Category Archives: fucking democrats, I declare

it’s just a few fingers

Posted on by
3

Every few weeks Bsky has this…I can’t call it a discussion or an argument, because it’s neither of those things. Even calling a discourse doesn’t quite fit, because that term refers to a serious conversation–and while the subject is very very serious, it’s not a conversation. In a conversation, both sides (all sides) are attempting to communicate. This is about folks repeating their positions on the subject.

The subject is voting. The positions, essentially, are as follows:

  1. Vote for the Democrat even if they suck on a particular issue, because they’re still infinitely better than the Republican.
  2. I will not vote for somebody who opposes an issue that is central to my life.

The argument made folks in the first category is pretty simple: “I know your situation is precarious. I know you’re just barely holding on. I feel your pain. But you belong to a small subset of the voting population. In order to effect change, we have to first win the election. After we’ve done that, we can see about improving your situation.”

The argument made by folks in the second category is even more simple: “This is my life. I won’t vote for somebody who will make my life more difficult than it already is.”

Sorry, I hope you understand that I have to do this to win the election.

The counter-argument by the first category is: “To get elected, we may have to cause you some minor inconvenience. You may end up with a bruised finger. At worst, you’ll lose a finger. Maybe two. But the Republicans will happily chop off both your hands. Which is worse?”

The counter-counter-argument is: “I shouldn’t have to settle for which is worse. I want better. I deserve better. I won’t vote for a candidate who thinks I should settle for which is worse. I’ll only vote for a candidate who offers me better.”

The counter-counter-counter-argument is: “Refusing to vote for the Democrat guarantees you a future of being handless. If you vote for the Democrat, you’ll at least have the chance that eventually, at some vague point in the future, you’ll get some prosthetic fingers. If you’re patient, there’ll probably be a time when you’ll never have to worry about losing any of your appendages.”

The counter-etc. argument is: “Even if I vote for the Democrat, I’ll lose some fingers and maybe fall to my death. You’ll be sitting inside, safe and whole. You want my vote, give me a candidate who’ll protect my right to keep my hands. Give me a candidate who’ll take my hand and help me through the window. Give me a candidate who’ll welcome me into the room. Until then, nope.”

The thing is, both of those folks are right. They’re just not talking about the same thing. The folks in category 1 are concerned about winning elections, and it’s true that you can’t effect change unless you win elections. But the folks in category 2 are concerned about their survival and the survival of their people. Winning an election only matters to folks who get to survive.

I’m a cisgender hetero white guy. I recognize that I’ll probably be mostly safe, regardless of who wins. I’ll vote for the Democrat. But I’ll work for and support candidates who respect everybody’s civil rights. And I won’t fault or blame anybody who refuses to vote for a candidate who’s willing to chop off a few marginalized fingers, even if it means a Republican gets elected.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We must burn the patriarchy to the ground. We need to burn it, gather the ashes, piss on them, douse them in oil, and set them on fire again. Then drive a stake directly through the ashes where its heart used to be. Then set fire to the stake. Burn it and keep burning it for generations. Then nuke it from orbit (you know why). Then open a semi-dry Riesling and serve it with a nice Emmental cheese and some crackers. I mean, we’re not savages, are we.

Other Editorial Note: The illustration is by Sidney Paget, for the short story The Engineer’s Thumb in the 1892 edition of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.

if we do this right…

Posted on by
3

Overheard in a hallway outside the Oval Office.

Trump: We must deport violent criminals.
ICE: Okay.
Stephen Miller: I want 3000 undocumented immigrants detained.
ICE: Okay.
Miller: That’s 3000 detained each day.
ICE: Oka…what? Each day?
Miller: Each day.
ICE: How are we supposed to identify, locate, and detain 3000 violent undocumented criminal immigrants each day?
Miller: Use the IRS.
ICE: Okay.
Miller: Find out who pays them, arrest them where they work.
ICE: Okay.
Miller: Take them when they’re picking crops.
ICE: Okay.
Miller: But at the end of the day, let them get the crops in first.
ICE: Okay.
Miller: Also, order them to appear at immigration offices to support their claims of asylum, arrest them at the courthouse.
ICE: Okay.
Miller: Might as well detain their families too. They’re probably illegal too.
ICE: Okay.
Miller: Any questions?
ICE: Nope. Arrest the ones who work, the ones who pay taxes, the ones who show up for their hearings. We can do that.
Miller: Good.
ICE: But what about those violent criminals?
Miller: If we do this right, the ones who are left will become violent. Then you can just shoot them.
ICE: Okay.
Some Random Democrat: We must focus on kitchen table issues.

yeah, this is where we are now

Posted on by
4

Yeah, I don’t want to include a screenshot of this (because I don’t want it to show up in the link), but last night Comrade Donald Trump posted this astonishing and delusional comment on his Truth Social network:

The United States Military just entered the Great State of California and, under Emergency Powers, TURNED ON THE WATER flowing abundantly from the Pacific Northwest, and beyond. The day of putting a Fake Environmental argument, over the PEOPLE, are OVER. Enjoy the water, California!!!

