Here's all the authors of the these anti-Kamala for VP articles:

[NightWatcher]

Link to tweet

[leftieNanner]

1. I don't understand this.

Sorry.

Can you explain please?

[NCjack]

2. Looks like members of the Young Republican's Club at Jeff Davis High School.

[Hortensis]

22. Yes, except the real authors don't. Which the Tweeter

of that delightfully racist construct knows full well. Here's his REtweet today from just one of the authors, the first of three for the first article listed by Celerity, Chris Cadelago.

Link to tweet

If Central Casting picked this face and build, it'd be to play a non-union NYC garbage man or extra on The Sopranos.

[NightWatcher]

3. People keep calling Harris "too ambitious" to be VP

It's code for "Black Female". I saw this tweet and thought I'd share, but will prob delete. Not trying to be divisive. Have a nice day.

[Claustrum]

8. Well, actually any female. Hillary was "too ambitious" as well. n/t

[leftieNanner]

14. Oh don't delete it

I was just too thick to figure it out myself! It's totally appropriate for the time.

Love Kamala Harris!

[GulfCoast66]

17. Don't you dare delete it!

It just the truth.

[PatSeg]

24. Or code for "woman"

Being ambitious is an attribute for men, but it is a liability for a woman. Ambitious women are often described as angry, bossy, manipulative, nasty, etc.

[Celerity]

5. ...

etc etc etc etc

[leftieNanner]

12. Thanks for this nt

[Celerity]

15. yw

[qazplm135]

7. it's a bunch of white guys

who are writing about a Black woman having too much ambition.

[leftieNanner]

13. Ah. Got it. Thanks. nt

[UTUSN]

10. (me:) Off topic, I want to thank you for asking for info in a polite way.

The posters who for some mysterious reason are attracted to my posts, when they want "context" express themselves with rancor, entitled *demand* like being served without any effort of their own, and plain rudeness of the "Nobody knows what you're talking about" (while there are posts present clearly discussing the topic and even Reccing it). I missed the Annointing when they were designated to speak for "everybody/nobody".

Those members devote more energy to high-handed nanny-ism and prefer to attack certain fellow members than attacking wingnuts. Plus, there are other threads on the same topic, but those members don't even peep a post in *those* threads, preferring to leave droppings in their targets.

So, I'm sincere in thanking you.

[leftieNanner]

11. Thanks

We all need to be kind to each other these days.

And I appreciate your interesting posts on a regular basis.

[Eliot Rosewater]

6. The more the con fascists oppose her, the more they fear her.

[Codeine]

9. If she's pissing off the usual suspects

then she’s obviously the right choice.

[smirkymonkey]

19. +1000

[peggysue2]

16. Do we ever hear a similar complaint about men?

That they're somehow too ambitious?

Peggysue's head cocked, listening, listening.

Crickets.

Yup, that's what I thought.

[betsuni]

18. K&R

[smirkymonkey]

20. Look at them.

That tells you all you need to know.

[Hortensis]

21. Not quite. Chris Catelago is a fat Mediterranean-looking guy

heading into middle age. Equal opportunity hitter on a number of Biden VP candidates, including white. On the right.



Natasha Korecki is white and female, not quite good looking enough to join the Fox bitches, so she's at Politico.



Marc Caputo, whom people will have seen around MSNBC and 60 Minutes



Those're just the authors of the "no remorse" hit.

The battle for power is huge, national and international, so big that race issues are merely tools used to divide voters, not the actual forces behind these hits. If the idea was to splinter off angry white voters by offending them with hits easily taken for racist on Warren, that's what we'd be seeing.

[JI7]

23. Don't you know, THEY are the base of the democratic party and the ones most concerned with black

lives that's why they must stop her. Just like they stopped Hillary in 2016 by supporting Trump.

[betsuni]

25. +1