Each year, in The Common Ills community, we vote on the books we enjoyed. Martha and Shirley tabulate the votes and then do their book piece at the end of the year. It's Friday morning, you have until 7 pm EST today to vote.
In community newletters and at websites, we do book reviews throughout the year. This is from THIRD and it's a list of the books reviewed at community sites this year:
In the early years, we just did new books. Then, at the community newsletters, Beth started doing book discussions on classic books and older books. And then we started wanting to cover -- at our sites -- whatever book interested us at the moment -- or interested us enough to pick it up.
One thing that we've added in the last few years is that when a book review goes up at a website, Ava and C.I. will do a brief discussion with the reviewer at THIRD:
Thursday, December 19, 2024. Elections have consequences. Let's discuss some.
Let's
start with a basic note. We're not a supermarket bulletin board. Just
because you've decided to teach guitar lessons, it's not my job to note
that. A number of people are frustrated -- people I don't just not
know but have never heard of -- because they're e-mailing their articles
or their videos to get them highlighted here. Martha and Shirley are
the main ones working the e-mails but they aren't the only ones.
Something from David Bacon comes in? They know to move it to a folder I
will try to work from, we're always happy to note his work which is both
journalism and art and he's one of the few labor reporters that the
country has. David's only problem is me finding time to get whatever up
here. But those of you who are new to me? You're not going up
automatic and some of you, when I get the time to review what you're
asking be noted, are at the wrong damn site.
We
have changed and we are changing and maybe that causes some confusion.
In the past, I tried to play fair. I'm not interested in that. I'll
give you an example. I know Katie Couric, we're not great friends but I
know her. And have real respect for the body of work she's provided. A
fright-wing and centrist took to attacking her in videos. Didn't want
to play gatekeeper so I included them here. I'm no longer interested in
that. The rank hypocrisy of the circle jerk left is never addressed or
even acknowledged. Right now, a woman who is often noted here and will
not be noted for a while.
In 2022 when the nonsense first started, we just ignored it and acted like it wasn't happening.
I'm
not in the mood anymore. As I've noted repeatedly, Chris Rock is a
friend. I have no idea why, with your political talk show, you have
felt the need to do not one but two attacks on Chris. In one week.
You're a Black woman who has refused to seriously explore real issues
that many of us in the community are exploring and have been --
including serious discussions about how the intersection of race and
gender impacted Kamala Harris' campaign.
But you've got time, in one week, to do not one but two lengthy segments attacking Chris?
I'm not in the mood.
Trump, Tulsi, Hegseth, Junior, Elon -- and how many more nightmares are out there but you're attacking Chris Rock.
I'm
not interested anymore in being 'fair' and saying, "Oh well, difference
of opinion, we'll just highlight other things from" _____. Not
interested at all. You pulled this s**t when Chris got attacked in 2022
at the Academy Awards ceremony. We were kind then. I'm not interested
being kind now.
I think it's important to
highlight voices of color but you're not the only voice of color out
there and two attacks in one week on Chris? I'm not interested in you.
We'll probably note you some in the new year -- if I'm not still angry
-- but I'm not in the mood now.
And again, for a
woman of color to do so little right now -- in the wake of all the pain
among Black women over the election results -- doesn't speak highly for
you but, I'd argue, two long segments in one week picking on Chris
didn't argue highly for you either.
As for the
centrists with all their pieces explaining why the Democratic Party
needs to move right, no, you're not going to be posted here and we're
not going to endure your nonsense.
Get over
it. That's a line from Stevie Nicks' "Hard Advice" and you can stop
reading now if you came by for fluff and nonsense. We're about to
address a serious issue regarding loyalty and betrayal.
He gives such hard advice
He says don't think twice
Turn off the radio
It was finished long ago
Go write some real songs
This is all wrong
Sometimes he's my best friend
Even when he's not around
But the sound of his voice
Well, it follows me down
And reminds me
Sometimes he's my best friend
Even when he's not around
But the sound of his voice
Well, it follows me down
And reminds me
You have to get over this
This pain's gone on too long
Go and write some real songs
Stay out of music stores
Don't buy that doll
-- "Hard Advice," written by Stevie Nicks, first appears on her 24 KARAT GOLD: SONGS FROM THE VAULT
I'm
being asked in real life if I'd oppose or support a challenge --
primary challenge -- in 2026 for Rashida Talib who is in the House of
Representatives and uses the party i.d. of "Democrat." I begged off
until today for providing an answer. I slept on it last night and my
answer is yes.
Rashida has done real damage.
What has she accomplished?
We
have to constantly defend her as a Democratic Party. We have to defend
her foul mouth because she never grasped the way we expect a politician
to speak. We have to defend her positions. We have to defend her
statements.
And that's fine in many ways.
When does it stop being fine?
Zell Miller.
That's what it comes down to.
You're lying and you're justifying and minimizing if you can't grasp that.
Oh, the pain she's in over her family!!!!
I don't give two s**ts and you shouldn't either.
We didn't write excuses for Zell. We didn't ponder what pain he might be in. We didn't care and we shouldn't have.
There are many things we can disagree on.
But when it comes time to elect a president?
No.
Zell,
for those who don't know, elected in 2004 -- he was in the Senate and
also used the label "Democrat" -- elected to speak at the Republican
Party's convention and to promote Bully Boy Bush.
That was the end of it for Zell and Rashida's actions (and her sister's) should spell the end for Rashida.
