual definition of "democracy"... what it means in this country. It seems that the arguments floated about Trump's actions that have at least a modicum of relevancy are generally in the national-interest camp. More specifically they are the globalist worldview vs the nationalist worldview. Why not just honestly admit that and have a conversation about the pros and cons instead of just flapping Trump-attack DNCNN talking points?
The Jan-6 events have already expended all their political capital to the anti-Trump side and today, with the release of 2000 Mules, are doing more harm than good. You keep scratching your head that Trump continues to build in popularity and 2022 and 2024 looking like a much worse 2016... and yet you keep doing the same things.
Today there isn't a single positive major indicator of American system health that Biden can claim as an accomplishment. Inflation has skyrocketed. Rates are set to climb to near Carter era. Small business has been destroyed. The investment markets are in free fall. The border is a mess. Crime has been exploding. Attacks on Constitutional rights have accelerated. And with all of this to discuss, we keep being spoon fed Jan-6 "Insurrection" and "threat to democracy" narratives.
Again, are we serious about journalism here on Substack, or is this just another political channel of the political gamer hive were we get our daily propaganda feed? I can just get this stuff from Facebook and WaPo.
The Jan-6 events followed a prior 4+ year period where large arenas were filled with millions of peaceful but enthusiastic MAGA supporters. Those numbers have increased today because the REAL divide today is one of class and more voters are figuring that out thanks to the terrible political performance of the Democrats in charge. Journalists that are anti-Trump are just feeding the Trump beast by failing to acknowledge the facts and truth on the ground and continuing to play the old depleted "Trump is a threat to Democracy" card.
I just looked it up and Pew polling said that among Democrats 80% think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Only 35 % think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. So looking at that, a Democratic politician would be right in suggesting it should be legal in all cases because if they got all of the Democrats and just 10% of the Republicans, they would sweep any election. Is my math wrong?
Charlie - you are being disingenuous when you state the bill allows abortion for all nine months without adding that the only exception is if the mother's life is in danger. Here is the language in the bill. Right there number 9. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3755/text
(8) A prohibition on abortion at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability, including a prohibition or restriction on a particular abortion procedure.
(9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.
I'm reading a book about 1941 Europe during WWII. The French Patinists sound exactly like the Republicans. Put their own people in concentration camps, fine. They forced French workers to work in Germany. They supported Hitler and Franko and believed the that the country should be run by Catholic rules. DeGaule was to them worse than Hitler. Roosevelt was a monster. The country should be ruled by the rich and the rest should be happy, contented and uneducated peasants. Sounds exactly like what the Republicsns are selling these days.
The biggest impediments to progress on voting were the fantasy that most Republicans supported voting rights and that Democrats would overturn the filibuster. One way to avoid a similarly prolonged ineffectual and contorted conversation on reproductive rights is to establish facts now by starting with a vote.
Giving Manchin the reins to create and advance his bill “guaranteed” to pass with bipartisan support was only effective because the vote to even debate it failed. Many were bitter and disgusted, but we were able to move on.
It’s also always good to let people grouse and rail that Democrats suck at politics and are feckless and ineffective. Enduring and crucial part of the American narrative. Peculiar.
As you suggest, "what do you mean, 'was'"? Great series today--I'm going to go save Amanda's listing of disenchanted Trump public servants and their indictments. The Derby was epic.
The focus on the SCOTUS house protests are really revealing about our media landscape. In 2021, when angry crowds were encircling the homes of local public health officials and local school board members, the mainstream press did cover it. I read a number of articles in various places about how threatened these public servants felt. I read with worry that many of them would be resigning or even moving. Threats were made against them and their children. It was concerning. But it was covered in the context of there being a lot going on in a difficult period, in a fractious populace where opinions - informed or not - were hardened and polarized. But there was so much to cover - inflation, covid, vaccines, Afghanistan, jobs reports, schools and offices establishing a new normal, and on and on. It's a big, complicated world.
I don't have a TV, but I gather that what Fox and other right wing outlets are doing is effectively pushing every other story from that big, complicated world out of the way to play videos of protests on a loop and talk about how awful and threatening it all is. I don't disagree - I would feel quite threatened, but so did those normie school board members and local health officials.
