It's not just the spineless cowardice that pisses me off, it's the fucking LAZINESS.
When BILL FUCKING KRISTOL is on your ass for not doing anything meaningful, you've really fucked up. But instead of actual resistance, we got ping pong paddles.
I can't get over this line in the Axios piece you linked: "They are not being talked to like they are children. We are helping them understand why their strategy is a bad idea," the source said.
Those words alone make me 100% sure they *are* being talked to like they are children.
Bernie is literally holding town halls in toss-up Republican districts right now. Yesterday in Warren, Michigan, 10,512 people showed up and 2,500 were turned away for lack of space.
I teach public health. Bernie is right about RFK Jr and food - and he didn't vote for him, as you say. Being right in one thing doesn't make up for lack of credibility on vaccines and other health issues. If we lie, we will lose credibility.
I am also very angry about Democrats who think that waiting around for the midterms is the answer. But don't tar them all with one brush. Highlight the ones that are doing their job.
RFK isn't right about anything, and there's no reason to say he is. His pure food garbage is of a piece with his anti vaccine nonsense and his anti fluoride nonsense; it's all part of fascism.
Would you start a discussion of Hitler by saying, "well, his vegetarianism made sense, but..." No, of course not.
I didn't tar all Ds with one brush; I pointed out Ds who were doing good things. Sanders has been iffy. I don't think it's a good idea to canonize anyone.
when I say it's all part of fascism, I mean that Kennedy's health stuff is all predicated on discourses of purity; who is pure, who gets to say what's pure; whose purity makes them strong and whose lack of purity makes them disposable. The important thing to do is highlight that, not take out bits that in isolation maybe sound reasonable and argue that there's common ground.
??? I voted for Sanders over Clinton in 2016? and I think Clinton is pretty horrible and criticize her regularly.
Sanders is mostly good, and I mostly like him. But he's not a saint, and he's been wobbly since the election (why did he vote to confirm Rubio?!) We shouldn't worship anyone in power; we should ask they live up to their values, and when they don't, we should demand better.
Why? From what I've seen this dude is the distilled essence of the Bernie worshiping personality cultist/dirtbag "any excuse to vote third party to own the libs" asshole that Bernie's fan base still refuses to acknowledge they're infested with.
Yeah, no. What we're NOT going to do is the Tulsi gabbard thing where we decide that someone is a True Progressive ™️ because Bernie said something nice about them.
RFK is an evil fucking prick who is already pushing the vaccines/autism bullshit at the CDC. Besides wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money, that shit never goes well for autistic people.
In Trump's first term a GOP senator in FUCKING MINNESOTA suggested putting autistic people on a registry because of Trump's antivax bullshit.
So, to repeat, what we are not going to do under any circumstances is imply that RFK is right, or that he might have a point about something. Because he fucking doesn't.
So I have been recommending to everyone I knew (my husband, my teenager, our dog) that the Dems start having a coordinated response to what's going down, vs the ad hoc stuff that a few energized people are doing. They should do a formal daily press briefing, sponsored by the Democratic leaders. It could include a rotating cast of speakers, depending on the top issues of the day, and offer talking points that would facilitate the news media's ability to present both sides of an issue. (Since official journalism these days appears to consist of attending press briefings.) Senator Van Hollen, Senator Murphy, Pete Buttigieg, Congressional Rep Jamie Raskin, AOC, Congressional Rep Jasmine Crockett, Ken Martin, and occasionally Leader Jeffries might be prime candidates to rotate among the lead roles. Obviously this effort would require full-time staff to identify potential issues and prepare draft talking points. I'm sure that sources could be found to fund and organize such an initiative. As it is, being limited to ad hoc responses as each representative feels moved has doubtless contributed to serious disappointment among committed Democrats towards Democratic leadership. This would also facilitate a more unified voice among Democrats. What do you think?
The Ds do have a regular press conference...but it's led by Schumer, who is a crappy communicator.
I think it would be a good idea to bring in someone who doesn't suck at speaking for sure. At the same time, Ds also need to use what leverage they have...and seeing them refuse to do that over and over is really disheartening, kind of no matter what the messaging is.
For a while it might just be people a) concerned about the welfare of the American people b) who want to preserve the restraints on government power in the constitution, and so the Kristol/AOC coalition is going to be the one that matters for the time being.
One would think all the Democratic politicians would be in it--apprently, they're not, but the voters are. You are correct about that.
The politicians may believe they win no matter what because we will have no other options. I am not sure, but it doesn't matter why they are like this, I suppose.
Tulsi Gabbard was never really a Leftist, though? She was part of an ultra-conservative Hindu movement in Hawaii, which made her support of Bernie Sanders...both temporarily hopeful and very VERY odd.
I have a feeling she's gone back to her roots now, sadly.
You never know—I used to be a Religious Conservative Republican myself, so I'm always glad to welcome walkaways.
Bernie Sanders isn't perfect, but he sure beats what's currently out there with a handful of (mostly minority female) exceptions just Jasmine Crockett, AOC, Ilhan Omar...and Al Green.
I mostly agree with everything you've written here, except going after Bernie Sanders like he's the "real problem", when Schmuck Schumer and Notorious P-Lousy Are Right There Being Corrupt NeoLib Obstructionists, Man!
It's not just the spineless cowardice that pisses me off, it's the fucking LAZINESS.
When BILL FUCKING KRISTOL is on your ass for not doing anything meaningful, you've really fucked up. But instead of actual resistance, we got ping pong paddles.
I can't get over this line in the Axios piece you linked: "They are not being talked to like they are children. We are helping them understand why their strategy is a bad idea," the source said.
Those words alone make me 100% sure they *are* being talked to like they are children.
Bernie is literally holding town halls in toss-up Republican districts right now. Yesterday in Warren, Michigan, 10,512 people showed up and 2,500 were turned away for lack of space.
