Chit-Chat: The Feels

[EtheltoTillie]

Matt Gaetz as Attorney General.  I give up.

[bluegirl147]

6 minutes ago, EtheltoTillie said:

Matt Gaetz as Attorney General.  I give up.

Let them play their silly reindeer games.  We all knew it was going to be bad.  Hopefully this will serve as a wake up call for all those undecided voters to decide better the next time. Assuming there is a next time.

[PRgal]

16 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

Let them play their silly reindeer games.  We all knew it was going to be bad.  Hopefully this will serve as a wake up call for all those undecided voters to decide better the next time. Assuming there is a next time.

Last time, he fired a bunch of people within the first couple of months or so.  Wonder if it’ll happen again this time.  

[bluegirl147]

1 minute ago, PRgal said:

Last time, he fired a bunch of people within the first couple of months or so.  Wonder if it’ll happen again this time.  

He won't fire Gaetz. He has been licking Trump's.........boots for a long time.

What I'm afraid will happen is a bunch of federal prosecutors will resign in protest for having to answer to Gaetz.

[bluegirl147]

And Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence. That should make it easy for Putin to find out everything.

[Ohiopirate02]

Is attorney general one of the cabinet positions that needs congressional approval? Because if so, those hearings are going to be something. I am aware that congress pretty much rubberstamps 99% of any president's picks, but Matt could end up being the exception. I really do not think the average American is aware of Matt and what he has been credibly accused of in the past. There are lines that the majority of Americans will not cross and expect their leaders to never cross and one of those lines is a man grooming a teenaged boy. 

[Makai]

Trump still hasn’t signed ethics agreement required for presidential transition

The last line of the article is chilling. 

Quote

That has been a problem in the past: In 2000, as the Supreme Court awaited a recount in Florida, neither George W. Bush’s nor Al Gore’s teams were participating in a transition, something the 9/11 Commission Report found was a contributing factor to the September 11, 2001, terror attacks.

[Is Everyone Gone]

I think we are officially in the "win stupid prizes" portion of the game show. 

[Palimelon]

Quote

Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence

There is an oxymoron in there somewhere...

Quote

I really do not think the average American is aware of Matt and what he has been credibly accused of in the past

7% of American adults think chocolate milk comes from brown cows, so...

[Makai]

2 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Is attorney general one of the cabinet positions that needs congressional approval? Because if so, those hearings are going to be something. I am aware that congress pretty much rubberstamps 99% of any president's picks, but Matt could end up being the exception. I really do not think the average American is aware of Matt and what he has been credibly accused of in the past. There are lines that the majority of Americans will not cross and expect their leaders to never cross and one of those lines is a man grooming a teenaged boy. 

He’s already demanded that the Speaker support recess appointments so that he can bypass the confirmation process. 

[Dimity]

48 minutes ago, EtheltoTillie said:

Matt Gaetz as Attorney General.  I give up.

We have had 8 years of the undeserving being rewarded and people like Gaetz and Trump avoiding consequences for their actions.  It's been exhausting.  4 more years...

[Makai]

I just saw that two Republican senators have already spoken out against Gaetz being AG. 

I have been wondering if there is a line for Republicans in Congress. Trump’s lies about his policies were enough to get him elected but the realty of them is not going to go over well with most Americans. 

[Ohiopirate02]

Just now, Makai said:

I just saw that two Republican senators have already spoken out against Gaetz being AG. 

I have been wondering if there is a line for Republicans in Congress. Trump’s lies about his policies were enough to get him elected but the realty of them is not going to go over well with most Americans. 

I do think there is a line for many members of Congress especially the ones who have been in office for decades. They are going to want to follow established procedure. Keeping up appearances is important to this crowd and in their minds it will add legitimacy to the second Trump presidency. They are already going to rubberstamp the vast majority if not all of Trump's appointees, why bypass procedure. They also don't want a future Democratic president bypassing established procedure. They still do need to pretend that nothing fundamentally has changed with the American government or if it did and the public revolts, then they were not the cause. There is still an election in 2026 that they need to be worried about after all. I personally don't think Trump will stop that election. Not when there's still seats to be had. 

[peacheslatour]

And in international news-

 

The leader of Japan’s Conservative Party has sparked an uproar by advocating for a ban on women marrying after the age of 25 and having their uteruses removed at the age of 30.