It brings up the old "nut-picking" idea, where instead of cherry picking something, you build your coverage around a focus on (what you can portray as) the craziest stuff from the other side. The media I consume, in general, doesn't do this. I'm a partisan Democrat who subscribes to The Bulwark, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlanta Journal Constitution, and The Atlantic, among others. I want a broad spectrum of ideas in my news diet, with information about my community, my nation, and my world.
Right wing viewers don't appear to want that. I don't know what to do about that. But it does feel like it's destroying us.
I'm just really having a look at that "trust in science" graph. How awesome that women's reproductive health decisions are now going to be made by the people represented by that red line. What a hellscape.
For once, on the Roe issue, I agree with this take - or at least Tim's take. But on the other hand, this isn't the end. If Ds are not dumb politically (I have to admit I hope for once on this they aren't), they would be pushing every piece of legislation they can dream up that provides for support for children, support for working moms, support for pregnant moms and families, more mandated parental leave, federally funded pre-school, prenatal care... Just keep making the GOP filibuster. Then nail them to a wall that they don't actually care about children or dealing with the fallout of abortion being illegal. That's what I want to see.
I do think this should just the opening salvo - make them have to go on the record over and over and over. And then run their videotape of commenting on it over and over and over. Make it clear that this has always been the party of who gives a shit about some other person's child. As a reminder, 75% of people who have abortions are low income and 60% are already parents. Facts matter.
I've spent half of my life in rural America and half in working class urban America one thing both have in common, modernization has damaged them. So those with ability and determination have left leaving those who are unable to cope behind. So in both you see an increase in drugs, violence and broken families. On both sides these are powerless people in desperate situations. The sad thing is both parties use them as pawns without ever helping them beyond the level of a bandaid on a gaping wound.
"Democratic senators vote on abortion legislation that is both unpopular—it would legalize abortions through all nine months of pregnancy, "
Shockingly, that's simply not true. In a recent Pew poll, 80 % Democrats and 39% Republicans support that legislation.
Meanwhile on Planet X:
"President Biden on Tuesday blamed Russia’s war in Ukraine, corporate greed, the pandemic and the policies of “ultra-MAGA Republicans” for causing record-high inflation, and insisted that Democrats’ big spending didn’t spur the highest price increases in 40 years."
I think for this to stick, the new DHS Ministry of Truth will need to silence all non-partisan economists.
But can we have another applaud for Biden, the guy elected to bring the country together, demonstrating that he will win the prize for the most partisan and divisive of all Presidents in modern times? He makes Hillary's "irredeemable deplorables" quote seem loving by comparison.
I have since a kid been a sports fan. And so too at seventy-two. But...but...I have not ever replayed a sporting event over and over and over and...as I have this call of the Kentucky Derby. "Rich Strike!!!!"
A win and a call for the ages.
PS Close your eyes. Imagine an old wood cabinet, tube radio. Listen to the call. It is as if Rich Strike, with mere feet to go, is teleported into the race from another universe. The stars are still shaking.
So, round up a bunch of swampy establishment hacks who's money flow depends on the swamp to collect quotes that Trump is a threat to democracy and then claim that this is a worthy journalistic endeavor? For every one of these swamp rats I can cite a dozen credible participants in the political-media chattering class that would point out that THEY are part of a cabal that threatens American democracy, and more importantly, American existence.
I get it. You are here writing and reading this stuff because you are a dedicated bluecheck or otherwise you are reliant on the old establishment ways, yourself, to pad the old bank account. But paaalllleeeaaasssee... let's not cheapen the discussion by ignoring the important differences in policy direction by repeating these stupid political campaign memes. To any serious and critical thinking person this Trump "threat to Democracy" claim is just silly and banal. Really, Chewbacca man and his band of hairy brothers are the threat we should be all wee weed up about? Really?
First, it seems that there is no real connection to the actual definition of "democracy"... what it means in this country. It seems that the arguments floated about Trump's actions that have at least a modicum of relevancy are generally in the national-interest camp. More specifically they are the globalist worldview vs the nationalist worldview. Why not just honestly admit that and have a conversation about the pros and cons instead of just flapping Trump-attack DNCNN talking points?
The Jan-6 events have already expended all their political capital to the anti-Trump side and today, with the release of 2000 Mules, are doing more harm than good. You keep scratching your head that Trump continues to build in popularity and 2022 and 2024 looking like a much worse 2016... and yet you keep doing the same things.