I teach public health. Bernie is right about RFK Jr and food - and he didn't vote for him, as you say. Being right in one thing doesn't make up for lack of credibility on vaccines and other health issues. If we lie, we will lose credibility.
I am also very angry about Democrats who think that waiting around for the midterms is the answer. But don't tar them all with one brush. Highlight the ones that are doing their job.
RFK isn't right about anything, and there's no reason to say he is. His pure food garbage is of a piece with his anti vaccine nonsense and his anti fluoride nonsense; it's all part of fascism.
Would you start a discussion of Hitler by saying, "well, his vegetarianism made sense, but..." No, of course not.
I didn't tar all Ds with one brush; I pointed out Ds who were doing good things. Sanders has been iffy. I don't think it's a good idea to canonize anyone.
when I say it's all part of fascism, I mean that Kennedy's health stuff is all predicated on discourses of purity; who is pure, who gets to say what's pure; whose purity makes them strong and whose lack of purity makes them disposable. The important thing to do is highlight that, not take out bits that in isolation maybe sound reasonable and argue that there's common ground.
THANK YOU. Bernie saying Kennedy was right about food makes just as bullshit as when he said "you have to hand it to Castro".
I think it's WRONG to attack Bernie Sanders, and back that traitor PoS Hillary like you always do, Noah.
So...there you are.
??? I voted for Sanders over Clinton in 2016? and I think Clinton is pretty horrible and criticize her regularly.
Sanders is mostly good, and I mostly like him. But he's not a saint, and he's been wobbly since the election (why did he vote to confirm Rubio?!) We shouldn't worship anyone in power; we should ask they live up to their values, and when they don't, we should demand better.
There's no reasoning with a Bernie bro. That one is way too far gone...
nah; I'm happy to chat with DR.
Why? From what I've seen this dude is the distilled essence of the Bernie worshiping personality cultist/dirtbag "any excuse to vote third party to own the libs" asshole that Bernie's fan base still refuses to acknowledge they're infested with.
Yeah, no. What we're NOT going to do is the Tulsi gabbard thing where we decide that someone is a True Progressive ™️ because Bernie said something nice about them.
RFK is an evil fucking prick who is already pushing the vaccines/autism bullshit at the CDC. Besides wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money, that shit never goes well for autistic people.
In Trump's first term a GOP senator in FUCKING MINNESOTA suggested putting autistic people on a registry because of Trump's antivax bullshit.
So, to repeat, what we are not going to do under any circumstances is imply that RFK is right, or that he might have a point about something. Because he fucking doesn't.
It's a decency issue.
So I have been recommending to everyone I knew (my husband, my teenager, our dog) that the Dems start having a coordinated response to what's going down, vs the ad hoc stuff that a few energized people are doing. They should do a formal daily press briefing, sponsored by the Democratic leaders. It could include a rotating cast of speakers, depending on the top issues of the day, and offer talking points that would facilitate the news media's ability to present both sides of an issue. (Since official journalism these days appears to consist of attending press briefings.) Senator Van Hollen, Senator Murphy, Pete Buttigieg, Congressional Rep Jamie Raskin, AOC, Congressional Rep Jasmine Crockett, Ken Martin, and occasionally Leader Jeffries might be prime candidates to rotate among the lead roles. Obviously this effort would require full-time staff to identify potential issues and prepare draft talking points. I'm sure that sources could be found to fund and organize such an initiative. As it is, being limited to ad hoc responses as each representative feels moved has doubtless contributed to serious disappointment among committed Democrats towards Democratic leadership. This would also facilitate a more unified voice among Democrats. What do you think?
The Ds do have a regular press conference...but it's led by Schumer, who is a crappy communicator.
I think it would be a good idea to bring in someone who doesn't suck at speaking for sure. At the same time, Ds also need to use what leverage they have...and seeing them refuse to do that over and over is really disheartening, kind of no matter what the messaging is.
Thank you for not paywalling- I’m sending this to my representative and Senators.
For a while it might just be people a) concerned about the welfare of the American people b) who want to preserve the restraints on government power in the constitution, and so the Kristol/AOC coalition is going to be the one that matters for the time being.
One would think all the Democratic politicians would be in it--apprently, they're not, but the voters are. You are correct about that.
The politicians may believe they win no matter what because we will have no other options. I am not sure, but it doesn't matter why they are like this, I suppose.
Leftists are not the enemy, we never HAVE been.
Unless you're Hillary Rodham Clinton or some other NeoLib Republican in all But Name.
Tulsi Gabbard is the enemy though.
Leftists can make mistakes like anyone. It's just important to be willing to acknowledge those and work on being better.
Tulsi Gabbard was never really a Leftist, though? She was part of an ultra-conservative Hindu movement in Hawaii, which made her support of Bernie Sanders...both temporarily hopeful and very VERY odd.
I have a feeling she's gone back to her roots now, sadly.
her support for sanders wasn't hopeful; it was an obvious grift, which he should not have fallen for.
But yes, she's a homophobic authoritarian asshole, and always was.
You never know—I used to be a Religious Conservative Republican myself, so I'm always glad to welcome walkaways.
Bernie Sanders isn't perfect, but he sure beats what's currently out there with a handful of (mostly minority female) exceptions just Jasmine Crockett, AOC, Ilhan Omar...and Al Green.
I mostly agree with everything you've written here, except going after Bernie Sanders like he's the "real problem", when Schmuck Schumer and Notorious P-Lousy Are Right There Being Corrupt NeoLib Obstructionists, Man!
I didn’t say he was the “real” problem. I said that he’s been kind of wobbly. I’ll stand by that.
But what ABOUT Schumer and Pelosi who ARE the Real Problem and need to be gotten rid of?