Pence Administration Cracks Down on Nefarious LGBT Plot to Have Children

As you are no doubt aware, same-sex couples cannot conceive children the same way opposite-sex couples can. While many choose to adopt, others choose to make what my husband and I call Science Babies. For male* couples, this usually involves one partner’s sperm and a surrogate; for female* couples, one provides the egg (and often womb), and then there is a sperm donor.

In a small but nasty administrative decision, the Pence wing of the administration has combined forces with the Trump wing to begin challenging birthright citizenship for gay couples who have Science Babies overseas:

Last summer, the State Department issued new rules unilaterally changing the department’s interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), a 1952 law that, along with the 14th Amendment, codifies eligibility for U.S. birthright citizenship.

“The U.S. Department of State interprets the INA to mean that a child born abroad must be biologically related to a U.S. citizen parent,” the State Department’s website says. “Even if local law recognizes a surrogacy agreement and finds that U.S. parents are the legal parents of a child conceived and born abroad… if the child does not have a biological connection to a U.S. citizen parent, the child will not be a U.S. citizen at birth.”

Under the policy[…] children born via gestational surrogacy and other forms of assisted reproductive technology (ART) are considered to be born “out of wedlock,” in the State Department’s words—even if their parents, like Roee and Adiel, are legally married.

I’m sure you’ll be shocked to learn that these new rules only seem to apply to children born to same-sex couples.

For parents of non-traditional families, the policy change has been a disaster, leaving them to navigate the labyrinthine immigration legal system with little guidance from the State Department and, at the moment, little recourse for appeal. Children of U.S. citizens are put at risk of deportation or even statelessness—despite no textual legal basis for the policy.

[…]“Assumption of parentage,” as the State Department calls it, now seems to LGBT parents to be reserved solely for heterosexual married couples.

Indeed, friends of ours recently had a Science Baby who was born in Thailand, and they had to jump through a number of hoops, including several genetic tests, to get the kid a passport. The whole article shows just how much of a mess the administrative state is for same-sex couples right now. The pretzels we had to twist ourselves into pre-Obergefell and Windsor have ramifications that will echo through our lives until this is cleaned up by actual laws. Which will not happen any time soon. In the meantime, administrations which decide that they can reinterpret the law to their liking, since nobody is likely to stop them, will do so.

What’s most galling for me is that this is not a large number of people. Many of these people are servicemembers. There is no legitimate reason to do this. I can’t even imagine what they’ll cook up in court to make it seem like there is. In the Trump era, they don’t even have the goddamn courtesy to give us a pretext any more.

*Chromosomal sex






173 replies
  1. 1
    polyorchnid octopunch says:

    Oh look, honey. Assholes.

    ReplyReply
  2. 2
    tobie says:

    God damn, Republicans works overtime to make life miserable for any group that’s not part of their base, which means anyone who is not a white, Christian, straight man. What percentage of the population is that? Tyranny of the minority, indeed.

    ReplyReply
  3. 3
    rikyrah says:

    I knew it. I knew it. They are just phucking DEMONS..the entire lot of them.
    You don’t actually think that they are gonna stop with those overseas, do you?
    Come on, now.

    ReplyReply
  4. 4
    Baud says:

    There is no legitimate reason to do this.

    Addressing economic anxiety?

    ReplyReply
  5. 5

    @Baud: Surely Medicare4All™ will turn them around on this issue!

    ReplyReply
  6. 6

    @rikyrah: They have made every dealing with USCIS an obstacle course be it for a short term visa, long term visa, immigrant visa or citizenship applications. This new bullshit about skills based immigration, I am not buying it. It is a means to break the coalition of immigration activists. Nothing more. But what do I know I am just a hectoring bully who picks on saintly front pagers and commenters.
    ETA: OPT applications, the ones that allow you to work for year in the United States after you finish your program of study is now taking 6 months or more to process.

    ReplyReply
  7. 7
    Syphonblue says:

    Jesus fucking Christ, just when you think, “These people can’t POSSIBLY get any MORE evil, could they?”

    Turns out yup!

    They can.

    ReplyReply
  8. 8

    @tobie:

    God damn, Republicans work overtime to make life miserable for any group that’s not part of their base

    Pretty much.

    This is the latest in a number of recent administrative decisions/laws* that only seem to apply to LGBT folks (especially the anti-trans “bathroom” bills).

    *Mostly at the state level.

    ReplyReply
  9. 9
    zhena gogolia says:

    Their wanton cruelty knows no bounds.

    ETA: Really (Godwin), really, what distinguishes them from the Nazis, deep down? What?

    ReplyReply
  10. 10
    Sab says:

    And I thought they were all pro-life.

    ReplyReply
  11. 11

    @zhena gogolia: Nothing. They aspire to be them.

    ReplyReply
  12. 12

    We talk about how attitudes toward marriage equality have changed. What’s happening to abortion right should be a caution. Things can change back.

    I am currently trying to convince myself that the whole country is like CA was just before it went totally D. They Rs passed every evil thing they could in a frantic last gasp

    ReplyReply
  13. 13
    rikyrah says:

    @schrodingers_cat (HectoringBully):

    This new bullshit about skills based immigration, I am not buying it. It is a means to break the coalition of immigration activists.

    I don’t doubt it.

    ReplyReply
  14. 14
    Mike in NC says:

    The Trump/Pence regime has decided to address the economic anxiety of the white, rural working class by (1) outlawing abortion, (2) passing more tax cuts for the rich, and (3) bombing Iran. Seems like these geniuses have it all thought out.

    ReplyReply
  15. 15
    lurker dean says:

    so glad we have democrats fighting trump at ever step. oh wait, never mind, they’re not even bringing contempt votes.
    “For Democrats, their hopes rest with the courts. Nadler told reporters Wednesday that he would issue subpoenas for any information he needs that the White House is blocking — then take the matter to court after a series of contempt votes if they refuse.

    But House Democratic leaders have yet to schedule a vote for the first package of contempt resolutions, including one for Attorney General William P. Barr. House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters that a full House vote on Barr’s contempt citation, approved by the Judiciary Committee last week, and any others wouldn’t occur until next month at the earliest.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-democrats-fall-in-line-with-pelosis-no-impeachment-strategydespite-trumps-defiance/2019/05/15/ce888e1a-7725-11e9-b3f5-5673edf2d127_story.html?

    ReplyReply
  16. 16

    @rikyrah: I am basing it completely on how people on skills based visas are being currently treated.

    ETA: Visa renewals are being delayed or cancelled with little or no explanation. RFEs (Request for Evidence) for the most routine applications and so on.
    We were assured that the legal immigration was not a problem not just by T (who always lies) but progressive betters here and elsewhere.

    ReplyReply
  17. 17
    ruemara says:

    Saw it yesterday. The US is exponentially dangerous to civil rights for all. If we don’t stop this now, we’re going to be the bad guys in the next war.

    ReplyReply
  18. 18
    Gremcat says:

    Wouldn’t this also effect opposite-sex couples that need a surrogate or egg/sperm donation that reside in other countries? But I agree that this is just the beginning of trying to end birthright citizenry. God I hate these people.

    ReplyReply
  19. 19

    @Gremcat:

    Wouldn’t this also effect opposite-sex couples that need a surrogate or egg/sperm donation that reside in other countries?

    Not in practice, because they are given an “assumption of parentage.” However, as this is not based on any actual laws, they could change that tomorrow.