She actively worked (as did Rashida's sister) to defeat the Democratic Party's presidential candidate.
And
because the race is so tight, and every vote counts, and because so
much of importance rides on the outcome, it is important, now, to think
critically, in an intelligent way, about a very disappointing thing
which happened this weekend: Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib’s unfortunate
refusal, at a UAW campaign rally in Detroit, to endorse the Harris-Walz
ticket.
Tlaib’s
rationale is both straightforward and legitimate: the Biden
administration’s strong and unwavering support for Israel’s criminal
campaign of murder and destruction of Palestinians in Gaza,
and the Democratic Party’s refusal to allow even one
Palestinian-American to give voice to Palestinian concerns at the
party’s convention last summer, represent intolerable disregard for
Palestinian lives. As she explained:
“Our trauma and pain feel unseen and ignored by both parties. One party
uses our identity as a slur, and the other refuses to hear from us.
Where is the shared humanity? Ignoring us won’t stop the genocide.”
Tlaib
is a brave and savvy political leader who has consistently spoken up
against oppression and who, as the only Palestinian-American in
Congress, has spoken bravely on behalf of Palestinians in the face of
outright hostility expressed by Republicans but also by many Democrats.
It
is in this spirit that I am writing now. I am not one of those who
believes that Palestinian and Arab-Americans are under a moral duty to
vote for the Harris-Walz ticket, or that they are somehow morally
blameworthy should they refuse to so vote on grounds of either
conscience or simple identity. For all politics involves mobilizing
identity, and the Harris campaign is going all out to mobilize women in
support of reproductive freedom and women’s health--as it should do.
The
writer took that to COMMON DREAMS which might not have been the best
place for it -- read the comments. Until early in October, COMMON
DREAMS was part of the effort on the left to elect Donald Trump -- via
microaggressions and assorted other tricks. To their credit, COMMON
DREAMS did do a self-evaluation and drop that nonsense. But their
readers were already indoctrinated and you can see that in the comments
on the article.
I don't believe Rashida who came out of the gate in 2021 with "Mother F**ker" has ever worried about alienating allies.
Rashida, maybe in your post-Congressional career, you can explain why you chose to call a man a MF as an insult?
As
a feminist, I don't even like to use the term "bastard" in my writing
(I've used it once) because it's always been used as a judgment on the
woman (the mother). So I'd love to hear you on that and know that
you're not part of the rank sexism in the Dearborn and Hamtramck.
No, Rashida's always been very clear that she's going to do what's best for her.
And
as a private citizen, she can do just that. Her sister's a private
citizen and we only mention her in relationship to their combined effort
to defeat Kamala Harris.
But Rashida's not a private citizen.
She's a member of Congress who took an oath to the Constitution.
I don't see how working to put a convicted felon back into the White House reflects or honors that oath.
More to the point, not one dime of Democratic Party money should have gone to her re-election.
She took party money, she therefore was required to advance the party in the election.
She refused to do that.
She's Zell Miller and she's proven that she can't be trusted. The party can't afford a turncoat.
Back to the column:
As I stated last week, in “A Few Words to Those Currently 'Uncommitted' to Voting for Harris ,“
many Arab-Americans are clearly so disgusted by Biden administration
policy that they cannot support Harris, and it would be both foolish and
morally tone deaf to tell them that their sense of identity is less
important than any other. Arab-American fellow citizens have a right to
feel outraged and ignored and to act accordingly.
That's
interesting. I don't remember anyone fretting over being "foolish and
morally tone deaf" in telling Black women -- who've suffered in this
country for centuries, who've been raped and murdered in huge numbers,
who've been exploited and had their labor and work stolen -- "that their
sense of identity is no less important than any other." No, what I saw
was that Black women were spat on. But let's continue.
The question I want to pose here regarding Tlaib’s decision is a question of political responsibility.
Tlaib
is a Palestinian-American citizen, whose family is currently in danger
in Israel-Palestine. As a citizen and as a conscientious moral
individual, she has every right to refuse to support or to vote for
Harris, by abstaining, or voting for Jill Stein, or whatever. It would
be presumptuous for anyone to judge her as an individual, for only she knows what the current destruction of Palestine means to her and those whom she holds most dear.
But
Tlaib is not only a Palestinian-American citizen. She is also a member
of Congress and leader of the Democratic Party and the progressive left
more generally.
She
was a leader of the Democratic Party. She's not now. For those who
don't know, Rashida didn't work alone to defeat Kamala, her sister was
part of the Muslim effort in Michigan to destroy Kamala. Rashida made
her choice -- that was to re-elect Trump and if you don't get how f**ked
Rashida is now as a result, you're just a dumb fanboy online who thinks
politicians never exact revenge.
And she has a distinct political responsibility
that comes with this leadership. It requires that she be accountable to
her constituents. But it also requires the she exercise the judgment
necessary to truly lead, and to act publicly in ways that promote the
interests of her constituents; the policies she cares about; and the
survival of democracy itself. What she does publicly is by nature about
much more than her. And her decisions carry more weight than ordinary
citizen decisions.
A
second Trump administration, especially linked to a buoyed MAGA
Republican Congress, would be a simple disaster for everything that Rashida Tlaib has
long bravely supported, from civil liberties to the dignified treatment
of immigrants—including Arab immigrants—to justice for Palestinians.
For Trump is an ally of Netanyahu and his Greater Israel agenda,
and he will surely green-light even more aggression, dispossession,
destruction and death for Palestinians than we have seen over the past
year.