The politician also suggested barring women from attending college after the age of 18, allegedly in order to concentrate on having more children.

In a November 8 YouTube video, writer and Conservative Party leader Naoki Hyakuta made the startling remark while talking about ways to boost the nation's birthrate. Image Courtesy: @Arin_Yumi/X

[Makai]

38 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I do think there is a line for many members of Congress especially the ones who have been in office for decades. They are going to want to follow established procedure. Keeping up appearances is important to this crowd and in their minds it will add legitimacy to the second Trump presidency. They are already going to rubberstamp the vast majority if not all of Trump's appointees, why bypass procedure. They also don't want a future Democratic president bypassing established procedure. They still do need to pretend that nothing fundamentally has changed with the American government or if it did and the public revolts, then they were not the cause. There is still an election in 2026 that they need to be worried about after all. I personally don't think Trump will stop that election. Not when there's still seats to be had. 

I really hope your right and there is a part of me that believes your right but January 6th has made me jaded. 

 

34 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

And in international news-

 

The leader of Japan’s Conservative Party has sparked an uproar by advocating for a ban on women marrying after the age of 25 and having their uteruses removed at the age of 30.

The politician also suggested barring women from attending college after the age of 18, allegedly in order to concentrate on having more children.

In a November 8 YouTube video, writer and Conservative Party leader Naoki Hyakuta made the startling remark while talking about ways to boost the nation's birthrate. Image Courtesy: @Arin_Yumi/X

Are they just copying the plots of dystopian novels now? 

[Avaleigh]

On 11/12/2024 at 12:48 PM, Makai said:

I’m curious if you noticed the same immediate hostility from many people to Harris because she’s seen as part and parcel of California politics. So that voting for her is seen as voting for the California economy on an even larger scale. I saw a lot of hostility that had nothing to do with race or gender. 

I meant to comment on this earlier and the answer is yes. I've been surprised by the reactions of some people. On paper, one would think her candidacy would have been a slam dunk with certain folks, but I guess it boils down to the general feeling in the air here of change being needed. The same people who were tired of DA Gascón are probably some of the same people who were lukewarm about Harris's candidacy. 

OTOH, I think she has a real shot at being governor of our state and am curious to see if she's interested in going for it when the time comes. 

Showing the country that she can successfully govern the state with the largest economy would be a great way to clapback at the naysayers who felt she wasn't the right person for the presidency.

Especially since the clown she lost to has just put together a cabinet that looks as though it was designed by someone whose sole interest is to shock and outrage people. Also, at least Harris said that she would have given one spot on her cabinet to a Republican. No way would Trump have even considered it. His primary criteria seems to be 'Does this person say nice things about me?'

[peacheslatour]

1 minute ago, Makai said:

I really hope your right and there is a part of me that believes your right but January 6th has made me jaded. 

 

Are they just copying the plots of dystopian novels now? 

A Handmaid's Tale should not be considered a blueprint for society yet here we are.

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, bluegirl147 said:

What I'm afraid will happen is a bunch of federal prosecutors will resign in protest for having to answer to Gaetz.

It could be part of the plan; the NY Times reported Trump's transition team is discussing moving the EPA headquarters out of D.C. and it's being speculated that's to cause career EPA officials to resign rather than relocate.  But none of that is necessary; he can just use Elon's new Department of Government Efficiency Department of Dismantling the Federal Government to get rid of them/it.

[Ohiopirate02]

4 minutes ago, Makai said:

I really hope your right and there is a part of me that believes your right but January 6th has made me jaded. 

 

Deep down, I don't expect them to do the right thing, but I do think they will keep established procedures in place. I also think they will be working on changing those procedures after January 20th in increments. 

[PRgal]

43 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

And in international news-

 

The leader of Japan’s Conservative Party has sparked an uproar by advocating for a ban on women marrying after the age of 25 and having their uteruses removed at the age of 30.

The politician also suggested barring women from attending college after the age of 18, allegedly in order to concentrate on having more children.

In a November 8 YouTube video, writer and Conservative Party leader Naoki Hyakuta made the startling remark while talking about ways to boost the nation's birthrate. Image Courtesy: @Arin_Yumi/X

Except men there don't want to have kids either.  And holy cow, this dude is just *SHORT* of taking the right for women to vote.  Whoops, I hope I'm not giving him ideas.  