    ReplyReply
  20. 20

    @ruemara: Any progress on your citizenship application do you have the in-person interview date?

    ReplyReply
  21. 21
    rikyrah says:

    @schrodingers_cat (HectoringBully):

    @rikyrah: I am basing it completely on how people on skills based visas are being currently treated.

    I bet WHITE PEOPLE with skills are doing just fine with their applications.

    ReplyReply
  22. 22
    Aleta says:

    @Gremcat: yes, the law applies to op sex couples, but its application to the State Dept. application for citizenship is discretionary, and it is same sex couples (and I’m sure trans individuals) who are being scrutinized and denied parenthood rights. The o.s. couples do not stand out on applications so the State Dept can overlook them. (There would be quite an outcry if they were doing this to everyone, but they are not.)

    “State says children born through ART require extra paperwork for proof of citizenship, but there are no boxes on any citizenship forms which indicate ART is used,” one woman, a former U.S. military intelligence officer who is married to a senior U.S. military officer, told The Daily Beast.

    And same sex marriage laws per state are not being recognized on these applications. Another example of why LGBTQ rights need federal protection and are now at serious risk.

    ReplyReply
  23. 23
    PJ says:

    @ruemara: Unlike the last few wars . . .

    ReplyReply
  24. 24
    rikyrah says:

    @schrodingers_cat (HectoringBully):

    We were assured that the legal immigration was not a problem not just by T (who always lies) but progressive betters here and elsewhere.

    Oh, I always knew LEGAL immigration was in their sights too. It was too obvious.

    ReplyReply
  25. 25
    rikyrah says:

    @Gremcat:

    But I agree that this is just the beginning of trying to end birthright citizenry.

    I will say again….birthright citizenry, which they are after, is still the figleaf for what they really want – to take out the 14th Amendment, which is the basis upon which all advances made in this country since 1954.

    ReplyReply
  26. 26
    JanieM says:

    @Dorothy A. Winsor:

    Things can change back.

    This, a million times.

    ReplyReply
  27. 27
    Mary G says:

    So an 11-year-old rape victim must bear a child, while two men or two women who go to the expense of bringing a much wanted and beloved baby into the world can go fuck themselves. I wish I could think of a word worse than evil to describe it.

    We have got to vote them all out. No Republicans. None.

    ReplyReply
  28. 28
    Gremcat says:

    @Major Major Major Major: So this is totally subjective to whomever gives out the passports?

    ReplyReply
  29. 29
    Brachiator says:

    I’m sure you’ll be shocked to learn that these new rules only seem to apply to children born to same-sex couples.

    These rules are outrageous, but I don’t see how they could hold up if they are selectively applied only to same sex couples.

    Also, wouldn’t this apply to some single parents?

    Hell, shouldn’t this make adopted kids subject to deportation?

    Madness.

    ReplyReply
  30. 30
    Chyron HR says:

    @lurker dean:

    We could have continued living in a progressive society, but you guys literally demanded “Bernie or Bust”. Enjoy your bust.

    ReplyReply
  31. 31
    Aleta says:

    @Aleta: via MMMM I was wrong to call it a law. My understanding is there have been several ‘announcements’ (correct word= ?) from the State Dept. about not recognizing state laws re: ss marriage and about ART.

    People who adopt children in other countries have to apply for their citizenship. (Parents who overlook this now have children at risk for deportation, and the children are not allowed to vote, etc.) So I wonder if this discrimination will also be applied to the children of ss and trans-inclusive couples who have adopted in another country but are waiting for citizenship papers for their children.

    ReplyReply
  32. 32

    @Gremcat: according to the article it’s entirely up to whoever you get on the phone at State.

    ReplyReply
  33. 33

    @rikyrah: Possible but according to the immigration lawyers I follow the delays and RFEs are across the board and indiscriminate. They don’t have enough staff, for starters.

    ReplyReply
  34. 34
    lurker dean says:

    @Chyron HR: uh, i was never a berner. so go fuck yourself.

    ReplyReply
  35. 35
    Aleta says:

    @lurker dean: Better to credit the Democrats who are fighting for this instead of blanket condemnation based on Nadler and Pelosi.

    ReplyReply
  36. 36
    Brachiator says:

    @rikyrah:

    Oh, I always knew LEGAL immigration was in their sights too. It was too obvious

    Legal immigration was always a priority. Some people just were not paying attention. Some people still aren’t paying attention.

    Trump and his racist minions always wanted to give immigration priority to wealthy, educated white people and to deny “unworthy” people the right to become citizens. This has been there from the beginning.

    Hell, a good chunk of the stupid white people who voted for Trump would be barred from entering the country if they were immigrants and Trump were able to implement his policies.

    ReplyReply
  37. 37
    Cacti says:

    But whatever you do, don’t point out that certain Dem candidates are foolish enough to think we can appeal to the alleged reason, decency, or economic interests of these people.

    That’s just rude, crude, and tattooed.

    ReplyReply
  38. 38
    Lyrebird says:

    @rikyrah: What she* said.

    *please correct me if I read you incorrectly.

    ReplyReply
  39. 39
    Lyrebird says:

    @Aleta:

    Another example of why LGBTQ rights need federal protection and are now at serious risk.

    So true.

    And in the meantime, how is your puppy?

    ReplyReply
  40. 40

    @Brachiator: a lot of these couples are wealthy, educated, and white—really what may once have been described as pro-family conservatives in many personal habits—but they’re the wrong kind of families, so.

    ReplyReply
  41. 41
    FelonyGovt says:

    It’s appalling how hard they work to find ways to be cruel to people who are already vulnerable.

    I read this morning that Kushner’s immigration proposal favors immigrants based on “merit”, meaning, I assume, wealth. How awful, when so many of our finest citizens are people who came here as struggling immigrants, or their descendants.

    ReplyReply
  42. 42
    Aleta says:

    @Major Major Major Major: It’s up to parents’ ability to amass paperwork, submit, meet deadlines, keep fighting, and their resources to hire lawyers. And then to the discretion of who’s assigned to review and issue a decision.

    ReplyReply
  43. 43
    Cacti says:

    @Brachiator:

    The other thing they’re after is the right to privacy. Roe v. Wade may be the short term target, but the main target is Griswold v. Connecticut. If Griswold gets overturned, the American Taliban is back in business for anti-contraception and anti-sodomy laws.

    ReplyReply
  44. 44

    @Aleta: an opaque, inconsistent, crony-infested administrative state is a key feature of Trumpism.

    ReplyReply
  45. 45
    FelonyGovt says:

    So DiBlasio is running for President. . From what I hear, he’s not even that well-liked in NYC.

    ReplyReply
  46. 46

    Passed with 52 votes, Collins a no.

    ReplyReply
  47. 47
    lurker dean says:

    @Aleta: fair point, although it’s tough when the people who ultimately control what’s done are pelosi and nadler. i’m not even saying that they need to bring impeachment this second. but at this point trump and barr and the rest are just completely ignoring congressional oversight and there seems to be minimal pushback, no sense of urgency. your average low-info voter sees that and figures that mueller/russia was just a big hoax like the idiot says. just frustrated.

    ReplyReply
  48. 48
    rikyrah says:

    @Cacti:

    The other thing they’re after is the right to privacy. Roe v. Wade may be the short term target, but the main target is Griswold v. Connecticut.