Rashida Tlaib is not morally wrong for refusing to support the Harris campaign. But her refusal, I submit, is politically mistaken,
because it is likely to bring about results that are politically
noxious for her supporters and their values, and for American democracy
more generally.
It
was beyond politically mistaken and it was ethically wrong. She needs
to leave the Democratic Party. She needs to leave now. She's most
likely going to be primaried and she should be. On the basis of party
loyalty, she no longer belongs in Congress.
B-b-but she's Palestinian-American!
She's Zell Miller.
She
didn't take an oath to defend her ancestor's homeland. She took an
oath to defend the Constitution and to defend this country, the United
States of America.
By helping Donald Trump get re-elected, she failed to honor her oath.
People
like her did real damage. And want to talk Palestine? People like
Rashida have destroy support -- decimated it -- for the Palestinians.
In the US, people have walked away. London? They turn out a crowd
every weekend to protest.
Here?
There's an attitude of "No, thank you."
And
that's while Joe Biden's still in the White House. Satan Trump hasn't
been sworn in and can't sick the military on protesters right now.
People are done.
You overplayed your hand and turned into the freaks that never could get the message across.
You had a window and opening and the American people were listening.
And then you proved yet again that you were freaks.
The most important issue in a US presidential election really isn't what's taking place in another country.
I
say that as someone who opposed the Iraq War, spoke out against it and
did everything I could to get those who supported it out of office.
Democracy
is under threat now. Because Gaza Freaks and others f**ked around with
our election, we're now in a very bad place and will be for the next
four years.
Immigrants and those who look like they might be immigrants are about to be targeted and rounded up.
So was it worth it, Rashida?
He's
not even in the White House yet, but Satan's already declared that the
Justice Dept should be going after any news outlet that reports on a
story he doesn't like. Not that's wrong, mind you. That wouldn't be
the Justice Dept's business either. But let's be very clear about
what's happening right now. He's attacking a paper because he didn't
like the polling results the paper covered.
Was it worth it, Rashida?
Do we need to talk about Ken Paxton suing New York?
What are you seeing, Rashida, that says, "Great job, Rashida!"
Because what I'm seeing is my country going down the tubes.
What
I'm seeing is people of color, LGBTQ+, all women, the press, free
speech, et al being under assault for the next four years.
You made your choice and you chose wrong.
Kamala
wouldn't have given you everything you wanted on the plight of the
Palestinian people. That's reality and I know you can't deal with
reality.
Here's some more
reality, you are never going to undue the prejudice against the
Palestinian people that the American people have been taught by their
media in one or two years. It is a long struggle.
Yes, people will die in Gaza during this struggle.
No, it's not fair.
But that's why you do your best to mitigate and continue attempts to educate.
Donald Trump was never going to help the Palestinian people.
Kamala would have pushed for a cease-fire.
And I don't need to hear from Adam Johnson or some other idiot telling me differently. Please see Ann's "Racists Adam Johnson and Othman Ali."
As noted here forever and a day, I've known Kamala for years. We were
not friends. I did not support her 2020 run. I did not scream, "Joe
step down and give it to Kamala!" Joe did need to step down and
thankfully he did. But that was it for me. We needed a new nominee.
When she began emerging as the party's potential nominee -- one of many
-- dictating a snapshot, I started out dismissing the idea. And then,
as I thought about it, it became very clear that she would be a solid
nominee and could be a great president. Again, I wasn't not part of her
base or a Kamala-stan. We honestly did not get along. And that's due
to personal issues and I will gladly cop to it being 100% all on my
side.
But my point in sharing this is
that she was the best choice and would have made an outstanding
president and I didn't drag all my personal issues into it to trash
her.
Rashida did.
I
don't know what to tell you, Rashida. You're damaged goods now. Not
just with the party but with Democrats across the country.
You've asked a lot of us over the last four years.
And we delivered.
We defended you.
We stood up for you.
And our thanks was you did your part to elect Donald Trump.
That didn't help the Palestinians.
And it damn well didn't help this country.
You're Zell Miller.
You
chose to make yourself that and you should be left on your own for now,
you should be primaried in 2026 (if you are, I expect I will be maxing
out with my donations to your opponent).
Ahead of the US election, Rashida felt the need to Tweet the following:
Rashida Tlaib
@RashidaTlaib
·
Nov 3
The Israeli government bombed children while they were trying to get their polio vaccination.
Oh, you care about polio vaccines, Rashida?
What
about American children? Your actions mean Junior's probably going to
be Secretary of Heatlh and Human Services and he is on record opposing
the polio vaccine.
So what about American children?
How did you defend them, how did you protect them, by working to defeat Kamala?
Everything is not about you.
You
took an oath to uphold the Constitution but you couldn't even vote to
uphold the Constitution. Why? Because the Israeli government was yet
again attacking the Palestinians.
Jim:
Ann, I'm turning to you for a number of reasons. First off, you were
raised a Green Party member. You always voted Green. This year, you
announced you'd be voting Democratic. You were very vocal about Jill
Stein being an embarrassment. You're also a Black woman and so there
were other revelations for you.
Ann:
I had no idea just how much racism there was in this country. None. I
knew it was out there. I liked to think it decreased with each year. I
mean, Cedric and I have two kids. I had thought they were growing up
in a country that was getting better and better. That's not the case.