 Note:  He's since apologized

[Browncoat]

2 hours ago, Palimelon said:

I also think he used to be pro-abortion. At least publicly.

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find out he's paid for more than one.

[Avaleigh]

4 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

I think what we're seeing boils down to one thing. It's not about race, it's about class.

 

4 hours ago, kittykat said:

Keeping the middle and lower classes fighting one another is what keeps the rich empowered.

I agree with both of these points. In a perfect world, working class people would all be on the same side, but unfortunately  we're divided. We're getting sidetracked by identity politics and other, ultimately, minor issues, and it's causing us to lose track of the bigger picture. It's also part of the cause for why we're losing important elections.

We should be focused on the areas where we do have common ground and be less concerned with something like whether or not a politician looks like us because at the end of the day a person might not have a politician who looks like them, but they should always have the option of a politician who thinks like them and supports the issues they care about. 

People like Bezos and Musk DGAF about the working class, and the only way we can stand up to people like that is by banding together. It's so disheartening to know that people like Bezos and Musk are allowed to meddle in our elections with no repercussions. Musk was essentially allowed to buy votes and Bezos was allowed to stifle endorsements for Harris. Meanwhile, people are fighting about whether or not people have the right to be angry about the price of gas and eggs, and whether or not there are currently too many pronouns in the mix. 

[Dimity]

Random question based on a few memes that have shown up on my FB wall today - how are the climate denier/MAGA idiots reconciling Reichsleiter Elon Musk and his tesla with their hatred for everyone who wants us to move away from a reliance on fossil fuels?  

[peacheslatour]

17 minutes ago, Dimity said:

Random question based on a few memes that have shown up on my FB wall today - how are the climate denier/MAGA idiots reconciling Reichsleiter Elon Musk and his tesla with their hatred for everyone who wants us to move away from a reliance on fossil fuels?  

That's for the plebes to worry about. They DGAF.

[Dimity]

This meme got forwarded to me earlier, but how realistic is it?  Are the working conditions and pay truly this dire?

 

[bluegirl147]

12 minutes ago, Dimity said:

This meme got forwarded to me earlier, but how realistic is it?  Are the working conditions and pay truly this dire?

 

Honestly I believe this is how they are treated.

[Is Everyone Gone]

Susan Collins is officially troubled.

[fairffaxx]

What post will he nominate the pillow guy for?

[bluegirl147]

2 minutes ago, Is Everyone Gone said:

Susan Collins is officially troubled.

Sure she is.  She has zero credibility. She is the one who thought Trump had learned his lesson after his first impeachment.  Or was it his second impeachment?

[kittykat]

Pretty sure they were paid two cents a bucket of oranges in The Grapes of Wrath.  Of course these guys have to adjust for inflation 🙄

1 hour ago, Avaleigh said:

Also, at least Harris said that she would have given one spot on her cabinet to a Republican.

And she got eviscerated by plenty of Democrat voters for wanting to do that.  I know we need bipartisanship to get things passed but when the post 2008 Republicans have been the party of No how do you fight that?  Do we become just as stubborn as the Republicans and shut them out?  I don't want the Democrats to stoop to their level but I'm sick of feeling like they always bend over and take it. 

If Harris wanted to appoint someone like Adam Kinzinger or Lisa Murkowski (the only R senator to vote against Kavanaugh)  I don't really see a problem there with appointing and opposing party member. Constitutional guardrails, like 3/4 states to ratify an amendment or 2/3 Congress to override a veto, are there so one party can't steamroll the other.  We may not like it right now but bipartisanship is necessary to get anything meaningful done.  I'm just tired of Democrats always having to be the bigger people and still get all the blame when push comes to shove and it's not changing any time soon.

 

3 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

Sure she is.  She has zero credibility. She is the one who thought Trump had learned his lesson after his first impeachment.  Or was it his second impeachment?

Susan Collins folds easier than a lawn chair.

[Bookish Jen]

1 hour ago, peacheslatour said:

A Handmaid's Tale should not be considered a blueprint for society yet here we are.

The United States is becoming a scary a dangerous combination of Handmaid's Tale, Idiocracy, and Mad Max.

[Bastet]

33 minutes ago, Dimity said:

This meme got forwarded to me earlier, but how realistic is it?  Are the working conditions and pay truly this dire?