    Say it louder for those not listening.

    ReplyReply
  49. 49
    MomSense says:

    I’m not a lawyer but it seems to me that Republicans in state and federal government are trying to set up different tiers of rights under the law.

    They are also ignoranuses who seeming never tire of dreaming up new ways to be mean.

    ReplyReply
  50. 50
    Aleta says:

    @Lyrebird: Thanks for asking. He had his one-week check up today and everything is very good. He’s bandage and suture free now. But he’s still not allowed to jump on the (low) couch or walk more than 5-10 minutes or hop around with his friends. This frustrates him, because he is a perfectionist who is self-employed at peeing on a self-selected number of things within about 10 blocks, and he is a way behind in his work. (You count among his valuable friends.)

    ReplyReply
  51. 51
    J R in WV says:

    @lurker dean:

    So, now Democrats are your enemies? You go, asshole~!!~

    No chance they’re planning on timing all this stuff so that their major votes on the impeachments of multiple law-breakers in the Executive branch occur at what Nancy Smash thinks will be the best timing for the 2020 election? No chance, none, that Nancy Pelosi is a better politician than, who are you again?

    Best politician in the country, that’s Lurker Dean, right!

    Sure you are…

    Sure!

    ReplyReply
  52. 52
    Emerald says:

    I wonder if that lady Trumper thinks he’s hurting the right people now.

    ReplyReply
  53. 53
    Aleta says:

    @MomSense: I think they look forward to writing new laws and to discretionary application of the law by the Heritage Fdn-approved judges and the H. Fdn–trained clerks.

    Nov. 21, 2018 — The Heritage Foundation, a conservative group that has played a leading role in moving the courts to the right, is reviving a “federal judicial clerkship academy,” according to materials posted on Wednesday on the group’s website.

    The foundation canceled an earlier version of the program last month after an article in The New York Times raised questions about some of its features, including requirements that participants keep teaching materials secret and promise not to use what they learned “for any purpose contrary to the mission or interest of the Heritage Foundation.”

    John Malcolm, a Heritage Foundation official, said the revised program eliminated those requirements, which he said had been the subject of widespread and warranted criticism.

    … “The language that was in the original application was totally unnecessary and was just a misguided attempt to protect the reputations of the people who were involved,” Mr. Malcolm said. “But it was silly, and we shouldn’t have done it. It was never our intention to have some kind of loyalty oath. People do not have to be loyal to the Heritage Foundation.”

    The conservative legal movement has worked hard to identify and cultivate promising law students and young lawyers, partly to ensure a deep bench of potential judicial nominees. Mr. Malcolm said the new program would be open to applicants who have accepted an offer from a federal judge for a clerkship that starts in 2019.

    “Anybody is welcome to apply,” he said. “The application does not say only people who have accepted clerkships with Republican-appointed judges need apply.”
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/21/us/politics/heritage-foundation-clerks-training-academy.html

    ReplyReply
  54. 54
    Cacti says:

    All of this is a small price to pay so that Susan Sarandon can have her revolution.

    Hillary would totally have been worse, because of reasons.

    ReplyReply
  55. 55
    matt says:

    God told me to skin you alive.

    ReplyReply
  56. 56
  57. 57
    J R in WV says:

    Major^4,

    Thanks for pointing this atrocity in motion out with details.

    I had heard about it, but not with enough detail to understand how they were going about their evil ways. I’m done with trying to understand these people. One word explains it all: EVIL!

    They lie awake in bed at night, trying to invent another devious evil plan to make people unhappy, to require them to go to the “correct” church, donate to the correct pastor’s grift plan.

    Makes me sick!

    ReplyReply
  58. 58
    Rk says:

    Any suggestions how to block the full screen hijack ads on smartphones?
    Android, Chrome, incognito mode.

    ReplyReply
  59. 59
    trollhattan says:

    “Veep” (r.i.p.) was both a documentary and instruction manual. I feel like an ant sliding down an ant lion’s sand funnel and it’s not a pleasant experience. I don’t like the ending of this play, either.

    ReplyReply
  60. 60
    lurker dean says:

    @J R in WV: yes, how dare anyone express that the democrats are blowing it. because you have that secret insider info that nancy is playing 11 dimensional chess that no one else knows about. you could have said that they may be timing it for a specific purpose without being a complete asshole.

    ReplyReply
  61. 61
    PPCLI says:

    @rikyrah: I doubt it. I speak from a couple of decades experience as a non-citizen white guy with a PhD, living in the US (with well-paying secure job, American wife, American kids). The immigration authorities treat non-citizen whites with skills like crap. Don’t misunderstand me: They treat non-whites, non-straights, unskilled workers etc.much worse. But that doesn’t mean they treat any class of non-citizens well. This was true even before Trump, and it’s out of control now.

    The one thing it’s hard for people to understand if they haven’t dealt with Homeland Security (or INS before that) is just how much absolute discretion an individual customs agent has to make life-altering decisions for someone who isn’t a citizen.

    ReplyReply
  62. 62
    Cacti says:

    @lurker dean:

    We have a lot of cranky old coots here.

    ReplyReply
  63. 63
    zhena gogolia says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    I think it’s an attempt at satire.

    ReplyReply
  64. 64

    @PPCLI: My friend who hasn’t changed her last name was detained by CBP when reentering the country because she and her son had different last names, when she was a permanent resident. She changed her last name when she became a citizen.

    ReplyReply
  65. 65
  66. 66

    @Cacti:Also pointing out that a front pager has a blind spot the size of Jupiter regarding anyone or anything (GG, BS or military brass who served as cabinet members for T, unscientific articles about veganism etc) is rude.

    ReplyReply
  67. 67
  68. 68
    laura says:

    Impeach Pence First. The God botherer in chief and the pocket nazi Miller are doing exactly what the trump campaign said was going to do – let pence handle all the domestic policy while the president spends his time making America hate again.
    Ultimately, they will get around to All of Us.
    They’re just starting with groups they deem marginalized and keep moving to the next group.
    How I wish them the most painful suffering miserable death, alone, unaided by any form of comfort.

    ReplyReply
  69. 69
    --bd says:

    @zhena gogolia: Also a DKs reference, I hope. Opening of I Kill Children.

    ReplyReply
  70. 70
    TenguPhule says:

    This is a message for leaders of the Democratic Party. For over two years, this president has broken the law, and nothing happened. You told us to wait for the Mueller investigation. And when he showed obstruction of justice, nothing happened.

    Now you tell us to wait for the next election? Really? Really? Really? This is why we volunteered. Raised money. Went door to door. And voted in the last election. Our founding fathers expected you — Congress — to hold a lawless president accountable. And you’re doing nothing. Nothing. Nothing. He broke his oath of office. He’s defying you. Laughing at you. And he’s getting away with it.

    Democrats are badly blowing it against Trump. A brutal new TV ad shows how.

    It is possible for Pelosi to get it wrong. This is not an attack on her or a disparagement of her political skills. But things are getting worse and what may have seemed a good idea months ago should be reevaluated in light of the increasingly lawless behavior of the administration.

    ReplyReply
  71. 71
    PPCLI says:

    @schrodingers_cat (HectoringBully): I had several experiences like that, and that was what made me realize that I had to become a citizen. Remaining on a green card was simply not tenable. Things were getting worse every year. And that was under Obama.