Kamala was the most qualified candidate. And the White progressives are
forever showing up after the election talking about how Black women as a
group repeatedly vote for the Democratic Party nominee. Is Laura
Flanders semi-closeted? I can never keep up. She was an out lesbian
for years when she was doing a public radio program. Then she went to
work for AIR AMERICA RADIO and ran back in the closet. I think she's
out again but I can't keep track of her or her cowardly ways. She's the
worst among the White women. She'll start extolling Black women after a
presidential election and talking about how we saved the election for
the Democrat. That's her posing on air. She's not a Democrat and
didn't even vote for John Kerry -- though she pretended over night on
AIR AMERICA RADIO the night of that election that she had voted for
Kerry and that she was a Democrat only revealing a couple of years later
that she voted for the Green. At any rate, shove your garbage talk
about Black women back up your ass, Laura. She couldn't stay off
INSTAGRAM with her attacks on Kamala as the election approached.
Betrayal? Black women turned out for the Democratic Party over and over
and here was one of us, a couple of yards from the presidency, and you
could have elevated us and showed us support but instead you showed your
racism and ripped us apart.
Cedric:
I want to build on Ann's point in a way that people haven't.
Reparations. We supposedly believe in them. Now a big cash check to
every Black person? I don't think that's going to happen in my
lifetime. So I tend to advocate for scholarships and assistance and
investment into Black communities -- for reparations payments to happen
that way. I don't see most White people going for individual checks --
not even on the left -- because it becomes a wah-wah where's my check
too? Kamala Harris was the most qualified candidate in that race. And
if you truly believed in reparations on any level, you should have voted
for her grasping the historical importance of voting for the most
qualified candidate when she was Black. But various people on the left
-- a lot of them White -- refused to support reparations and put a Black
woman in the White House. So Laura Flanders, Amy Goodman, Katrina
vanden Heuvel and all you other White fake asses grasp that we see you
for the racists you truly are. And we don't need to hear from you and
we don't want to hear from you.
Jim:
I think Cedric's pulled us into the heart of this roundtable. We were
trying to approach it. Ruth you wrote down that you wanted to address
Gaza Freaks so I'm going to toss to you.
Ruth:
Something cruel and criminal has been taking place in Gaza since
October of last year. Many people became part of a movement to stop
it. The Gaza Freaks were the loudest and they'd pretend that they were
the first. They are, always, the first to turn people off to the
cause. That is due to the fact that they are off putting and crazy.
They worked overtime to elect Satan by advancing grifter Jill Stein
and/or advocating for Satan and attacking Kamala Harris. They did not
put the Palestinians first. They lied and told everyone not to vote for
Vice President Harris. Now Satan's headed back to the White House and
they want to pretend that's not their fault, they want to pretend that
Satan's decision to destroy Gaza is not their fault. Yes, it is. You
freaks cannot elect anyone but you damn sure can ensure that the wrong
person gets into the White House.
Isaiah:
And I'm not working with the Gaza Freaks. They're dishonest liars. I
will never work with them on any issue. If they're included, I'll find
another action to take part in.
Rebecca:
And that is the reaction. I've spoken out for the Palestinians since
college. I would often cry about the fact that they didn't get their
support they needed and that they were being slaughtered. We're going
back to college years. C.I. would talk realistically to me. She'd note
what could be done at this moment and what couldn't be done and why.
It went to the fact that the US people had a view of the Israeli state
and that they conflated that state with people being Jewish. It went to
our government's relationship with the Israeli government. When the
illegal Iraq War started, C.I. noted that this would help the
Palestinian people by educating Americans on occupations. October 7th
saw the Israeli government finally overplay their hand. And C.I. and
other non-Gaza Freaks shaped a message day after day that the American
people could embrace. And the shift is finally taking place. Enter the
Gaza Freaks. It's really over now. You would need people like C.I.
who know how to shape an argument and how to win support. And she's not
going to work with the Gaza Freaks. She's not the only one. COMMON
DREAMS, every weekend, tries to highlight some London protest for
Palestinians. They have to go to London because Gaza Freaks burned the
bridge in America. They put Donald Trump back into the White House and
no one's forgiving them for that. Nor should they.
Mike:
I'll jump in. I'm someone coming to the issue late. And I didn't have
strong beliefs one way or the other until October and the way that
coverage was addressing it. I cared about the Palestinians. CODE PINK
and it's ancient 'leadership' didn't make that happen. Amy Goodman and
her half-truths didn't make it happen. It was the people who led on it
for the first time following October 7th. They set new parameters and
they made real arguments. The Gaza Freaks? They worked for decades and
never managed to shift US opinion. So now they're back in charge and
America just doesn't care -- more likely just doesn't care to be working
with those fringe freaks. We still care about the Palestinian people.
But the Gaza Freaks ensured Trump got elected and, in doing so, they
ensured the deaths of Palestinians will continue.
Ty:
The Gaza Freaks also threatened and bullied and attacked Black people
-- especially Black women -- online. And that's not forgotten. It's
not acceptable. And I'm not going to pet them on the head and act like
they're cuddly and cute. They're racist, they're sexist and they're
homophobes. And when Orange Cheeto rains hell down on them, they have
only themselves to blame. They showed the Black community their true
nature and we're done.
Stan:
I cover entertainment at my site but I do watch and learn. And there
were times something would be in the news and I could argue it was
entertainment related and cover it and using the tools C.I. repeatedly
accessed while writing at THE COMMON ILLS, I would get some e-mails
saying that they hadn't seen the Palestinian issue that way before.