Having family members who run farms -- yes, yes they are.  My relatives pay a little more than average and provide much better housing than is typical, but we still get into an argument every time I visit.

[Eri]

I know we're being tongue in cheek, but despite that, a lot of folks and Republicans like to argue that "the economy" was better under Trump. However, I would also argue that he inherited a healthier, recovering economy from Obama's presidency at that time before COVID happened.

The fact is the US has typically fared better under Democratic economic policies since WWII from a historic standpoint, according to the Joint Economic Committee (if you want the data/numbers):

https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/democrats/2024/10/the-u-s-economy-performs-better-under-democratic-presidents

• Overall job growth has been greater under Democratic presidents
• Unemployment is lower under Democratic presidents
• The economy grows more under Democratic presidents
• Manufacturing job growth is greater under Democratic presidents
• Manufacturing investment has surged under the Biden-Harris administration
• Small business creation has been higher under the Biden-Harris administration 
• Twice as much was added to the national debt under President Trump as under President Biden

Quote

Nearly all recessions in the modern era began under Republican presidents 

"Of the 11 recessions that have occurred in the modern (post-World War II) era, 10 of them have occurred under Republican presidents. Republican presidents often inherit strong economies and leave their successors with significantly weaker economies. For example, President George W. Bush inherited a strong economy from President Bill Clinton, and his presidency ended with the Great Recession. President Donald Trump inherited the longest continuous run of job creation in modern U.S. history from President Barack Obama but became the first president in the modern era to oversee net job losses during his term. There were 2.7 million fewer Americans employed when President Trump left office than at the beginning of his term."  

Just so you know, JD Vance himself and Tom Cotton are Republican Senate Committee members on the JEC.

 

2 hours ago, Avaleigh said:

In a perfect world, working class people would all be on the same side, but unfortunately  we're divided. We're getting sidetracked by identity politics and other, ultimately, minor issues, and it's causing us to lose track of the bigger picture. It's also part of the cause for why we're losing important elections.

Based on how popular progressive policies passed even in red states (despite them voting for Trump), I can only surmise that people love/benefit from leftist policies and programs, but abhor the idea of identifying or aligning with the left (vibes instead of policy).

Maybe it's a classic case of "what do you mean I can't have everything I want?!"

Capitalism won and continues its hold on the propaganda game.

Edited November 14 by Eri

[bluegirl147]

49 minutes ago, Is Everyone Gone said:

 

Republican politicians have been known to vote against legislation that would help their constituents and once the legislation passes without their help they go back home and campaign on that legislation.  And their voters believe them.

[JustHereForFood]

1 hour ago, Dimity said:

Random question based on a few memes that have shown up on my FB wall today - how are the climate denier/MAGA idiots reconciling Reichsleiter Elon Musk and his tesla with their hatred for everyone who wants us to move away from a reliance on fossil fuels?  

Probably the same way they are reconciling being for traditional family and voting for someone who divorced twice and cheated on his wife with a pornstar.

[Makai]

2 hours ago, Dimity said:

Random question based on a few memes that have shown up on my FB wall today - how are the climate denier/MAGA idiots reconciling Reichsleiter Elon Musk and his tesla with their hatred for everyone who wants us to move away from a reliance on fossil fuels?  

[tearknee]

9 hours ago, peacheslatour said:

When you're used to having all the power, equality for anyone else feels like oppression.

But people who can be reached and whose votes you can't throw away?

 

Well, making them feel shamed and insulted or fearful just worsens your existing problems a thousand-fold.

"Deplorables" (Clinton)

"xenophobic/"racist" (Brexit)

"unpatriotic" (The Australian republic referendum) and "racist"/"settlers"/"always was, always will be Aboriginal land" (The Australian indigenous Voice referendum).

 

[Makai]

Illinois, Colorado governors announce state-level coalition to resist Trump policies

Reading that was the first time I heard that Trump wants to accomplish deportation by sending National Guard units from red states into blue states. What the Fuck!

[tearknee]

"I think we are going to have to accept Federation control for the time being"

 

[mostlylurking]

4 hours ago, Is Everyone Gone said:

Susan Collins is officially troubled.