    ReplyReply
  72. 72
    TenguPhule says:

    What’s most galling for me is that this is not a large number of people. Many of these people are servicemembers. There is no legitimate reason to do this. I can’t even imagine what they’ll cook up in court to make it seem like there is. In the Trump era, they don’t even have the goddamn courtesy to give us a pretext any more.

    The reasons never change.

    First they came for the Muslims….Then they came for the LBGT…..

    ReplyReply
  73. 73
    Cacti says:

    @TenguPhule:

    Ad from who?

    ReplyReply
  74. 74
    TenguPhule says:

    @zhena gogolia:

    Really (Godwin), really, what distinguishes them from the Nazis, deep down? What?

    They learned from the Nazis not to keep detailed records of their crimes.

    ReplyReply
  75. 75
    TenguPhule says:

    @Cacti: Tom Steyer. California Liberal Billionaire.

    ReplyReply
  76. 76
    Emma says:

    @TenguPhule: Whose ad? Who/what are they backing politically? I’m sorry but these days I check the provenance of anything and everything, including my own allies.

    ReplyReply
  77. 77

    @TenguPhule:

    what may have seemed a good idea months ago should be reevaluated in light of the increasingly lawless behavior of the administration.

    It seems clear to me that “I want to do it, now make me do it” is Pelosi’s approach to impeachment.

    ReplyReply
  78. 78
    rikyrah says:

    @laura:

    Ultimately, they will get around to All of Us.

    say it again. tell that truth

    They’re just starting with groups they deem marginalized and keep moving to the next group.

    yep

    ReplyReply
  79. 79
    TenguPhule says:

    @J R in WV:

    No chance they’re planning on timing all this stuff so that their major votes on the impeachments of multiple law-breakers in the Executive branch occur at what Nancy Smash thinks will be the best timing for the 2020 election?

    Relying on the courts to enforce Congressional investigations when the Senate has been pumping Federalist Nazis as judges as fast as they can doesn’t seem wise.

    And remember, for all that she’s been a smart political leader, Pelosi has a record of making bad calls too. Letting Bush and Cheney ignore, stonewall and whitewash Congressional investigations came back to bite us all in the ass.

    ReplyReply
  80. 80
    joel hanes says:

    @zhena gogolia:

    Godwin

    himself has said :

    By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I’m with you.

    https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic/status/896884949634232320

    ReplyReply
  81. 81
    Emerald says:

    @lurker dean: Nancy SMASH is always playing 11th-dimensional chess.

    ReplyReply
  82. 82
  83. 83
    Citizen Alan says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    As if Medicaid and Medicare would survive if Fat Bastard gets to replace any of the liberal justices.

    ReplyReply
  84. 84
    TenguPhule says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    It seems clear to me that “I want to do it, now make me do it” is Pelosi’s approach to impeachment.

    That’s not how I’m reading things. If that were the case, we wouldn’t be seeing her clamp down so tightly on the House Democrats who would be the ones you’d normally expect to be pushing her towards it.

    Now I could be wrong, but this is feeling like a rehash of 2007-2008 where the Democrats in Congress made a political calculation to run on their agenda instead of pursuing the Bush admin and the clock ran out on holding any of the major players accountable. Its a risk adverse approach that paradoxically is incredibly risky now because it relies on the rules and norms that no longer apply because the other side does not care about anything but winning.

    ReplyReply
  85. 85
    TenguPhule says:

    @Emerald:

    Nancy SMASH is always playing 11th-dimensional chess.

    But this time she’s playing against a three hundred fifty pound pigeon.

    ReplyReply
  86. 86

    @FelonyGovt:

    From what I hear, he’s not even that well-liked in NYC.

    Which is why he’s running for President rather than for some higher office in New York state.

    ReplyReply
  87. 87
    rikyrah says:

    The Supreme Court decision in the Shelby Country v. Holder case had the effect of spreading voter suppression like a cancer that has metastasized across the country in places like: North Dakota, Kansas, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.” – @Sifill_LDF #VoterSuppression #GiveUstheBallot pic.twitter.com/KyGXpx9gyC

    — Legal Defense Fund (@NAACP_LDF) May 16, 2019

    ReplyReply
  88. 88
    laura says:

    @rikyrah: rikyrah, You Are The Moral Conscience of this here Blog!

    ReplyReply
  89. 89
    Baud says:

    @FelonyGovt:

    From what I hear, he’s not even that well-liked in NYC.

    He’s no Michael Bloomberg

    Whatever happened to Howard Schultz? He had a media boomlet for a moment but then dropped of the face of the earth. Not that I’m complaining, but I’m curious. I don’t recall him dropping out.

    ReplyReply
  90. 90
    Brachiator says:

    @TenguPhule:

    Democrats are badly blowing it against Trump. A brutal new TV ad shows how.

    So, who is this goofball running the ad? If he is going to blame Congress, shouldn’t he be nailing Republicans as well, just to get it on the record?

    I suppose the Democrats could go for impeachment during an presidential election cycle, even though it will obviously fail, because the Senate will not vote to convict and remove Trump.

    What’s the citizen sentiment about impeachment?

    ReplyReply
  91. 91
    Baud says:

    @Brachiator:

    So, who is this goofball running the ad?

    @TEN_GOP

    ReplyReply
  92. 92
    ruemara says:

    @schrodingers_cat (HectoringBully): there’s no progress. Just a monthly, “we’re doing nothing”.

    @TenguPhule: Fuck that ad. If that doesn’t target Republicans, fuck it with a warhead.
    @Brachiator: among likely voters not on Twitter, they want bipartisanship. Because they’re idiots and they’re the idiots we have to appeal to.

    ReplyReply
  93. 93

    @Brachiator: @Baud: Tom Steyer is a California hedge fund billionaire who’s been making a big single-issue push for impeachment.

    ReplyReply
  94. 94
    lurker dean says:

    @Emerald: i hope you’re right.

    ReplyReply
  95. 95
    tobie says:

    @rikyrah: There’s no excuse for this in PA. What the heck is Gov. Wolf doing??? I don’t live in PA but I know they have elections on Mar 21 for a bunch of state offices. PA Jackals — is there any close local race that needs some help?

    ReplyReply
  96. 96
    rikyrah says:

    @laura:

    thanks, but, I think others are that here.

    ReplyReply
  97. 97

    @ruemara: IIRC California office is one of the slowest. Since they don’t have enough personnel to deal with the increased paper work they are demanding from applicants.

    ReplyReply
  98. 98
    Missouri Buckeye says:

    The first time I know of the term “Science Babies” was from the character of Helena in Orphan Black.

    https://www.vulture.com/2016/05/orphan-black-recap-season-4-episode-4.html

    ReplyReply
  99. 99
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Major Major Major Major: It is the spoken word first line of the Dead Kennedy’s song “I Kill Children.”

    ReplyReply
  100. 100

    @rikyrah: You do it without losing your cool. I admire that.

    ReplyReply
  101. 101
    rikyrah says:

    @Baud:

    Whatever happened to Howard Schultz? He had a media boomlet for a moment but then dropped of the face of the earth. Not that I’m complaining, but I’m curious. I don’t recall him dropping out.

    Folks began to vet Howard. Plus, the Democratic base isn’t the GOP base. Some muthaphucka who sold a lot of coffee, and decides to get into politics because he wants to keep his tax cut….what was his constituency?