But, like Mike said, it's going to need a full revamp at this point.
The Gaza Freaks took over and sent everyone running off over disgust
with the Gaza Freaks. It's a real setback for the Palestinian cause.
While
other Trump Cabinet picks have been in the glare of the spotlight –
including embattled defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth and potential
director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard – Kennedy's nomination
has recently become more divisive following reports that one of his
allies took aim at the long-trusted polio vaccine.
Aaron
Siri, Kennedy’s top adviser helping him pick health officials for the
incoming Trump administration, petitioned the Food and Drug
Administration in 2022 to revoke or limit approval of the polio vaccine. If confirmed as HHS secretary, Kennedy would oversee the FDA and other departments.
Kennedy has questioned the effectiveness of vaccines for years and promoted debunked claims that certain vaccines are linked to autism. Trump, wary of vaccines in his first term, has said recently he is not against them even as he defends his nominee.
“Vaccines
are incredible, but maybe some aren’t, and if they aren’t, we have to
find out,” Trump told NBC earlier this month. He has since said he
supports polio vaccinations.
Some
Republican senators have embraced that uncertainty. Sen. Markwayne
Mullin, R-Okla., said there is an “epidemic” of autism in the United
States (an uptick that experts have attributed to improved diagnoses practices). “The question of vaccines, he has a right to question it,” Mullin said.
A public health expert scorned Sen. Tommy Tuberville's analysis of vaccine mandates as illogical and unscientific.
The Alabama Republican met with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is Donald Trump's nominee for health secretary, and came away saying that
they agreed that children are required to get too many vaccines instead
of just three, as both septuagenarians had gotten as children in the
1950s, and Dr. Paul Offit faulted his reasoning during an appearance on
CNN.
"That's
called survivor bias," said Offit, director of the Vaccine Education
Center at Children's Hospital, Philadelphia. "I mean, the notion is
that, you know, we were fine, so therefore everybody else is fine. This
thing about transparency [in research] is very upsetting to me, because
you can see all the data that everybody else sees. It's all open to the
public. I mean, when we, the FDA vaccine advisory committee, reviewed,
for example, the Covid vaccines in December of 2020, we reviewed about
800 pages of data. That was all on FDA's website for anybody to look
at."
"I don't know what Tommy Tuberville is talking about,"
Offit added, "but one thing that Tommy Tuberville said that should be a
key to exactly what RFK Jr. is going to do is he said, 'I just talked
to RFK Jr., and we talked about how, do we really need all these
vaccines. That tells you everything about what RFK Jr. is about to do.
He is about to do everything he can to destroy the vaccine program in this country, and I think it is a dangerous time to be a child in the United States of America."
Are you happy now, Rashida?
Elections
have real consequences. The world is going to be living in a world of
hurt with Satan headed back to the White House and it's time to see some
accountability from those who helped him win.
Butler is best known for their books Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990) and Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex (1993), in which they challenge conventional, heteronormative notions of gender and develop their theory of gender performativity. This theory has had a major influence on feminist and queer scholarship.[8] Their work is often studied and debated in film studies courses emphasizing gender studies and performativity.
It’s been 35 years since the publication of Judith Butler’s book Gender Trouble,
which argued that gender is performative (that is, it’s “real only to
the extent that it’s performed”). Recently, the queer feminist theorist
discussed the book’s enduring impact, as well as the role of gender in
this year’s elections in an interview with the Spanish newspaper El PaÃs, which had previously named them one of the most influential minds in the world.
And they had harsh words for people on the left thinking about abandoning trans people in hopes of future electoral success.
Butler laid out their stance on several issues, including access to
gender-affirming care for trans youth. “Not providing support to gender
non-conforming youth strikes me as an act of cruelty,” they said. “I
don’t think every time a kid says, oh, I want hormones, you rush to the
doctor. But you also don’t refuse the idea.”
“Womanhood won’t be erased just because we open the category and invite some more people in,” they added.
They talked about a straight, cis father they met in Chile who said
he doesn’t want to live next door to a gay family because his “way of
life is the way that God has mandated, and it is the only correct and
moral one.”
“His fear was that if there were different kinds of legitimate
families, then his form would become less natural and less necessary,”
Butler recounted.
Judith Butler is a leader and we could all take a lesson on how to stand up and how to stand firm.
Tuesday, December 18, 2024. Elon Musk is a security risk to the
United States and Trump needs to break with him, the geritocracy is
harming Congress, more news of Pete Hegseth's drunken misadventures, and
much more.
Elon Musk
and his rocket company, SpaceX, have repeatedly failed to comply with
federal reporting protocols aimed at protecting state secrets, including
by not providing some details of his meetings with foreign leaders,
according to people with knowledge of the company and internal
documents.
Concerns about the
reporting practices — and particularly about Mr. Musk, who is SpaceX’s
chief executive — have triggered at least three federal reviews, eight
people with knowledge of the efforts said. The Defense Department’s
Office of Inspector General opened a review into the matter this year,
and the Air Force and the Pentagon’s Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security separately initiated reviews last month.
The
Air Force also recently denied Mr. Musk a high-level security access,
citing potential security risks associated with the billionaire. Several
allied nations, including Israel, have also expressed concerns that he
could share sensitive data with others, according to defense officials.