Susan Collins and all these other supposed main stream republicans can pound salt.  At the end of the day they do nothing but either resign or bow to the altar of trump just like everyone else.  It’s sickening.  There is no bridge too far, no red line to cross.  Every bridge and every red line has been crossed and no one gives a shit.  And let me tell you democrats aren’t much better.  I’ve heard pundits saying they don’t want to even entertain the notion that Kamala didn’t win because she was a woman.  They don’t want to face that reality and also the reality that the entire country is turning red.  Well if they don’t start seeing this country as it is instead of how they think it should be don’t be surprised if they never win another election again.

[Yeah No]

10 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

Like I said before, I also had to pay off my student loans. I would love to have had the opportunity to have them forgiven. It sucks that I didn’t, but I still don’t begrudge others the opportunity to have this good thing I didn’t. Should we not fix problems just because others who had to suffer don’t get to experience that better life?

I don't begrudge things being given to people that need them and I kind of not love that you think I do. My point is that there are a lot of people that need things and don't have the luxury of time, physical health and resources to bounce back from it, especially older people. I don't think most of the young people that cry about their student loan debt could possibly fathom a hand as bad as many older people struggle with. Many older people didn't even get the opportunity to go to college much less whine about how much it costs. Those young people could have chosen other paths, not rack up student loan debt. That's what older people did when they were young - they didn't bite off more than they could chew and if they did, it was their personal choice to do so and their responsibility to honor their debts. And they didn't have government making them feel like they should expect to have that forgiven. And I still feel that way even now. I don't know why it's OK to expect older people to have personal responsibility for their financial expenditures but the younger people keep getting treated like special children that never have to grow up or face the consequences of adulthood.

I only want equity for everyone, not singling out certain groups over others for government sponsored forgiveness. I don't think it's begrudging anyone to say that if that's done, then similar things should be done for other groups as well.

10 hours ago, Dimity said:

Same could be said for my father, who rose to the level of a CEO in his chosen field.  He worked hard to get where he did but he will be the first to tell you being an anglophone white man in the 1960s didn't hurt. 

No one is saying all white men this or all white men that, all we are saying in that in general white men, especially white protestant men, have been disproportionately advantaged and to ignore that reality is just maddening. 

I for one am sick and tired of the "what about the menz" mentality.  I worry a helluva lot more about what the future holds for my granddaughters than I do about my grandsons.  I don't love them more I just know that girls have to deal with so much more just because they are female then their brothers ever will. 

Women stepping up and saying "please sir, can I have some more" is what is causing this backlash - co-ordinated needless to say by white men of privilege.

The "in general" argument isn't acceptable by anyone when applied to out and out racism so it doesn't fly with me here either. I am nothing if not completely consistent about this subject. Generalizations that are too broad lead to prejudice toward any social or ethnic group, period. And I fully understand why many men from similar circumstances and with similar disabilities as my husband would not appreciate being painted with that broad brush.

If you want to know how people feel and why this is it. I have spent much time around white men like my husband who are from humble circumstances that feel this way. I'm not making it up. You don't have to agree with it, but it is what it is. And I believe that many of their reasons for feeling that way have validity and to dismiss them is only going to make more of them turn away from voting democratic. My husband sees things from a bigger picture and has a very strong moral foundation, so thank goodness he would not support Trump and MAGA. He grew up in the multi-ethnic "Heights" made famous by the play so his best friends were of all races, faiths and walks of life. Same was true of my parents and me too, growing up in the Bronx. I truly grew up in the "melting pot".

Also, that's great for your father but he started out in a previous era. There is NO WAY that a man my husband's age could have ascended to CEO without a college degree, especially not one with his disability and from his humble working class background. By the time my generation came on the scene achieving that kind of status was not possible without a college degree. Early Boomers and previous generations had those advantages but not mine. By the time we came along there were too many young people and not enough jobs because there were so many of us flooding the market, AND we had fewer jobs available because of several mini-recessions. All the seats were taken by the time us later Boomers came along so the standards stiffened up quickly and by a LOT.

In fact a lot of white men were able to get great corporate jobs with no degree at all or only a liberal arts degree into the 1960s, but into the '70s that went away and suddenly by the '80s when we came on the scene if you didn't have a degree in business administration it was "no soup for you". In fact that's all I heard about when I was in college and many people switched their majors as a result. Of course, unless you really were from privilege and had connections - then a man could still ascend to those positions without all those qualifications. But again, not all white men had those privileges.