Trump is claiming he ordered the US military (all of it? some branch of it? maybe a special secret water control operations unit?) to slip into California undetected, after which they flipped the Master Toggle Switch that controls the flow of water from the Pacific Northwest (or ‘beyond,’ whatever the fuck that is). Remember, this jamoke is the duly elected President of These United States. I don’t know if he actually believes this (which would make him actively delusional), or if he’s under the impression the citizenry of the US is stupid enough to believe a lie this blatant (and maybe they are, since they voted for him), or if he’s just bragging in order to feel good about himself (which is entirely possible). In any case, this is seriously fucked up.

Here’s the reality: The US Bureau of Reclamation (which is a federal bureau utterly lacking in troops) had shut down a few water pumps in Northern California for maintenance. The maintenance was completed yesterday and the pumps were restarted. End of.

This wildly bizarre episode is just one of dozens of equally disturbing things Trump has done in his first week as POTUS. It’s maybe the least damaging thing he’s done. The response of MAGA Republicans to all this bullshit? They’ve climbed up a tree and are hoping Trump’s wolves will find somebody else to eat first.

Republican Members of Congress addressing MAGA voters.

And the Democratic response? It’s almost as bad. The leadership seems to be attempting to sort out WHICH of Trump’s outrages they should address first, and how to craft the appropriate messaging to address that particular outrage in order to assuage the wolves.

What (in my opinion) they should be doing is standing up on their own hind legs and howling at the top of their lungs. They should be objecting LOUDLY to every single illegal command Trump has given. Hell, they should be objecting loudly to most of the legal commands he’s given, since most of those are cruel and intended to hurt people. They should be chasing MAGA up the tree.

The Democrats need to get angry and really loud and obnoxious; it’s the only way they can cut through the Trump Cascade of Bullshit. Otherwise, they’re just joining the GOP in the tree.

well, that was something

Posted on by
8

US presidential debates have always been…wait, wrong approach. US presidential debates have NEVER been debates. I mean, a debate is a discussion, right? A discussion between individuals or groups about a particular topic or a related range of topics. When you sit around the coffee shop and have a convivial argument with your friends about the merits of film photography versus digital imagery, that’s a debate. When you sit in a bar and challenge your friend to prove that Star Wars has a more coherent universe than Star Trek, that’s a debate. These may be stupid debates, but they’re more true to the debate concept than whatever the fuck that was last night.

[Okay, I wrote this yesterday morning, then had a Squirrel Moment and got distracted by something outside. Then I had to go to the gym and get ritually humiliated in pickleball by a bunch of savage retired women. Then there was lunch and the day just got away from me. So any reference to ‘last night’ should be interpreted as ‘Thursday’.]

Presidential debates in the US have just been awkward Q&A sessions. The moderators ask a question, the candidates give some sort of an answer that may or may not be tangentially related to the question. There’s rarely any real discussion, and to my knowledge there’s never ever been any attempt to persuade their opponent to change their mind.

What we saw last night was…well, I don’t know what the fuck it was. Whatever it was, it was ugly. And the reaction by most of the US political news media to whatever it was, was even uglier. In fact, the news media reaction has been just as fucking stupid as Donald Trump was last night.

How stupid? The New York Times editorial board called for Joe Biden to drop out of the race. Why? Because he gave a poor performance. Which is true; Biden seemed older than usual, and his voice was raspy and congested. He didn’t always give a consistent, reasoned answer to the moderator’s questions. He rambled a bit, he stuttered (the guy has always had a stutter, that’s not unusual for him), and he sometimes strayed from the topic. It was unpleasant to watch.

Trump, on the other hand, was fucking vile. Which is to say, Trump was Trump. Rude. Often incoherent. Insulting. Openly lying in literally almost every comment he made. But he told those lies in a loud, confident voice, as opposed to Biden’s tremulous responses. Trump refused to even attempt to answer the moderator’s questions, while Biden tried to answer them.