Internally,
SpaceX has a team that is expected to ensure compliance with the
government’s national security rules. Some of those employees have
complained to the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General and
other agencies about the lax reporting, which goes back to at least
2021, four people with knowledge of the company said. SpaceX was awarded at least $10 billion in federal contracts with the Pentagon and NASA from 2019 to 2023, making it a major contractor.
And now we have our answer. Lawrence O'Donnell covered this development last night on MSNBC.
Now
you know why Elon stays with his body pressed against Satan's -- he's
trying to learn things that he can't otherwise -- national security
things.
Elon Musk is not an American citizen. He was
born in South Africa to a man from South Africa and to a woman born in
Canada whose family moved to South Africa and where she chose to make a
life for herself when she became an adult. Elon was happy racist in
South Africa. But the brutal system of apartheid was coming to an end,
Black people in South Africa would be free and this was so frightening
to Elon that he fled South Africa.
The racist should
not have been given US citizenship. He has divided loyalties. And, as
he demonstrated with China (among others), he's happy to take the
dictates of other governments and curry their favor.
He never should have been allowed to become a US citizen (I do not believe in dual nationality).
He also should have never gotten a security clearance.
The
rules on drug usage? This was all explained to him ahead of time. He
stated he could abide by the rules and regulations to receive a national
security clearance.
He gave his word.
His word is now meaningless because we know he didn't keep his word.
It's
time to cut off his government contracts, it's time to cut of his
clearance and it's time for Trump to decide whether he (Trump) is an
American or not? Because if he believes even 1% in this country, he
would not be hanging out with a security risk.
Now we
were warned in the lead up to the general election that Trump himself
was a risk. We were told that all it took was flattery and some foreign
leader could lead Trump around by the ring in his nose.
Elon
flatters and gets to come along, he's the new Miss Sassy having
overtaken JD Vance. Donald's boymance (don't call it a "bromance" --
neither of those weak fatties qualifies as a "bro") is putting the
country at risk.
Trump needs to erect a wall between
himself and Elon immediately. It needs to be public and it needs to
reassure the country that South African born Elon Musk is not
controlling Trump, is not learning secrets from Trump and is not in any
way running the government.
It's time to kick him out of his non-existent post.
If
Trump can't do that? I wouldn't be surprised. But I would hope
everyone watching his refusal would grasp how Trump cannot put this
country first.
He is a laughing stock around the world and he's not even been sworn in.
Richard Blumenthal is an embarrassment. Sucking up
to Elon -- he's no different than Trump at this point. The
disgraceful also includes Senator Bernie Sanders and TV comic Jon
Stewart (see "Media: An idiot says he'll sue over art evaluation, two other idiots defend Trump's nominees") who not only praised Elon (and Robert Kennedy Junior) but also whined on air about people calling them out for their fawning.
There was no reason to praise Elon.
But the know-nothings did anyway and, oops, turns out now we see how they truly know nothing.
The
left does not advance or pimp odious people in order to look 'fair.'
Suck ups do. And what Bernie and Richard and Jon have done is just as
disgusting as Mika and Joe bowing and scraping before Trump.
Senator Elizabeth Warren's office issued the following:
“Mr. Musk’s substantial
private interests present a massive conflict of interest with the role
he has taken on as your ‘unofficial co-president.’”
“Currently, the American
public has no way of knowing whether the advice that he is whispering to
you in secret is good for the country—or merely good for his own bottom
line.”
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren
(D-Mass.) sent a letter to President-Elect Trump with concerns about
Elon Musk’s conflicts of interest as he serves as a top advisor for the
incoming president.
In the weeks since the election, Mr. Musk has been named the co-chair
of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency, and has
frequently been by Trump’s side, joining his phone calls with Ukraine’s
president, “[met] secretly" with Iran’s ambassador to the United
Nations.
“But Mr. Musk is no ordinary citizen,” wrote
Senator Warren, pointing out that he is the CEO of several companies
that have significant interests before the federal government.
“Mr. Musk’s substantial private interests present a massive conflict
of interest with the role he has taken on as your ‘unofficial
co-president,’” continued Senator Warren. “Currently,
the American public has no way of knowing whether the advice that he is
whispering to you in secret is good for the country—or merely good for
his own bottom line.”
SpaceX, Tesla, and Mr. Musk’s other companies have an ongoing
interest in how the government does or does not enforce labor laws,
workplace safety rules, environmental regulations, and other federal
laws. Additionally, his companies have been the subject of at least 20
recent investigations or reviews, creating adversarial and significant
entanglements with federal regulators.
For example, Mr. Musk’s automobile company, Tesla, has obtained
nearly $42 million in government contracts to provide electric vehicles
(EVs) and services to the government. The government indirectly
subsidizes the company and its competitors via a $7,500 federal tax
credit for EVs. Similarly, SpaceX, Mr. Musk’s rocket company, has
received nearly $20 billion in government contracts, providing crucial
rocket launches.
Indeed, Mr. Musk has already benefitted substantially from
President-elect Trump’s victory: in the five days after the election,
Tesla’s stock surge alone increased Mr. Musk’s fortune by $70 billion.
“Federal law contains ethics rules for government employees that are
specifically designed to protect the public from dangerous conflicts of
interest and ensure that government employees are working on behalf of
the public interest rather than twisting government policy to line their
own pockets,” continued the senator. “As a member of
the transition team, Mr. Musk is not a federal employee, but the
conflicts he faces are enormous and the need for him to be subject to
similar ethics standards is obvious.”