I also want to say that there was a "good old boy" network that kept out men from lower classes. Just being a white protestant didn't give you any great advantage with these people. They were snobs and didn't want to give jobs to anyone but their own rich, privileged few. And they could tell where you were from. All they had to do was see your address...

People think prejudice was only of minorities but WASPs have discriminated against other white people forever. My own mother had to anglicize her last name to get a job in NYC. Her maiden name ended in an "o" because she was of Sicilian descent. And she was routinely passed over for jobs on that basis alone back in the 1940s. They were not even shy about telling her that to her face, too. That's one reason she became the secretary to a prominent Black lawyer in Harlem, where she lived as teenager and young adult. My parents were some amazing people!

[Yeah No]

10 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

There are a lot of people out there trying to fight to make sure things like SS and Medicare don’t get gutted. They’re some of the same people who are fighting for student loan forgiveness. It’s not an either/or situation. 

Speaking of Medicare, now that I am on it, I can attest to the fact that it is NOT cheap and they keep raising the premiums and whittling away at what it covers too. I am not on a low or no premium Advantage plan because everyone in my area complains about them not being so good (and I've done my research on this both alone and with my Medicare counselor) so I'm on a regular supplemental plan with part D. My part D premiums have doubled in the past year and this was my first year on Medicare. So it's not just about things not being gutted - we need much more than THAT to bring us where we should be. So yeah, it is more of an either/or situation than it looks like it is, at least from my point of view. I had cheaper premiums and better coverage when I was working! I personally like the idea of Medicaid for all. When I was on Medicaid it paid for EVERYTHING. Of course the way things are going I am sure that all of that will come to pass after I'm long gone...sigh. 

[Yeah No]

10 hours ago, Makai said:

I hear what you’re saying but when I am having these conversations I am not going to add a bunch of caveats to my statements. The terms are being used in a collective sense. Yes, white men are often disadvantaged but there are areas where they are better off than people of color. White privilege is a real thing. Saying that isn’t an attack on white men. It’s simply an acknowledgment of the world we live in.

And I'm saying that while white privilege is a real thing, it isn't distributed equally among white people, and to act like it is doesn't account for a lot of white men's experience and isn't fair to them either. I have used the collective sense before when talking about social/ethnic groups and been told I'm overgeneralizing so I try not to do it unless I have facts to back up my arguments. And even then I get told not to do it. So I don't see why it's only OK to do it when it concerns white men when it's not OK with other groups. I am one of these people that takes equity and consistency very seriously. It works both ways. I don't think it's consistent to say that using broad generalizations about one group is OK but it's not OK to use the same kinds of generalizations about another.

10 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

As a Gen Xer I say come join us.  Our not giving fuck had served us pretty well until Trump.  As much as I want to just throw up my hands and say fuck it I can't. I will fight because if I don't I feel powerless and I will damned if I'm going to let any man make me feel that way. 

How is it that Gen X gets to think it's cool because they don't GAF but the Baby Boom generation gets blamed for all the ills of society and not fixing everything? I can just imagine if Baby Boomers were to say they didn't give a fuck. They'd most certainly be called all sorts of vile things for it. I don't know why everyone thinks Boomers caused every ill of society. Boomers inherited a lot of crap like other generations and tried to fix things but don't get the credit for for their efforts. And from my POV GenX gets to sit on the sidelines and gets off scot-free. I have recently seen a lot of factoids about GenX that blew my mind. They spend more than other generations and I am reading now that as a group they are to the right of Baby Boomers in general and tend to vote more Republican!

9 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

I'll be honest, I consider myself supportive of trans people and I have no problems with they/them pronouns, it sounds like a no-brainer (in English, that is, which is very gender neutral - when people start to twist other languages that don't work like that, that is another thing). But people inventing new pronouns like xe, zir, or whatever make me roll my eyes a bit. But this seems to be like such an inflated thing - how many people use it like that in reality? This is IMO another example of a most outlandish part of a group that represents maybe 0,01% getting the most attention, because they are the loudest (and probably not yet employed, so they have far more free time to argue on the internet than people with full-time jobs and responsibilities). Regular people will mostly probably not care either way, but if somebody who wants to sow division shows them that some activist wrote a guide how to make language "more inclusive" by getting rid of words like mother and replace them with caretaker or something like that, I can see how it would scare someone, especially if they don't have time to check everything on how much is such idea popular.