But NYT thinks Biden should drop out of the race? Because he’s old and did poorly in a debate? Because he’s a decent, patriotic American, Biden should be willing to sacrifice his presidential career for the good of the nation?

What about the convicted felon and sex pest? The NYT did NOT call for Donald Trump to drop out of the race. In (grudging) defense of the NYT, there’s no point in suggesting Trump drop out for the good of the nation, because he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the good of the nation. He doesn’t give a rat’s ass about anything but his ownself. Trump is a fucking cancerous tumor; the only way he’ll leave the political body if he’s surgically excised.

Trump mugging democracy

This is a seriously risky moment in US history. The Republican Party has become an authoritarian White Christian Nationalist party, openly hostile to the very concept of representative democracy. That’s bad enough, but we also have what is essentially a rogue Supreme Court. In the last couple of weeks alone, SCOTUS has decided that 1) homeless people can be banned from sleeping outside even if there’s no other place for them to sleep, 2) random judges should have more control over the environment, public health, workplace safety & consumer protections than expert regulators, 3) public officials can accept ‘gratuities’ from wealthy businesses for favorable decisions AFTER the decision is made (but not before the decision is made, because that would be bribery), and 4) that obstructing or impeding an official proceeding only applies if you destroy records or documents, not if you violently disrupt Congress by breaking in and threatening members of Congress. (We still don’t know how SCOTUS feels about presidential immunity for criminal acts, but I’ve got no confidence in them doing what is obviously right.)

Joe Biden is NOT an ideal candidate. I mean, his role in enabling the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank is, to me, incomprehensible and unforgivable. But I’ll vote for the guy because he IS the Democratic candidate. I’ll vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is because fuck Trump and the GOP. Fuck them in the neck.

can we please just impeach this asshole?

Posted on by
3

A couple weeks ago — the day before Valentine’s Day, in fact — the House GOP impeached the Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas. Why? Did he commit any ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’? Nope. Is he even suspected of committing any HC&M? Nope. Did the Republicans actually think there was any way in hell the Senate would act on this? Nope. So why did they impeach him?

Because: 1) Donald Fucking Trump wanted somebody — preferably Biden, but anybody in the Biden administration — impeached. 2) They want to use scary brown immigrants as an election issue. 3) Pure malignant spite and the desire to hurt people. 4) They hope it’ll give their base the appearance that they’re doing something. 5) They wanted to say ‘Fuck you’ to Joe Biden and his entire administration.

These are all bad reasons to impeach anybody. That pisses me off. But what pisses me off just as much — and maybe more — is that there are people who absolutely fucking deserve to be impeached. People who are totally impeach-worthy. People whose past behavior has earned an impeachment and whose future behavior actually threatens the future of representative democracy in the United States. People like this fucking guy:

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States Clarence ‘Deep Pockets’ Thomas

Right now, we have the most openly corrupt and partisan SCOTUS in US history — and ain’t nobody more openly corrupt and partisan than Clarence Thomas. He’s had his hand out since Day One. This avaricious sumbitch would steal the sugar out of a cake. Hell, he’d do it while you watched and dare you to call him on it. He barely tries to hide it. For decades, he’s received ‘gifts’ from billionaire ‘friends’ whose business interests depended on favorable SCOTUS opinions. These are ‘friends’ he made after he was tapped for SCOTUS; it’s not like they’re his old high school buddies. He’s accepted these gifts, he’s failed to report them as he’s required to do, and he’s ruled on their cases. That’s some serious grifting, right there.

Then, of course, there’s all the awful shit his wife has pulled. I’m talking about her encouraging and promoting the January 6th Insurrection, which is truly bad its ownself. And when her shit came up before SCOTUS, did Clarence recuse himself like any ethical jurist would? Nope. He not only sat on the case, he was the ONLY justice on the bench that voted in a way that protected his wife.

There is absolutely no sustainable argument for Clarence Thomas to remain an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. I mean, there are other assholes on SCOTUS we could do without, but Clarence is the bull goose grifter and the most obvious and deserving candidate for impeachment.

I can say, with absolute confidence and mathematical certitude, that if Clarence had been appointed by a Democrat and had been writing liberal decisions, the Republicans would have held a decade worth of hearings by now. If Congressional Republicans are willing to impeach Mayorkas over bullshit, why aren’t Democrats willing to impeach this grasping, covetous bastard? What in the stonewashed fuck is wrong with Democrats? Why won’t Democrats at least TRY to do what’s right?