    ReplyReply
  102. 102
    MomSense says:

    @Citizen Alan:

    As if Medicaid or Medicare4All would help as long as we have the fucking Hyde Amendment to contend with.

    Not venting at you just venting at another blind spot the progressiver than thou caucus has.

    ReplyReply
  103. 103
    TenguPhule says:

    @Brachiator:

    So, who is this goofball running the ad? If he is going to blame Congress, shouldn’t he be nailing Republicans as well, just to get it on the record?

    Tom Steyer. California Liberal Billionaire.

    And the message in the ad may be harsh, but it rings true. Democrats ran on a platform of accountability. They’ve claimed we’re in a Constitutional Crisis. But they’re not behaving like that’s actually the case. There is no sense of urgency in the House’s current investigations, instead its coming across as business as usual.

    And that’s really dangerous.

    ReplyReply
  104. 104
    Brachiator says:

    @Cacti:

    The other thing they’re after is the right to privacy. Roe v. Wade may be the short term target, but the main target is Griswold v. Connecticut. If Griswold gets overturned, the American Taliban is back in business for anti-contraception and anti-sodomy laws.

    I would say that they have multiple targets. And clearly, they are trying to settle multiple scores as they try to roll back cultural progress.

    So here they are using immigration to attack gays and others, using religion to attack women and others.

    Every liberal law and court ruling since around 1960 offends them.

    ReplyReply
  105. 105
    Baud says:

    @rikyrah:

    I don’t disagree, but he was running as an independent, not a Dem, and his constituency was the media.

    ReplyReply
  106. 106
    TenguPhule says:

    @ruemara:

    Fuck that ad. If that doesn’t target Republicans, fuck it with a warhead.

    This is what pushing for impeachment from the outside looks like. It’s not pretty and we could have avoided this.

    ReplyReply
  107. 107
    Mary G says:

    @rikyrah:Howard seized Uncle Joe as an excuse to drop out, per Business Insider:

    Billionaire businessman and former Starbucks chief executive Howard Schultz has delayed his decision on whether to run for president as an independent as he assesses the possibility of former Vice President Joe Biden capturing the Democratic nomination, FOX Business has learned.

    If Biden, a moderate liberal who is friendly to business, emerged as the likely Democratic nominee, this would be a significant impediment to Schultz running for president since his campaign would focus on similar issues to Biden’s, according to two people with direct knowledge of Schultz’s thinking. And if Biden does survive a Democratic primary without betraying his record as a moderate, it’s unlikely Schultz would mount his independent campaign, they add.

    Noooothing to do with the fact that voters hate him.

    ReplyReply
  108. 108
    Baud says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    Haven’t seen the ad and don’t plan to. Almost all single issue advocates start out noble but lose the plot after a while and instead of continuing to build their movement, decide to spend time attacking people for not joining their movement. Sounds like the pattern holds here.

    ReplyReply
  109. 109
    Citizen Alan says:

    @MomSense:

    You misunderstand. I don’t think Medicare and Medicaid survive in any context. Ditto EPA. Ditto OSHA. Ditto neary every decent government policy since the New Deal. If any of the liberals get replaced under this regime, Clarence Fucking Thomas becomes the swing vote. And he thinks the federal government should have no power under the Commerce Clause beyond maintaining ports, roads and airports.

    And fuck Biden for letting him on the Court.

    ReplyReply
  110. 110

    @Baud: he’s a long-time party activist, for what it’s worth.

    ReplyReply
  111. 111
    rikyrah says:

    @TenguPhule:

    Tired of him. Why not fund anti-voter suppression groups. Or groups getting folks their ids. Or fund groups trying to put same day registration and other voter registration reforms on the ballots in states?

    Yeah, ok, impeachment SHOULD be on the table, but, folks need to be able to vote.

    ReplyReply
  112. 112
    jl says:

    @Baud: I think corporate media has some standards for return on investment in supporting a corporate friendly centrist. Can win some elections, get good ratings for media dog and pony shows, can serve as a good ambassador of corporate BS. If a prospective corporate flunky can meet one of those criteria, then needs to be ‘fluid’ on policy, so wherever the schmuck lands in government, will adapt to whatever corporate funders want, aka, will be a good flunky.

    Schultz had nothing on the first set of criteria. Just a bomb. I think they abandoned Klobuchar, because she was not ‘fluid’ enough. They have some bets on a couple of other candidates I think, but don’t want to start a blog fight by naming who I think they are.

    So, bottom line, still an opening for Baud 2020! as a corporate media darling

    ReplyReply
  113. 113
    rikyrah says:

    @Brachiator:

    Every liberal law and court ruling since around 1960 offends them.

    go back to Brown v. Board, and you and I are seeing eye to eye

    ReplyReply
  114. 114
    TenguPhule says:

    @Brachiator:

    I suppose the Democrats could go for impeachment during an presidential election cycle, even though it will obviously fail, because the Senate will not vote to convict and remove Trump.

    The House took an oath to defend the Constitution, regardless of what the Senate decides. If it refuses to do its duty because its politically risky, then they have no power left at all.

    ReplyReply
  115. 115
    Brachiator says:

    @TenguPhule:

    And the message in the ad may be harsh, but it rings true. Democrats ran on a platform of accountability. They’ve claimed we’re in a Constitutional Crisis. But they’re not behaving like that’s actually the case.

    Why is impeachment so important to you, since you know that it will fail?

    ReplyReply
  116. 116
    rikyrah says:

    @Baud:

    I don’t disagree, but he was running as an independent, not a Dem, and his constituency was the media.

    he didn’t attack not one Republican..he was always opening his mouth to attack Democrats

    ReplyReply
  117. 117
  118. 118
    TenguPhule says:

    @rikyrah:

    Why not fund anti-voter suppression groups. Or groups getting folks their ids. Or fund groups trying to put same day registration and other voter registration reforms on the ballots in states?

    For all we know he could be doing that too.

    But he’s not wrong here. This is also a threat to mustering the Democratic vote. People have to believe their vote will change things.

    ReplyReply
  119. 119
    Baud says:

    @Major Major Major Major: They’re the worst of the bunch.

    @rikyrah: The media loves people who attack Dems though.

    @jl:

    “It’s time to unshackle the power of the free market.”

    How’d I do?

    ReplyReply
  120. 120
    Baud says:

    @Origuy:

    Ah! Thank you.

    ReplyReply
  121. 121
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Baud:

    I don’t recall him dropping out.

    Neither do I. But then again, I haven’t even seen his name mentioned in the polling of late. Is it possible he realised he had no support whatsoever and quit his run on the QT?

    ReplyReply
  122. 122
    chopper says:

    it should be illegal for these assholes to use the phrase “pro-life”.

    ReplyReply
  123. 123

    @Mary G:

    Noooothing to do with the fact that voters hate him.

    I actually believe it doesn’t. Schultz’s whole rationale for running was that he was afraid the Democrats were going to nominate somebody like Warren or Sanders. He was explicitly threatening to run as a spoiler unless they nominate somebody more moderate.

    ReplyReply
  124. 124
    chopper says:

    @Origuy:

    He also had back surgery.

    repeated attempts at self-fellatio will lead to that.