On November 27, 2024, the Trump transition team released its
Transition Team Ethics Plan, which outlines that “transition team
members will avoid both actual and apparent conflicts of interest,”
including financial interests of their “organization with which they
have a business or close personal relationship.” Mr. Musk appears to be
playing an influential role in the transition, especially as a key
adviser to Trump and a high-profile policymaker in his role as co-chair
of the DOGE Committee.
“He should be held to the ethics standards that you have established
for your transition team and should provide clarity about his role and
his activities in order to reassure the American public that he is
working solely on their behalf and not using his role in the transition
as an opportunity to fatten his own wallet,” concluded Senator Warren.
Senator Warren is requesting Trump’s transition team provide answers to her questions no later than December 23, 2024.
###
See,
that's what you do. You don't fawn over Elon -- the way Blumenthal,
Sanders, Stewart and Ro Khanna keep doing. No, you call him out.
I-I-I-uh-uh-uh didn't know!
You damn well knew. You're a whore for money like far too many people in your demographic.
There's
a reason one of THE BIBLE's best known verses is Matthew 19:24, "It is
easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man
to enter the kingdom of God."
You tossed that out, you
tossed aside common sense, you tossed aside basic principles and you
decided to normalize and promote Elon Musk.
You should all be ashamed.
Let's
turn to the disaster that is Pete Hegseth. Satan wants him to be
Secretary of Defense. This despite the fact that he is not qualified
for the job. He has no experience in running anything (the two veterans
organizations that he was run out of make that especially clear). He
apparently assaulted a woman -- who his lawyer says should come forward
knowing full well that the woman had to sign an NDA. His actions at the
veterans organizations were text book harassment. He is touring the
Senate with his bodyguard -- a man guilty of beating a civilian. None
of this says, "Secretary of Defense!" It's all a shame and an
embarrassment only made worse by his sending his Mommy out to defend
him. Little middle-aged boy who can't fight his own battles sends Mommy
to fight them for him.
As Lawrence O'Donnell noted in
the video at the start of the snapshot, Pete also has a drinking
problem. But, he promises, if he is made Secretary of Defense, he will
stop drinking.
Fox News promoted the controversial 2023 New Years clip featuring Fox
News host and Trump Defense nominee Pete Hegseth drinking champagne
directly from the bottle before being dunked into a tank full of the
alcoholic beverage.
The clip, which was recently resurfaced by MeidasTouch, was originally
shared by Fox News on their official website and Facebook page.
A few comments left on the Fox News Facebook page called the New Years Special, a “letdown” and “not family friendly.”
Pete Hegseth, Trump's Department of Defense nominee, is currently
fighting against allegations that he has been drinking on the job and
that co-workers at Fox News were concerned that he has a drinking
problem. NBC News reported
that, "ten current and former Fox employees say Trump’s pick for
defense secretary drank in ways that concerned his co-workers."
NBC News said Fox News colleagues "smelled alcohol on him before he went
on air" and "heard him talk about being hungover as he was getting
ready or on set." NBC News stated that "one of the sources said they
smelled alcohol on him as recently as last month."
House
Democrats are on the verge of changing out some of their top committee
members, a reflection of the generational change some have wanted to see
as the party gears up for President-elect Donald Trump’s second term.
The caucus is set to vote today on new leaders for three important committees where the dynamic is playing out.
“In
the run-up to the vote, younger lawmakers challenged ranking Democratic
members who have led their committees for years,” our colleague Marianna Sotomayor writes.
“These challengers and their allies appear less concerned with
seniority and more willing to nudge out elder statesmen to make sure
they have the sharpest leaders in place to take on President-elect
Donald Trump’s agenda and tussle with House Republican chairmen.”
The highest-profile example is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s race against Rep. Gerry Connolly (Virginia)
for the top Democratic slot on the House Oversight Committee. The
powerful House Democratic Steering Committee backed Connolly on Monday,
but Ocasio-Cortez (New York) is hoping to pull off an upset.
At 35, Ocasio-Cortez is less than half of Connolly’s age.
House
Democrats will also decide whether to follow the Steering Committee
recommendation to install Rep. Angie Craig (Minnesota)
as the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee. The committee
selected Craig, 52, over the current ranking Democrat, Rep. David
Scott (Georgia), 79, and another challenger, Rep. Jim
Costa (California), 72.
AOC
did not get the post. Cry baby Connolly did. "Cry baby"? I covered
way too many hearings that Connolly was a part of. He cries constantly
and that goes back a decade. So there should have been concern about
putting a cry baby in charge of Oversight. The slot should have gone
to AOC. The party remains unable to move forward in the House.
Fresh
off a comfortable re-election victory in 2018, Sen. Sherrod Brown,
D-Ohio, considered running for president on a populist message aimed at
the many working-class Midwest voters who had fled the Democratic Party
in favor of Donald Trump.
Brown
passed on the White House campaign. Now, six years later, he is soon to
be unemployed, having recently lost his bid for a fourth Senate term.
It will be the first time since 1992 — and only the second time since
1974 — that he will not hold an elected office.
Trump,
meanwhile, will return to the presidency next month, and the
existential challenges are already roaring back for Brown and the
Democrats. The challenges ring true to Brown, 72, who has been warning
about them for years. And, despite his defeat, Brown’s perch in a part
of the country where Democrats are a tarnished brand presents him with
the opportunity to have a vocal role in the party if he wants one.
