Wednesday, May 18, 2022

Putting Their Money Where Their Mouths Are?

In a word: no. To expand on that a little bit, apparently it's Biden's fault (actually, it is not) and they are very concerned but it is simply wrong to ask them to, you know--do stuff.

Shit. The Theocrat Won

 

I don't trust this guy even more than I don't trust most (ok, any other) Republicans. There is a sense some people have about Republicans electing crazies during their primaries that really insists on us assuming that the crazies can't win a general election. I am not a person who is going to make that assumption. He is a threat to democracy in my state, but also a harbinger of the increasingly Dominionist turn the GOP seems to be making. 

UPDATE: Oh.



Like I said--I don't assume that the most radical candidate is going to lose.

Tuesday, May 17, 2022

This is What They Do, Now.

 


Roughly the same time I was hitting "submit" on yesterday morning's blog post, Rep. Stefanik was hitting "submit" on the Tweet depicted above: "democrats desperately want wide open borders and mass amnesty for illegals allowing them to vote.  Like the vast majority of Americans, Republicans want to secure our border and protect election security."

Sure, that's just a re-statement of the great replacement theory, but she also wants you to also know who the real victim in all this is: Elise Stefanik, for being smeared by people calling her out for exactly what she's saying. I expected no less, because there is hardly less a person could expect. The Washington Post's Philip Bump has it right--no one will apologize. They won't even stop and consider what the fallout of their rhetoric will be. Not even after it has lead to mass shootings. 

So, maybe Rep. Matt Gaetz will try to say his promotion of GRT is "race neutral". Oh, ok. We'll just ignore which immigrants are singled out. Others can claim (various RW pundits) that if you blame Democrats instead of George Soros it isn't real great replacement theory (it's just sparkling xenophobia!). And they are out there conflating two separate ideas: that America is demographically "browning" in the sense of eventually becoming minority-majority (a neutral, observable trend) and the idea that the demographic change is deliberate (not so neutral, the boogey-man under the bed). 

I guess the dumbest thing is, just as I've pointed out that the border is, in fact, being protected by the Administration despite fear-mongering and hyperbole to the contrary, why is anyone on the right thinking that new citizens are necessarily going to be Democratic voters? I wouldn't count on it, myself. Voting patterns in naturalized US citizens usually lags that of native citizens (and turnout among them isn't so hot, either) and there's no reason, not one, to expect a group to vote for us in return for citizenship. People vote for candidates who promise to do a good job. This is because people are thinking individuals with agency. They might even vote Republican, Elise--we know! 

That fantasy would be so easy (if you don't like the voters you have, just import ones you will!) if it...had any chance of working. And in the meanwhile, would it make sense electorally to create any kind of "crisis at the border" when Republicans seem to use it so deftly (and fallaciously)  as a cudgel for Democratic administrations?

This is what Republicans do now, they are shameless. No one wants to "silence" them--only ask them to be a bit introspective about the damage they are doing. But all they can think to do is escalate. 

Monday, May 16, 2022

Where Did He Learn GRT?

 

The young man who killed 10 people in Buffalo singled them out demographically--he did homework in order to take human lives. This young man was handed coursework for a tragic and fatal assignment by people with no conscience. He was basically groomed for white supremacy and violence, in a society where guns and fantasized violence and casual racism are given a pass by a particular party. And what about his parents? Were they concerned about his mental diet? Did they wonder why their gun-loving son got body armor (as if deer ever shot back)? 

I don't think the GOP will denounce great replacement theory after they just called for starving brown babies in immigration detention. They have excused everything else, so why not double-down on their rhetoric even after tragedy? I mean, after a brief pause for thoughts and prayers, of course. It will be turned around--why are poor conservative victims being called racists!? The infamy of being called out like that!

I'm not feeling eloquent about the thing I keep writing about--how demagoguery and gun worship are priming the US for increased violence.  

Friday, May 13, 2022

Abbott and Audacity

 

It seems to me that the complaint Gov. Abbott makes that the Biden Administration is feeding babies in immigrant detention is an obvious example of Adam Serwer's axiom: "The cruelty is the point."  There isn't an option here--you feed the kids or they die of starvation. Texas Governor Greg Abbott understands that, but he also understands that there are people who really don't care if that happens. And those are his people. He doesn't have a solution to the issue of fixing the food supply or actually taking care of these children.

What? Greg Abbott, concerned about the supply chain or child welfare

It really feels like he doesn't care if children are endangered so long as he is making a culture war point.  He comes up with complaints about things, not real solutions even while real people can be harmed. So of course he has something to say about even the babies of undocumented immigrants--he has made the border his business, and threatening babies I guess makes him look tough

Or it makes him look like a sick SOB. I know how I see it. 


Thursday, May 12, 2022

TWGB: "Actual Fraud is Irrelevant"

 


Politico dropped a story about John Eastman's emails that show that he was working with state legislatures regarding strategies to overturn the election, vis getting the alternate elector slates approved in the states where the vote totals demonstrated Trump lost. The plan? Basically, throw out the number of votes you don't like the look of, and just count the ones you actually want. Easy peasy! 

PA State Rep. Russ Diamond understood the assignment pretty well, I think:

(click to embiggen)

He basically said, welp, the Trump attorneys didn't prove their case and at least once totally lied, but why prove actual fraud if you don't agree with the election.  Apparently "there oughta be a law!" against people voting against Trump.  And yes, I hate it, because that's my vote they were talking about throwing out so casually. I didn't even give my ballot to a Soros-funded mule. I mailed the SOB by mailbox. Russ Diamond voted for Act 77  (he was for it before he was against it) that made voting this way possible.

See why I don't trust Republicans? I was born in the election year of the Watergate break in. They have been like this my whole life. 

But anyway, the bigger message is--the Trump side hasn't ever actually proved fraud--they basically have been throwing spaghetti against the wall this whole time. When you list the claims, they get ridiculous:  the Venezuelan software, the Italian satellites, the German servers, the Chinese thermostats, the Chinese ballots (with bamboo in the fibers, even!), and the South Korean jet planes, etc.

The claims never had to make sense. Time was of the essence and all they wanted to do was get everything finagled into place by 1/6th. Here in Pennsylvania, in Georgia, in Arizona, etc. All the "audits" and stuff after the fact are more about 2024. I mean, they worked so hard to find fraud--it would be silly to think states forked over a bunch of money to prove something that never really existed at all right?

HAHAHAHAHA! Yeah. but this is TrumpWorld. It's funny that way.


Wednesday, May 11, 2022

The Exception that Proves the Rule, or Something

 

So, I think the takeaway from the 49-51 vote that failed to codify Roe has to be taken with a grain of salt--did you expect something else? It's a failure, but in the classic silver-linings sense, it's just demonstrative of one way to not succeed. What we have is only one out of 50 Democratic senators voting against your right to bodily autonomy, and every single one of the Republicans voting against it.

Manchin is an exception. The rule is: absolutely don't rely on a situation when only Joe Manchin doing the right thing stands between you and success. The only answer I get solving for that is--more not-Manchin Democrats in office. 

This also means: don't vote for a Republican unless you actually want a country where one's body is policed (Fugitive Uterus Act, anyone?) for unsanctioned reproductive activity (or inactivity, as the case may be). If people will just take very seriously the implications of this vote, it signals something bad for the GOP--a chalk outline, perhaps. 


Putting Their Money Where Their Mouths Are?

192 Republicans vote against $28 million for baby formula shortage pic.twitter.com/7hZv4DUe8p — Acyn (@Acyn) May 19, 2022 In a word: no. ...