I agree with you that this is something that has been blown up to be a big thing when it's really not. If it wasn't for the fact that I had experience being corrected in a very not-nice way for using an incorrect pronoun I wouldn't have made my comment about it. But it's also about being corrected for using so-called "trigger" words and other words that have now been deemed as unacceptable. Words I can't even use on this site anymore which may actually shock a lot of people here that don't even know they have been banned from usage. Words I had no clue were now somehow seen as offensive. Look, I get why a lot of them are seen as offensive, I just hate feeling like I'm always apologizing for doing something wrong that I didn't even know was wrong. It got so bad there for a while that nobody could keep up with it. I do think some of that has died down now so it's not as big of an annoyance to me as it was a few years ago.

[Lantern7]

*sigh* So many fires, and I don't know where the hose should be aimed first. Also, I don't think there's any water.

[Annber03]

22 hours ago, Yeah No said:

I actually don't think the pronouns themselves are what bothers most of these people. It's being made to feel stupid and wrong for not knowing the currently accepted pronoun for everyone, especially when it seems like they change so often. Of course there are people that are bothered by them altogether but those are not the people the Democratic party has a chance of keeping anyway.

And I just don't see that being enough of a problem to where people need to worry about it. That fear seems to be borne out of a scenario where someone might take one or two instances in which htey heard about someone who has specific pronouns they go by throwing a fit online at some person who meant well but might've slipped up, and somehow extrapolated that to assume that EVERYONE who goes by certain pronouns will act that way towards anyone who might occasionally slip up in how they address them.

The fact is that most of them won't. Most people won't "cancel" anyone who makes an honest slip up but clearly still means well when trying to address someone by their preferred pronouns. Usually if someone is raked over the coals for messing up, it's because said person messed up on purpose, because they genuinely didn't respect and hat no interest in respecting the wishes of someone who wanted to go by a specific pronoun/pronouns. 

11 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

I have seen way too many of those men fail and still continue to get opportunities.  Could you imagine if Obama had said even one the crazy things Trump said?  Or if Obama had been caught messing around with an intern?  

THIS. We've literallly had two very experienced, intelligent, competent women run for the highest office in the land against Trump now, and both times people looked at hte options and STILL went with the guy who didn't know what the fuck he was doing, nor did he care, and many of them did so because they just could not handle the idea of a woman/woman who wasn't white being in charge. 

So yeah, it is frustrating to hear white men continuing to complain that they've got it so hard when the bar is so low it's in hell and they don't even have to cross it to still get what they want. 

I have no personal dog in the student loan fight, since I only ever attended one year of community college and don't have student loans hanging over my head. But I do support student loan forgiveness and I hate how it's turned into this "pit the generations against each other" fight with, "Well, we iddn't get any forgiveness for our loans, why should others?" Isn't the whole point to make things better for the next, so they DON'T have to deal with the struggles the generations before them dealt with? 

But I'm also an elder Millennial who will likely never be able to buy a house (but hell, my family has never owned a house, we've always been renters, so that's really nothing new for me) and also won't likely be able to collect Socia Security when the time comes and things of that sort, so...yeah. 

[Anela]

3 hours ago, tearknee said:

But people who can be reached and whose votes you can't throw away?

 

Well, making them feel shamed and insulted or fearful just worsens your existing problems a thousand-fold.

"Deplorables" (Clinton)

"xenophobic/"racist" (Brexit)

"unpatriotic" (The Australian republic referendum) and "racist"/"settlers"/"always was, always will be Aboriginal land" (The Australian indigenous Voice referendum).

 

trump called liberals "the enemy within". He said that the military should be turned on us. We are apparently worse than the dictators he loves - he said so.

Gay and trans people have been called pedophiles, as have liberals who support them. There was a whole conspiracy theory around liberals, that helped to get him elected before.

I can also tell you that the one aunt I have left, in England, used to hate trump, but she was a Brexiteer, and she is both transphobic, and wants immigrants out of the country. She voted Reform, and "liked" a post by someone else I know in the UK, who was happy that trump won. Because he stands for the same things. They have no problem hurting other people, insulting them, lying about them. 

[Annber03]

Also, Hilary's "deplorables" comment, when taken in its full context, wasn't even about Trump supporters as a whole*. She explicitly stated that some were deplorable, and others had valid concerns.