In
a recent interview with NBC News, Brown talked like someone who does.
He spoke of a “post-Senate mission” to reorient Democrats as the “party
of workers” in Middle America. He also revealed that he has received
calls from people encouraging him to run for chair of the Democratic
National Committee, though he added that the position does not interest
him.
“Being
the national chair, you have a platform,” Brown said. “You also have to
run an organization with 50 state chairs. … I don’t want to spend my
time on an airplane raising money.”
But
Brown’s post-Senate mission could lead him back to the Senate. He left
the door open to running for office again in 2026, when Ohio will hold a
special election to fill the remainder of Vice President-elect JD
Vance’s term. Brown also noticeably described the final remarks he
delivered in the Senate on Tuesday as his “last” speech — not a
“farewell,” as such addresses from outgoing senators are commonly
known.
Should
Sherrod run for the Senate again? It's an open seat and right now he
would be the big name. Last November, he lost by approximately 5%.
Factor in that it was presidential election year. If Ohio Democrats
want to rally behind him, it would make sense for him to run for the
seat. He's 72, normally that would mean a six year term with him being
80 when he completed it. However, this would be a special election so
there would be a different rule: "If Brown does run and wins the special election in 2026, he will have to run again in 2028 for a full term. In 2028, Brown’s fellow Ohioan Vance will likely be at the top of the GOP presidential ticket."
I'm
not in Ohio, the people there will need to determine whether or not
Brown should run again. I find him to have more common sense and
knowledge than probably 90 members currently serving in the Senate. I
have no ill will towards him and believe he makes a sincere effort to
address the problems facing our country.
But does it make sense to invest all the time and energy
required -- I'm referring to the Democratic Party, does it make sense of
them to invest all the time and energy required to win the seat for
someone of that age? Maybe if they don't have anyone ready for a statewide race.
That's the state issue but it should probably be something we discuss
nationally. Where do we want resources to go? What type of candidates
do we want to run? This goes far beyond radical-left-center left and
centrist. It's about the future of the Democratic Party and you don't
influence anything by waiting until primaries to start debating what's
required, what's needed and how do we reach that point?
That's what's at stake and I hope Sam Seder's making that point in the video below -- the title indicates it is.
You
build a party or you paralyze it. And it's past time for more and more
reigns to be handed over in Congress. I don't know if people grasp
this but the Baby Boom has held onto power. Yes, a few dropplings are
being passed on due to rightful complaints. Grasp that Gen X did not
get handed the reigns. The Baby Boom refused to do so. They should
have done it a long time ago.
We need to see a serious shake up in the House and in the Senate.
And
we need to see it now. In 2028, most people are going to be sick of
geritocracy -- my prediction -- as a result of Satan Trump's
incompetence.
Few
policy proposals were as central to President-elect Donald Trump’s 2024
campaign pitch as tariffs. When asked about his economic policy, Trump
almost always fell back on tariffs as a shorthand for his vision.
Details were scarce elsewhere, but huge tariffs were ever-present.
“The most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff,’ and it’s my favorite word,” he told the Economic Club of Chicago in October. It showed. And the idea seemed to be relatively popular, if not overwhelmingly so.
But there was always a major question about how much that support would hold up over time. Trump, after all, falsely pitched tariffs as
taxes paid by other countries — they’re actually taxes on imports that
are paid by U.S. consumers — and voters didn’t seem to understand their
inflationary potential. Polls generally showed a minority of Americans
were able to pick the right definition of a tariff; Republicans
overwhelmingly subscribed to Trump’s incorrect framing.
And sure enough, as the reality of Trump’s proposed tariffs approaches, Americans appear to be registering more concern.
Recent
polling suggests Americans have begun to understand — and agree — that
Trump’s tariffs could drive their prices up. And overall support for
Trump’s specific tariffs appears to have cooled. What support does exist
seems to be only a few inches deep.
Four
years of old man Satan's incompetence and you're going to see a desire
for real change and push to move away from the geritocracy.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
Murray, Baldwin, Colleagues Introduce NDAA Amendment to Protect Military Parents’ Right to Health Care for Their Kids
House-passed NDAA included a ban on health care for transgender
kids, stripping servicemembers of parental rights to make health care
decisions for their children
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) joined Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and 19 other Senators to introduce an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2025
to remove language that would strip away servicemembers’ parental
rights to access medically necessary health care for their transgender
children.
The U.S. House of Representatives-passed NDAA includes language that
bans health care for transgender kids and TRICARE patients under the age
of 18.
The amendment is co-sponsored by Senators Ed Markey (D-MA), Brian
Schatz (D-HI), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Dick Durbin
(D-IL), Patty Murray (D-WA), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA),
Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Tina
Smith (D-MN), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ron
Wyden (D-OR), Alex Padilla (D-CA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), John
Fetterman (D-PA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), and Martin Heinrich (D-NM).
Every major medical
and mental health association in the U.S., representing more than 1.3
million U.S. doctors, supports access to this medically necessary,
evidence-based health care for transgender people.
If the House-passed NDAA becomes law, it is estimated that 6,000 –
7,000 transgender children of servicemembers would not be able to access
the health care that their parents had approved.
The amendment to the FY2025 NDAA would strike Sec. 708 of the
House-passed NDAA, which would ban TRICARE from offering medically sound
health care for our youngest transgender servicemembers and to
transgender military children under 18.
A full version of the amendment is available here.
An online version of this release is available here.