You don’t have to answer that. The answer is pretty obvious (SPOILER: they’re comfortable political cowards who’ll mewl and grizzle about how unfair it all is, but won’t fucking act).

Look, I’m not asking Democrats to act like Republicans. I mean, they’re assholes. They’re willing to lie, fabricate, mislead, obfuscate, and deceive in order to score petty political points. Democrats don’t need to do that. They can just present verifiable facts to support a legit impeachment inquiry.

Seriously, the US would be better off if Democrats would just TRY to impeach this asshole. It would be a worthy effort even if the Senate failed to convict him. So c’mon, give it a shot, Democrats. What have you got to lose?

an extremely grudging vote for uncle joe biden

Posted on by
16

It’s still 260+ days until the presidential election, which means a whole hell of a lot could happen to change things. But as things stand right now, I’m going to be voting—with some reluctance—for Uncle Joe Biden.

Why the reluctance? Because of his unwillingness to lean on the government of Israel to stop the genocide of Palestinians. Uncle Joe has been a much better president than I’d expected. Better than I’d hoped for, in fact. Yeah, he’s old and yeah, he makes gaffes and says stupid shit periodically. But overall, I’ve got to say he’s had an incredible number of accomplishments—especially considering the massive ongoing clusterfuck created and sustained by House Republicans.

But still, it’s impossible to be happy about casting a vote for a man who has enabled Bibi Netanyahu to physically destroy Gaza and kill tens of thousands of civilians. And for anybody who wants to argue that opposing the Israeli Defense Force is the same as supporting Hamas, go fuck yourself. What Hamas did on October 7th was monstrous. No matter how frustrated they were with the Israeli government, there’s no fucking way to justify the slaughter of civilians.

But that same notion applies to the government of Israel. The willful slaughter of more than 30,000 Palestinians in Gaza (10,000 of whom were children) isn’t justice for the 1100 people killed during the Hamas attack. Biden’s willingness to go along with the genocide and the destruction of two-thirds of Gaza’s infrastructure makes it almost impossible to vote for him.

Almost impossible.

Despite the many good things Uncle Joe has done domestically and internationally (and personally—the guy has effectively reduced my student loan payments to almost zero), I’m extremely unhappy with the thought of voting for him. But I will, grudgingly.

Why? Because of this one simple fact: if Biden wins re-election, we’ll have a chance to elect a better leader in 2028. But if Trump wins re-election, there’s a very good chance the US will die as a democracy and we may not have anything remotely like a fair election in 2028.

That’s incentive enough.

unqualified

Posted on by
8

I haven’t written anything about Comrade Donald Trump for…well, quite a while. Months. That’s not because he’s become irrelevant; it’s because I’m just sick to fucking death of writing about him. But…

Trump disqualified from Colorado’s 2024 primary ballot by state Supreme Court

That was the headline run by The Washington Post last night. Try to imagine the size of the smile that crossed my face when I heard that.

Just a couple of weeks earlier, in another Colorado court, Judge Sarah B. Wallace found that Trump had, in fact, engaged in insurrection. However, she ruled he shouldn’t be removed from the ballot. Why? Because she determined Section 3 of the 14th Amendment didn’t “intend to include the President as ‘an officer of the United States.”

Seriously. It was a cowardly ruling, in my opinion; a clear attempt to dodge her responsibility as an officer of the court. Let’s look at the text of Section 3:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Judge Wallace’s decision was appealed (by Republicans, by the way) to Colorado’s Supreme Court. Yesterday, they basically said, “Sorry, Judge Wallace, but POTUS sure as shit IS an officer of the US. Dude ain’t eligible to be president on account of that insurrection business.”

So, what happens next? Trump will appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States. In case you’ve hit your head and forgotten, let me remind you that three SCOTUS Justices were appointed by Trump, and Clarence Thomas’s wife was directly involved in the insurrection. Thomas should recuse himself, but he’s not required to. And let’s face it, that motherfucker is massively corrupt, so he probably won’t. He can make bank off this case. The three Trump appointees? Well, we’re supposed to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they’ll judge the matter based entirely on the law. Don’t hold your fucking breath.

As I understand it (and yeah, I’m not a lawyer), the fundamental issues SCOTUS will have to determine are 1) whether the State of Colorado has the authority to determine if Trump committed insurrection against the United States, and 2) if he’s had sufficient due process to defend himself against that charge.