    ReplyReply
  125. 125
    Bill Arnold says:

    This is a good thing. Driven in part by fears of regulation/breakup, perhaps, but still good. (Note that this is on the tail of other similar shutdowns of non-Israeli actors.)
    Facebook shuts down an Israeli firm’s effort to influence politics in West Africa – Linked to a shadowy company called Archimedes Group (Nick Statt, May 16, 2019)
    and from Facebook itself,
    Removing Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior From Israel (Nathaniel Gleicher, Head of Cybersecurity Policy, May 16, 2019)
    The Israeli government needs to decide whether it condones this sort of actvity.(Unfortunately, this is true, whether they like it or not.)

    JPost: Facebook thwarts Israeli firm’s efforts to interfere in foreign politics – Approximately 2.8 million Facebook accounts followed one or more of the deceptive pages and approximately 5,500 joined the Facebook groups. (Eytan Halon – May 16, 2019)

    ReplyReply
  126. 126
    Brachiator says:

    @rikyrah:

    go back to Brown v. Board, and you and I are seeing eye to eye

    Fair point. Trump is all about white resentment and white revenge.

    ReplyReply
  127. 127
    TenguPhule says:

    @Brachiator:

    Why is impeachment so important to you, since you know that it will fail?

    1. Because it gives the House stronger legal powers when it comes to investigations.

    2. Its a single narrative to tie every single scandal and crime Trump, his family and his appointees have committed and keep the lazy media’s attention focused on it for months.

    3. Democrats need to show how the process is supposed to work again to educate the voting public.

    4. Its their duty under the Constitution.

    5. Our voters need to see that their votes matter. That the people they voted for will do their best to carry out the promises that were made during the last election. Otherwise, who’ll believe us in the next one?

    ReplyReply
  128. 128
    Aleta says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Btw, thanks for putting Pence in this headline. I know LGBTQ discrimination is his obsession, but I hate that he usually gets passed over in headlines and news text about other administration atrocities. This lets him preserve his fake christian brand while backing crimes against humanity at the border and immigration policy.

    Pence needs to be called every day out for racism and discrimination against the poor and sick.

    ReplyReply
  129. 129
    Brachiator says:

    @TenguPhule:

    The House took an oath to defend the Constitution, regardless of what the Senate decides. If it refuses to do its duty because its politically risky, then they have no power left at all.

    It’s not just that it is politically risky, it’s that it is probably pointless.

    I don’t see that the House has a duty to impeach Trump, but I see your point.

    ReplyReply
  130. 130
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @rikyrah: Neither of you are going far enough. They want to go to back to the Lochner era.

    ReplyReply
  131. 131
    low-tech cyclist says:

    Looks like a comment of mine went into moderation, so let me try again without the link and quote.

    I cited the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 (and linked to and quoted the State Department page about the Act). I was wondering why that law didn’t apply to and grant automatic citizenship to these children.

    It wouldn’t be birthright citizenship, but it takes effect as soon as they enter U.S. jurisdiction. The only difference is that they wouldn’t be eligible to become President or VP someday.

    ReplyReply
  132. 132
    jl says:

    @Baud:

    ‘ “It’s time to unshackle the power of the free market.”

    Good to go. Delivery should be upbeat and peppy, look a common working man in the eye and smile, stay sober.

    ReplyReply
  133. 133
    Aleta says:

    The radical ‘religious’ right (RRR) don’t believe in the ‘teachings of Jesus.’ They believe in the dominion of white men over all other living things on earth, which they claim have been put here for their use according to their convenient (evil) interpretation of the judeo-christ. bible.

    2015 quote from a Guardian article about RRR outrage against Obama for condemning all violence done in the name of religion.

    Jonah Goldberg claimed the Crusades were a justified action against Muslim aggression and the Inquisition was a well-intentioned anti-lynching measure. Ross Douhat spent his morning on Twitter defending conservative Catholicism more generally. Redstate.com’s Erick Erickson declared that Barack Obama was not a Christian in “any meaningful way”. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal argued that since the medieval Christian threat was over a long time ago, we should just focus on combating radical Islam.

    ReplyReply
  134. 134
    rikyrah says:

    @Roger Moore:

    He was explicitly threatening to run as a spoiler unless they nominate somebody more moderate.

    in order to spoil, he had to have a constituency within the Democratic Party, which he had none

    ReplyReply
  135. 135
    jl says:

    Trump citizen action social media bias police, what a corrupt scam. You need to give your email, phone number, AND ZIP. Refuse to say how they’ll use that information, or what limits on where it will go, they can edit your submissions.

    Well, NRA/Russia won’t be able to chip in like in they did in 2016, so I guess they need to do something to replace it for 2020.

    Trump Wants Your Social Media Gripes — And Zip Code, Email And Phone Number
    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/donald-trump-white-house-social-media-discrimination-survey

    ReplyReply
  136. 136
    PPCLI says:

    @schrodingers_cat (HectoringBully): I did, about 5 years ago, and made it through all the hoops. Wisest decision I ever made. For all the reasons you would expect, though I had no idea that the coming reality would exceed even my worst fears.

    ETA: Even after all this time, I still feel that sinking dread every time I approach a border crossing, and I’m stunned at how easy it is with the US passport.

    ReplyReply
  137. 137
    MomSense says:

    @Citizen Alan:

    Our only hope is to win WH, House, and Senate – then pack the fuck out of the court.

    ReplyReply
  138. 138
    MomSense says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Damn, you are usually the one that talks us off the ledge.

    ReplyReply
  139. 139
    Cacti says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Still not far enough. They want to revisit the Dred Scott era.

    Antonin Scalia gave up the game when he said that women were not persons under the 14th Amendment.

    ReplyReply
  140. 140
    Dan B says:

    The Pences of this country believe that LGBT people are diseased or possessed by satan. We’re pedophiles or recruiting innocent children. The leading RW preachers say worse. They believe they are martyrs for trying to save the country. They yearn for a time when LGBT people were in the shadows and women were obedient and chaste. (abortion violates these, natch – who knew?) Their goals are to save children from the only families they have known and to make women “proper”.

    They are infected with fear and live their lives, in many cases, in self loathing. Add in their desire for the “darker complected” to be in “their place” and it’s easy to extrapolate their next moves.

    ReplyReply
  141. 141
    Bill Arnold says:

    @jl:
    This one is also pithy:
    The White House’s ‘Tech Bias’ Reporting Form Is a Masterpiece of Trumpism (Max Read, 2019/05/16)

    But the most important function of the tech-bias tool almost certainly isn’t to gather evidence to address a genuine problem. “The thing about the Trump Facebook bias survey is it’s just going to be used to assemble a voter file,” the Times’ Kevin Roose points out, “which Trump will then pay Facebook millions of dollars to target with ads about how biased Facebook is.” That is, none of the people who submit grievances to the form will have their accounts restored or content promoted. They won’t get explanations for why social media isn’t working the way they think it should, and they almost certainly won’t get satisfying regulation out of their complaints. Instead, they’ll be advertised to about Trump — and whatever else the Trump campaign uses the list for — for the rest of their digital lives, on the very platforms they feel completely alienated from.

    (It will also be gamed, perhaps amusingly. :-)

    ReplyReply
  142. 142
    Cacti says:

    “Beings of an inferior order . . . with no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”

    That’s the Supreme Court precedent the radical right would like to see reinstated against every group they dislike.

    ReplyReply
  143. 143
    Eural Joiner says:

    @Cacti:

    Still not far enough. They want to revisit the pre-Magna Carta era.
    Representation and common law are for the plebs, not the white aristocracy.