Today there isn't a single positive major indicator of American system health that Biden can claim as an accomplishment. Inflation has skyrocketed. Rates are set to climb to near Carter era. Small business has been destroyed. The investment markets are in free fall. The border is a mess. Crime has been exploding. Attacks on Constitutional rights have accelerated. And with all of this to discuss, we keep being spoon fed Jan-6 "Insurrection" and "threat to democracy" narratives.
Again, are we serious about journalism here on Substack, or is this just another political channel of the political gamer hive were we get our daily propaganda feed? I can just get this stuff from Facebook and WaPo.
The Jan-6 events followed a prior 4+ year period where large arenas were filled with millions of peaceful but enthusiastic MAGA supporters. Those numbers have increased today because the REAL divide today is one of class and more voters are figuring that out thanks to the terrible political performance of the Democrats in charge. Journalists that are anti-Trump are just feeding the Trump beast by failing to acknowledge the facts and truth on the ground and continuing to play the old depleted "Trump is a threat to Democracy" card.
I just looked it up and Pew polling said that among Democrats 80% think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Only 35 % think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. So looking at that, a Democratic politician would be right in suggesting it should be legal in all cases because if they got all of the Democrats and just 10% of the Republicans, they would sweep any election. Is my math wrong?
I wonder how long until some indie studio makes a "Bull Semen Tycoon" game
Charlie - you are being disingenuous when you state the bill allows abortion for all nine months without adding that the only exception is if the mother's life is in danger. Here is the language in the bill. Right there number 9. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3755/text
(8) A prohibition on abortion at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability, including a prohibition or restriction on a particular abortion procedure.
(9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.
I'm reading a book about 1941 Europe during WWII. The French Patinists sound exactly like the Republicans. Put their own people in concentration camps, fine. They forced French workers to work in Germany. They supported Hitler and Franko and believed the that the country should be run by Catholic rules. DeGaule was to them worse than Hitler. Roosevelt was a monster. The country should be ruled by the rich and the rest should be happy, contented and uneducated peasants. Sounds exactly like what the Republicsns are selling these days.
The biggest impediments to progress on voting were the fantasy that most Republicans supported voting rights and that Democrats would overturn the filibuster. One way to avoid a similarly prolonged ineffectual and contorted conversation on reproductive rights is to establish facts now by starting with a vote.
Giving Manchin the reins to create and advance his bill “guaranteed” to pass with bipartisan support was only effective because the vote to even debate it failed. Many were bitter and disgusted, but we were able to move on.
It’s also always good to let people grouse and rail that Democrats suck at politics and are feckless and ineffective. Enduring and crucial part of the American narrative. Peculiar.
Schumer has always been an ineffective putz and the progressive left can't stand him.
Sincerely,
Member of the Progressive Left
As you suggest, "what do you mean, 'was'"? Great series today--I'm going to go save Amanda's listing of disenchanted Trump public servants and their indictments. The Derby was epic.
The focus on the SCOTUS house protests are really revealing about our media landscape. In 2021, when angry crowds were encircling the homes of local public health officials and local school board members, the mainstream press did cover it. I read a number of articles in various places about how threatened these public servants felt. I read with worry that many of them would be resigning or even moving. Threats were made against them and their children. It was concerning. But it was covered in the context of there being a lot going on in a difficult period, in a fractious populace where opinions - informed or not - were hardened and polarized. But there was so much to cover - inflation, covid, vaccines, Afghanistan, jobs reports, schools and offices establishing a new normal, and on and on. It's a big, complicated world.
I don't have a TV, but I gather that what Fox and other right wing outlets are doing is effectively pushing every other story from that big, complicated world out of the way to play videos of protests on a loop and talk about how awful and threatening it all is. I don't disagree - I would feel quite threatened, but so did those normie school board members and local health officials.
It brings up the old "nut-picking" idea, where instead of cherry picking something, you build your coverage around a focus on (what you can portray as) the craziest stuff from the other side. The media I consume, in general, doesn't do this. I'm a partisan Democrat who subscribes to The Bulwark, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlanta Journal Constitution, and The Atlantic, among others. I want a broad spectrum of ideas in my news diet, with information about my community, my nation, and my world.
Right wing viewers don't appear to want that. I don't know what to do about that. But it does feel like it's destroying us.
Tillerson, it was rex tillerson