(Frankly Ithink she was being far too kind even then, but again, that's a prime example of how she had to tiptoe around and be careful with everything she said lest she upset someone, but Trump can say utterly vile things about women and minorities and, well, that's just Trump for ya.)

All this nomination news makes my head hurt. What the fuck kind of timeline is this. I've often thought we'd entered the Twilight Zone sometime around 2015, after Trump announced his candidacy, and that we're still trying to find our way out, but now I think that's a flat out insult to the Twilight Zone. At least the Twilight Zone still has some level of logic and coherence to its madness. 

My hope is that the BIden administration is quietly doing some heavy duty shit behind the scenes to try and make it a lot harder for Trump and the GOP to get a lot of what they want done, but that feels more like wishful thinking at this point than anything. 

But yeah, if the rest of us didn't have to be caught in the fallout of the chaos and disaster Trump and the GOP will bring, I too would love to watch that party canniablize itself due to their complete incopetence and ability to get shit done, even the stuff they DO want. I'm hoping their incomptence will ultimately make it so they can't get much of what htye want passed at all, but somehow morons like this always manage to fail upward, so...

 That story about Japan's Conservative Party is...YEOW. What the actual fuck? 

[Bastet]

2 hours ago, Yeah No said:

And I'm saying that while white privilege is a real thing, it isn't distributed equally among white people,

White privilege is equally distributed among that group (just like male privilege or any other privilege among their own dominant group), it's just their overall power gets diluted when a white person is simultaneously disadvantaged by their membership in a marginalized group or groups.

The reality of white privilege means that a white person who is also part of X number (be that 1 to umpteen) of marginalized groups - gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, economic status, etc. - is affected by institutional problems because of those other identities, but still has the racial privilege that gives them a leg up over those who share all their disadvantage(s) but don't benefit from being white, because they don't also have racism to contend with on top of everything else. 

That's it, a simple truth.  Privileges exist on their own and across a variety of combinations, creating a baseline existence people may or may not overcome based on individual circumstances. 

(Again - because for some reason this other simple truth needs by some to be explicitly acknowledged - someone with every advantage still has problems, being human and all, but those problems are individual, not institutional.)

Edited November 14 by Bastet

[FilmTVGeek80]

1 hour ago, Yeah No said:

I don't begrudge things being given to people that need them and I kind of not love that you think I do. My point is that there are a lot of people that need things and don't have the luxury of time, physical health and resources to bounce back from it, especially older people. I don't think most of the young people that cry about their student loan debt could possibly fathom a hand as bad as many older people struggle with. Many older people didn't even get the opportunity to go to college much less whine about how much it costs. Those young people could have chosen other paths, not rack up student loan debt. That's what older people did when they were young - they didn't bite off more than they could chew and if they did, it was their personal choice to do so and their responsibility to honor their debts. And they didn't have government making them feel like they should expect to have that forgiven. And I still feel that way even now. I don't know why it's OK to expect older people to have personal responsibility for their financial expenditures but the younger people keep getting treated like special children that never have to grow up or face the consequences of adulthood.

I only want equity for everyone, not singling out certain groups over others for government sponsored forgiveness. I don't think it's begrudging anyone to say that if that's done, then similar things should be done for other groups as well

You’ve complained now - several times - about how you have an issue with people getting their student loans forgiven. How exactly was I so off the mark by saying you’re begrudging them that? I’m sorry you don’t like it, but that’s how I see what you keep saying. Also, for someone who is complaining about generalizations, you’re doing an awful lot of that yourself when it comes to younger generations. People who have gotten their student loans forgiven cover a wide range of ages, and yes many of them have struggled. The fact of the matter is tuition is way too much and sometimes loans - which are horrible - is the only way people can swing it. I’m sure a lot of people in your generation did complain about how much school cost. They just didn’t do it on a large enough scale that it created any change. This generation is. A lot fewer people are going to school now and it’s because of how crippling the cost is, even outside of student loans. Trying to do something about that is not a bad thing. It’s not about being lazy or needing to be coddled. It’s about doing something to better not just their situation, but make it better for those in the future.

[Soapy Goddess]

17 hours ago, bluegirl147 said:

Life isn't fair. It's just not.  Wish it was but it's not.

Agree, but unfortunately that is not what is being taught to our children. Instead even the 'losers' now get a trophy. Where's the fairness in that? Makes the 'winner' feel like they didn't accomplish anything.