    ReplyReply
  144. 144

    @PPCLI: I did too in 2017. Although I must say that I have never had any problems with border crossings or ports of entry myself.

    ReplyReply
  145. 145
    Dan B says:

    @rikyrah: Their strategy for dismantling Brown? I’m wondering if it will be dramatically defunding of the civil rights bureaucracy. Also rampant voter suppression in 2020 will stir up court cases that open up opportunities for judicial jujitsu, like parental rights to the schooling of their property… I mean children.

    ReplyReply
  146. 146
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @MomSense: 1. I knew these Federalist Society people in law school. It’s what they want.

    2. People can talk themselves off of their own ledges if they want get down. When it gets too negative for me around here these days, I just take a break from the place. I don’t want to give anyone else the idea that I am trying to tell them what they can and cannot say.

    ReplyReply
  147. 147
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    They want to go to back to the Lochner era.

    No doubt in my mind.

    ReplyReply
  148. 148
    Cacti says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    I don’t want to give anyone else the idea that I am trying to tell them what they can and cannot say.

    When you shovel it, you really do use both hands counselor.

    ReplyReply
  149. 149
    Seanly says:

    With everything they do, I hate these muthafuggas more & more each day. I’d imagine there will be lawsuits about this as they can’t legally knowingly discriminate like this?

    ReplyReply
  150. 150
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Cacti: I am not trying to talk you off of a ledge. I mean feel free to toss around homophobic language because you don’t like a candidate and seem to be incapable of arguing the case against the candidate at anything above playground level.

    ReplyReply
  151. 151
    rikyrah says:

    Royal Power Brokers and The Winds of Change

    The winds of change are ruffling the feathers of royal reporters, courtesy of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

    Few of us get to know the royal family in person; we get what we know about them from the media. Royal reporters and headline writers influence and even control, their public narrative. But with the birth of the Sussexes’ first child, Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, the public has seen the clear signal being sent to the press: change is already here.

    Yes, there’s a new royal couple in town and they’re telling reporters that their tactics are no longer working.

    ………………………………….

    But whereas most of the royal courtiers’ work is done outside public view, the stories by reporters they also depend on – and have been known to manipulate – are very public. It’s in those public expressions that we can best see the change.

    They’ve had it coming, of course, both the courtiers who leaked developments or shared fact-free, damaging rumours about the Sussexes, and the royal reporters who have lapped up those whispers, added to them, and embroidered them for their readers.

    ………………………..

    But no-one could predict that Prince Harry, son of Charles and Diana, sixth in line to the throne, would fall in love with an American actress, a woman of mixed race and a divorcee.

    After that, all hell broke loose in certain British media.

    ……………………………….

    With the birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, the first child of the Sussexes, we’ve seen both reporters and their palace sources get their comeuppance in spectacular style.

    Left out of the big story of the royal birth. Left out of the photocall, a big money-maker for the media. Left out of even the tiniest details about the birth.

    Even “some senior royals”, according to news reports, didn’t know that Meghan had gone into labour till it was announced – hours after the baby’s birth. And royal reporters, bereft of the leaks and rumours from their “palace sources”, were left completely in the dark.

    When the news was announced, it didn’t come through the secret pipeline between courtiers and reporters. It came from Buckingham Palace and SussexRoyal – the Sussexes’ new Instagram account, their preferred method of communicating directly with their supporters. (It has more than 7 million followers as I write, with many more joining hourly.)

    The details were sparse, with royal reporters unable to add any information. Even the usual speculative commentary – a trademark of royal reporting and “experts” – felt lame. Someone was controlling this narrative and it wasn’t the media.

    ………………………………

    Newsworthy also, and ironic, was this detail: the only person allowed to interview the couple among this virtually all-white, privileged class of British royal reporters was Alan Jones, a largely unknown royal correspondent with the Press Association and — even more surprising — is Black.

    Jones delighted viewers when he later described the experience of interviewing Harry just hours after the birth. You could sense both the reporter’s confidence and humility, sense that he was still marveling at the great privilege of being the chosen one. No appearance of entitlement here, no allusion to being an authority on the Sussexes.

    The Sussexes had announced their terms weeks earlier. Access to them and their baby, they said, would be restricted to one still photographer a few days after the birth. That photographer would feed the pictures to the media. Similarly, they agreed to be interviewed by one reporter.

    ReplyReply
  152. 152
    Cacti says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    And out steps the real you, from behind the preliminary load of high-minded sounding bovine excrement. ;-)

    ReplyReply
  153. 153
    rikyrah says:

    @Dan B:

    They yearn for a time when LGBT people were in the shadows and women were obedient and chaste. (abortion violates these, natch – who knew?) Their goals are to save children from the only families they have known and to make women “proper”.

    Yep.
    They want to shove all the LGBT back into the closet and lock the door, and strip them of their humanity.

    ReplyReply
  154. 154
    Spinoza is My Co-pilot says:

    @Dorothy A. Winsor:

    I am currently trying to convince myself that the whole country is like CA was just before it went totally D. They (sic) Rs passed every evil thing they could in a frantic last gasp

    It would be pretty to think so, wouldn’t it?

    But the whole country really isn’t like CA. And what’s happening under R rule nationally (and in R-controlled, which is to say, the majority, of the states) is no “frantic last gasp”. The structural advantages that the fascists enjoy under our constitutional system (the Senate is only the most-obvious of these; there’s also the essentially monarch-like “unitary executive” powers permitted to [only] a Republican president — that’s happening right before our eyes, every day, as Trump gives both middle fingers held high to a Democratic House who can’t do a damn thing about it) just about ensures the continued rule by an evil but very committed minority.

    A solidly-rightwing and highly-activist federal judiciary for the next generation alone makes that nearly certain, President Warren notwithstanding. That was by far the most consequential result of Trump winning the Electoral College in ’16, and we’ll be dealing with it for decades.

    ReplyReply
  155. 155
    Bill Arnold says:

    Aleta:

    They believe in the dominion of white men over all other living things on earth,

    Along the same lines,
    White “Christian” Supremacist Theology and Fascist Politics & Tree of Life Murders (Gary Kohls, October 29, 2018)

    ReplyReply
  156. 156
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Spinoza is My Co-pilot:

    But remember, we weren’t supposed to “blackmail” people with the Supreme Court or by reminding them what was actually at stake in 2016. We were only allowed to talk about what a terrible candidate Hillary was and how electing Trump would totally bring on The Revolution. Because selfish assholes on the “left” couldn’t look beyond their hurt fee-fees for 10 goddamned seconds to see how everyone else was going to get hurt. It was all about them and coddling their goddamned fragile feelings. 😡

    ReplyReply
  157. 157
    Mnemosyne says:

    @rikyrah:

    Newsworthy also, and ironic, was this detail: the only person allowed to interview the couple among this virtually all-white, privileged class of British royal reporters was Alan Jones, a largely unknown royal correspondent with the Press Association and — even more surprising — is Black.

    This is only surprising to people who still have NO CLUE that Harry and Meghan’s fan base is Black women all around the world.

    And I’ll bet that the “senior royal” who’s whining about not knowing that Meghan was in labor is that asshole Princess Michael. There is no way in hell that Harry did not inform his actual family, ie his brother and sister-in-law, his grandparents, and his father and stepmother.

    Especially since Harry is very clearly the favorite grandson who can do no wrong and both his grandmother and his father dote on Meghan.