SCOTUS might refuse to accept the case, but that’s really unlikely. If they did, the Colorado ruling would stand. Trump won’t be on the ballot in Colorado. The reality is SCOTUS will almost certainly agree to hear the appeal. But they could slow walk it; they could hold off on issuing a ruling until early next year…February or March…by which time Trump will very likely have locked in the GOP nomination. Then they could claim removing Trump from the ballot in Colorado would create chaos and deprive the voters of their voting rights.

Is this asshole qualfiied to be POTUS?

That’s just a guess, of course. I have absolutely no idea what they’ll do. But I want to address one bullshit argument that we’re going to hear frequently over the next few weeks. People will argue that it should be up to the voters to determine if Trump should be POTUS; it shouldn’t be determined by any court.

That’s a bullshit argument. It sounds reasonable, but it’s not. The Constitution of the US tells us who is eligible to be president. Article II places only three limits on qualification: the person must be 1) at least 35 years of age, 2) be a natural born citizen, and 3) must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years. The 14th Amendment adds a 4th qualification: a person who has taken an oath to support the Constitution but engaged in insurrection or rebellion is NOT qualified. And the 22nd Amendment added a 5th qualification: no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.

So there you have it. It’s not up to the voters. If the voters want Barack Obama to be president, they’re out of luck: he’s done his two terms. If the voters want Arnold Schwarzeneggar to be president, they’re out of luck: he’s not a natural born citizen. If they want Taylor Swift to be president, they’re out of luck: she’s not old enough…yet.

And if the voters want Trump to be president, they’re…well, they’re confused and stupid. But they’ll also have to wait until the most partisan and corrupt SCOTUS in the history of the US decides what to do.

The future of democracy in the US depends on them. I’d like to say I’m optimistic. But damn, optimism is pretty fucking hard to muster right now.

cool down papa, don’t you blow your top

Posted on by
1

The buzzard told the monkey you are choking me.
Release your hold and i will set you free.
The monkey looked the buzzard right dead in the eye,
And said your story’s so touching, but it sounds just like a lie.

Irving Mills / Nat king cole

Two scenarios:

Scenario One: President Uncle Joe Biden’s lawyers, while going through files in an office in a private policy institute Uncle Joe used in the period between being Vice President and President, come across two files that appear to be classified. They notify the Department of Justice and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and return the documents without being asked. The Attorney General immediately appoints a prosecutor to investigate. (Edit: apparently there were ten documents, not two.)

Scenario Two: President Comrade Trump has multiple highly classified documents transferred to his home, which is shared with a public venue. Four months later, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) asks for the return of those documents. Trump returns two dozen boxes of material, including some of the classified documents. NARA informs Trump that they’re still missing some documents, and ask him to return the rest of the material he took from the White House. Seven months later, Trump returns another dozen boxes of material. A year after Trump left office, NARA informs Trump he STILL hasn’t returned all the documents. The Department of Justice is notified. Sixteen months after Trump left office, the DOJ issues a subpoena for the return of those documents. Trump claims he’s returned everything. Eighteen months after leaving office, a federal judge issues a warrant for the FBI to search and seize the still-missing documents. They find nearly 200 classified documents, including some labeled TS/SCI (which are so secret they’re only to be read in a secure room in which no cameras or recording devices are allowed). In total, around 13,000 documents Trump wasn’t allowed to take are recovered from Mar-a-Lago. The Attorney General appoints a prosecutor to investigate the matter 23 months after Trump removed the documents.

The News Media: Both Trump and Biden in possession of classified documents! Prosecutor to investigate!

Attorney General Merrick Garland hears Trump’s attorneys.

This is absolute bullshit, of course. Biden and his lawyers acted properly. They discovered the two documents, notified the appropriate agencies, and acknowledged the mistake. Trump did the exact opposite. He deliberately removed thousands of documents, he and his lawyers resisted returning them, lied about them, and the FBI was forced to go to Mar-a-Lago in order to retrieve them.

Attorney General Merrick Garland delayed ordering a prosecutor to investigate Trump’s handling of classified documents for nearly two years, but immediately ordered one to investigate Biden’s handling of them. Why? To appear non-partisan. To avoid giving MAGA Republicans a reason to claim the DOJ is unfair. As if MAGA Republicans have any interest in Fact or Truth. MAGA Republicans will, of course, claim the two scenarios are exactly the same.

The only question is whether the news media will have the integrity to report this matter accurately. And sadly, I think we know the answer to that. Is there anything we can do about it?

Nope, not really. And let’s face it, there are more equally stupid but far more critical issues we’ll be dealing with in the very near future. In this on particular case, maybe we should consider the advice of Nat King Cole: “Cool down papa don’t you blow your top.”