    ReplyReply
  158. 158
    trollhattan says:

    @chopper:

    it should be illegal for these assholes to use the phrase “pro-life”.

    After slamming NPR yesterday on a particular boff-sides interview I was pleased today to hear one of their cub reporters pointedly use “anti-abortion” describing the positions of an interviewee.

    Baby [heh] steps.

    ReplyReply
  159. 159

    @rikyrah: What they’d really like to do is put us LGBT people in a concentration camp on an island — and the nuke the island.

    But in the meantime, eradicating LGBT people from public life, and making life so unbearable hat many of us kill ourselves, will have to do.

    No I’m not being hyperbolic here (based on sites I follow that track what the fundies are up to).

    ReplyReply
  160. 160
    rikyrah says:

    @Sister Golden Bear:

    No I’m not being hyperbolic here (based on sites I follow that track what the fundies are up to).

    Say what you say, because absolutely NOT – you are NOT being hyperbolic. And, I don’t see how anyone looking and seeing this Administration’s policies could utter the word hyperbolic. …when it’s THE TRUTH.

    With these ‘ conscience’ rules…PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DIE BECAUSE THEIR EXISTENCE OFFENDS SOMEONE ELSE.

    ReplyReply
  161. 161
    J R in WV says:

    @TenguPhule:

    There is no sense of urgency in the House’s current investigations, instead its coming across as business as usual.

    And that’s really dangerous.

    That may be the way the MSM portrays things in the House. I don’t think that’s the way things are because I don’t automatically believe the MSM any more, since about 1990. I was pretty doubtful before that, but really suspicious more recently.

    I’ve seen the 8-10 pm news shows on MSNBC, Chris Hayes and Rachel Maddow, interviewing various congressmen and congresswomen, and they seem to me to mostly be very serious about running the investigations. Maybe I’m an incurable optimist some times? Other times I’m an angry old coot, sometimes both in a single thread.

    But being hateful towards a House leadership you want to be doing more seems a little self-destructive to me. YMMV

    ReplyReply
  162. 162
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Sister Golden Bear:

    Some distant (in DNA) relatives of ours recently made it public that they are letting their daughter live her life as she pleases even though she was born with male genitalia. It’s been in the works for some time, and she was finally ready to go public … at age 6. Because she knew what was right for her, and they were wise enough to listen when their small child started to say things like, “Maybe when I die and go to Heaven, God will finally let me be a girl.”

    I’m terrified for her right now, but I also plan to fight for her rights. 🌈💪

    ReplyReply
  163. 163
    J R in WV says:

    @Origuy:

    Howard Schultz is reconsidering after Biden entered the race. He also had back surgery.

    Well, sometimes I would say I wouldn’t wish that pain on my worst enemy. But in this case, I’m glad for Howard and his back trouble, if it keeps him minding his own business and not mine!!!

    ReplyReply
  164. 164
    J R in WV says:

    @jl:

    @Baud:

    ‘ “It’s time to unshackle the power of the free market.”

    Good to go. Delivery should be upbeat and peppy, look a common working man in the eye and smile, stay ACT sober.

    Fixed that for you…

    ReplyReply
  165. 165
    The Lodger says:

    @J R in WV: Unlike the previous impeachment effort, the current House leadership is making the effort to prepare a bulletproof case. In this situation, as the man said, “you best not miss.”

    ReplyReply
  166. 166
    J R in WV says:

    @Aleta:

    The radical ‘religious’ right (RRR) don’t believe in the ‘teachings of Jesus.’ They believe in the dominion of white men over all other living things on earth, which they claim have been put here for their use according to their convenient (evil) interpretation of the judeo-christ. bible.

    Well said!! Quoted for truth!!!!

    ReplyReply
  167. 167
    TenguPhule says:

    @J R in WV:

    But being hateful towards a House leadership you want to be doing more seems a little self-destructive to me. YMMV

    Things have moved from the asking nicely phase to the angry shouting phase.

    Pushing for a course of action isn’t all politeness and polling.

    ReplyReply
  168. 168
    J R in WV says:

    @Cacti:

    You have finally earned the honor of being the sole resident of my Pie list. Enjoy your sojurne in the Pie Safe!!!

    I really try to not over react to people, but some have nothing of value to say, whatsoever. So why bother to read their inane muttering?

    ReplyReply
  169. 169
    J R in WV says:

    @The Lodger:

    I agree.

    The Democratic leadership isn’t interested in a show trial, like the Republicans put on over nothing. Really. they wanted to punish a successful Democratic President for the guilty behavior of ve-President Nixon, nothing more, nothing less.

    But we now have serious misbehavior that would for any other person on earth have already resulted in indictment, trial and imprisonment. So they need to get all the facts together that they can, and conduct an impeachment that demonstrates the obvious guilt of the subject, Trump the last. Then the day after he loses his position, indictment and arrest!! There’s some optimism for ya’ll~!!!~

    ReplyReply
  170. 170
    MomSense says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    I wasn’t criticizing. You are usually more confident in institutions than some of us.

    I know what you mean about knowing these bastards when. I had forgotten all about asshole Jim Robinson until a couple weeks ago or whenever it was he wrote something stupid.

    Tonight I’m taking a mental health break and going to see a concert with five or so acts (my kid is one of them) with a young woman musician who I met through my son but she has become something of an adopted daughter. She’s been traveling the country since last October and I’m looking forward to getting all the deets as they say.

    ReplyReply
  171. 171
    Cacti says:

    @J R in WV:

    Ouch. You’ve broken my heart.

    ReplyReply
  172. 172
    Spinoza is My Co-pilot says:

    @Mnemosyne: Among the things that ended (for me) on November 8, 2016 were a few friendships with some “leftier-than-thou” people who opposed Hillary because of (in their words) “the subversion of democracy by the DNC rigging the primaries so Bernie lost”. Even if this rigging nonsense were true (and of course it isn’t) it wouldn’t have mattered; as you and I and almost everyone around here understands, the choice in November of 2016 was a stark, binary one between Hillary (warmongering corporatist shill though she may be, and I don’t think she is) and the vile, buffoonish, existential threat to our liberal democracy that now squats in the Oval Office.

    I even had that “don’t blackmail me with the SCOTUS” line of bullshit pulled on me when I tried reasoning with a couple of these useful idiots. It was fucking maddening, and when Trump won that was it, I just couldn’t any longer with these fascist-enabling assholes who I used to call friends.

    One of them contacted me last November after the Senate race was finally called for Sinema here in AZ (she was the candidate I volunteer-campaigned for and donated to — pretty much exclusively — in the ’18 elections; I’ve worked every election cycle since ’68, when I was a teenager, for Democratic candidates at all levels, and for me, locally, she was by far the most important last year). Paraphrasing, I was snidely told that, “Well, I see your candidate won, that’s great. She’s even more of a corporatist tool than Clinton, won’t be any different than if McSally won”. That’s the mindset of these leftist assholes, and they’re going to pull the same shit when their savior Bernie loses in 2020 as they did in 2016.

    You see, Mnemosyne, negative Nellie as I can be (my 50+ years at this politics thing just doesn’t allow me to see our current and likely future situation in anything close to a rosy hue), we are still on the same side and fight for the same things. These purity leftist motherfuckers? They might as well be goddamn fascists.

    ReplyReply
  173. 173
    kindness says:

    Handmaiden’s Tale isn’t a fantasy to some of the Dominionists. They are truly scary people.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *