July 26, 2024

Who ARE these guys....?

You know, the ones who like to identify as "Democrats" or "Centrists" (anything but Republicans) but seem unable to control their impulses to express misogynistic, dudebro, neocon, stupidities, who call themselves 'independent thinkers(!)' and bullshit like that?

You know the guys I mean. They kinda sorta lean Libertarian but not really, 'cuz they know the Libertarian universe is essentially loserville.

The James Carvilles.

The Bill Mahers.

Fence-straddlers. They're smart enough to definitely NOT want to be part of the Loserworld [Redacted] has made of the GOP, and they can read tea leaves well enough to know that eventually most of the Broligarchs are heading for a date with several unfriendly Federal agencies with questions about taxes, hidden assets, monopolies and other sticky topics.

But deep down inside, they still think the Broligarch vibe is desperately cool and Alpha.

So... essentially insecure, but noisy.

They know the passwords and secret handshakes, and, of course, they have Y chromosomes.

Up until now, it's been enough.

Enough to get them the attention they crave, the veneer of credibility that keeps them in the punditry. Enough to supply them with barely sufficient naysaying gravitas to be on various bookers' rolodexes as "counterpoint" sources.

They get that little-boy-being-naughty shiteating grin when they parade their borderline misogyny (they rarely cross the line too far...) and contrarian bullshit for the cameras, inviting other would-be dudebros to yuk with them in the clubhouse.

Yanno what?

They have seen the writing on the wall.

Mene, mene, tekel upharsin, dudes.

Of course they're going to do their best to submarine the current wave of Democratic unity behind Kamala.

Hold course, and they will soon be relegated to the cultural dustbin with all the other irrelevant mastodons.

cynically,
Bright

July 24, 2024

I'm hoping some of our Black DUers might check me on this.

Caveat, first - I know it's often condescending, stupid, and offensive to bring out the "As a Black person, can you tell me how Black people feel about yadayadayada" bullshit as though every Black person is obligated to enlighten, entertain, and act as SpokesBlackPerson for all Black people. (Who, this kind of thing implies, are by virtue of their race all homogenous and conforming to whatever stereotypical expectations the white majority has of them.... :sigh: )

I'm trying NOT to do that, here. But I am hoping that sincere requests to bring personal (not necessarily monolithic for-all-Black-people) experience and viewpoints to a discussion, to assist me in being a helpful ally, will not be perceived that way.

We have a unique opportunity. A Presidential candidate for our Party, who is BOTH Black, and female.

Totally awesome, and if we can get Kamala Harris elected President it would fulfill a dream I never thought I'd see come true in my lifetime. Living this long in a sewer of racism and misogyny, it may have affected my ability to hope...

I can already see some "issues" taking shape. (reference: Discussion thread here.)

It's my impression that at least some of the challenge is related to semantics and assumptions. White people who are familiar with institutions like fraternal organizations, college-related "Greek" organizations, churches, social clubs, etcetera, are generally familiar with the white versions of such institutions, and their roles in white communities.

Some white ethnicities may have experience with ethnicity-related versions of similar institutions. That may give some insight into the differences (from similar mainstream WASP institutions) in how such institutions approach their roles in helping members of that ethnicity find support, build networks, advance economic success, promote participation in the public arena, etc. Which might be helpful in understanding similar differences in how Black institutions function for their communities - or promote unhelpful assumptions.

Why do I think it matters?

Because THIS is the chance for me, as a white person, to do everything I can to support other communities - particularly the Black community - in taking power and leadership in the Democratic Party and the political life of our nation. Long overdue. But please attend to my wording there - TAKING power and leadership. I mean this in the sense of defining, on their own terms, how support will be mobilized, how communications will happen, how funding will flow, how decisions will be made, and other important, consequential things.

There has been strong Black leadership in the Democratic Party for some time, but the opportunity to mobilize for a goal of this magnitude is new. I trust Black Democrats to work with leadership in the broader Black community. To know who to tap for what roles, how to communicate to turn out every Black voter.

It has been accurately observed that, in a number of "swing" states, if every white Democratic regular voter turns out to vote AND every single eligible Black voter turns out to vote, those states will no longer be "swing" states. They will be bright blue.

As far as I can tell, one aspect of getting those Black voters to the polls involves mobilizing a whole lot of Black community institutions, on THEIR terms, playing to THEIR strengths, and employing THEIR language, cultural markers, etc.

And I can see where confusion among white people about those institutions, based on their similar names and apparently similar goals with analogous institutions in white communities, could lead to white people being unintentionally (or... :sigh:... in some cases intentionally...) offensive, and diverting the potential impact of such efforts into futile squabbles about racism, cultural appropriation, etcetera.

I do not want to be part of that. I DO want to increase understanding of the importance of such efforts, and the importance of white people being supportive. Not "helpful" in the sense of giving uninformed advice on how to do it, not unconsciously dismissive or minimizing, not playing into the potential divisive discussions.

So I'm hoping I'm right about this:

My role as an ally is to say "YAY!" and "THANK YOU" and even "If I can help, tell me how!"

My role as an ally is to speak FOR MYSELF to other white people about why I appreciate new strategies, changes, communications, etc. related to Black people taking leadership from the standpoint of Black communities and their critical role in this campaign. Not to try and interpret or 'explain' those efforts.

Have I got that right?

hopefully,
Bright

July 22, 2024

Why I'm still angry and sad...

Please, don't get me wrong. If we end up with President Harris I will be over the moon with joy... she was my first choice in 2020 and if the Party comes together, unifies behind her, puts the energy into beating [Redacted] like a drum, and pulls off an amazing historical feat, I will be beyond delighted.

The talk now seems to be running on "Joe's amazing, self-sacrificing choice for the Good of America", which is a fine spin, and, I believe, a true representation of the man's nobility and patriotism. Not to mention intelligence and supreme political nous, with respect to timing, etc. He has always been a master at negotiating, using leverage, understanding timing, reading the zeitgeist, and finding ways to improve life for the kind of Americans among whom he was born and raised.

He is, and will forever be, my hero, right up there with Paul Wellstone, Bruce Vento, Hubert Humphrey, Jimmy Carter, and a few others.

But...

I need to know why this was necessary at all?

Does he have a real health issue?

Please tell us.

Because absent a serious, compelling reason OTHER THAN "everyone important wanted him to do it and the polls were all making it clear this had to be done"... the only interpretation I can put on this is a very, very ugly one: ageism.

Ageism in a particularly painful form as apparently it is used to justify 'political necessity.'

Yes, us old codgers don't move as fast as we used to. There's a LOT of data on our hard drives, and sometimes search and recall takes a bit longer than for the youngsters. And yes, some of us have cognitive issues.

But there has been NO EVIDENCE of any kind of verifiable, factually-based assessment that the President's cognitive abilities are, or are likely to be, impaired now or in the next four years. NONE. All of the 'phenomena' exciting the concern trolls and Dump Joe apparatchiks, are manifestations of normal fatigue, minor illness, etc. that have nothing to do with his ability to continue the amazing work he's put in over the past 3.5 years. Not one... damn... thing.

In fact, all the current rave reviews and approval of this latest incredibly well-timed, strategic move only serve to underline just how much his experience and capability are incredibly valuable resources for the America that is delightedly mothballing him, with suitable paeans of praise and hagiographical rhetoric to dilute the sting.

And what it looks like to me is, we're all fine, now, with equating "old" with "incompetent, should be kept away from open flames, sharp objects, etc."

And that is ugly.

That is the opposite of the world we Democrats are trying to build, where everyone has a chance to make the fullest possible contributions to our shared well-being.

It is perilously close to, not just legitimating a very cruel and repulsive form of prejudice, but letting the end justify the means... and there is no more slippery slope towards trying to paint a wall blue with red paint. Unless we hear of a genuine, fact-based, physiological or other reason NOT based in ignorant prejudice, we as a party stand convicted of colluding with the worst, not the best, in human nature.

And I will be sad about that until I die. Because it seems pretty clear that America will be equally happy to shove me aside as I get more wrinkles, slow down a little more, and lose track of the latest memes and trendy doodads.

Not the world I hoped I'd leave to my grandchild, but perhaps they will be able to do something about it in the coming generations.

wearily,
Bright

July 21, 2024

He's an old school 'horse trader' pol. What did Joe trade for this?

We will have to intuit, because he won't tell - unless they renege on their side of the deal.

But I still trust Joe.

Whatever he traded, is going to be worth having.

I just hope he's right, and it gives us a better chance of remaining a constitutional democratic republic.

It starts with Kamala, I think.

But I'm going to be watching his legislative and regulatory agendas VERY closely over the next 6 months.

I think he'll still be working for us.

somberly,
Bright

July 21, 2024

Dear "Big Donors" and other Broligarchs

Just remember, these blueprints are freely available on the Internet. I'm sure many copies have already been downloaded.

I, personally, plan to take up knitting.



informatively,
Bright

July 19, 2024

Let's Use This Thread to Compile a "CBB" Reference List

What is "CBB"?
"Controlled By Billionaire(s)". That is, a source, company, PAC, pundit, etc., which is owned by, or directly controlled by, one or more billionaires - particularly the techbro and ultrafascist contingents.

Why do we need this list?
It's fairly clear that the noise machine around Biden's status as the Democratic nominee (not to mention many other issues and actions) ramped up exponentially when he mentioned implementing a "billionaire tax" - not that it's ever been a secret that their number one priority is protecting their obscene wealth and power. So if we know a news source, poll, website, pundit, etc. is "CBB" it becomes very clear WHY we are hearing what we are hearing.

How will this work?
I'll start off with a couple of listings, below, under the header "Controlled By Billionaires". Using boldface for the name of the source, poll, etc., and regular text for the evidence, names, etc. of the controlling billionaire(s). If you have any to add, please copy/paste the header and list items from the post immediately above yours (the one you're replying to), and add your own before hitting the "Post" button. This should result in an ever-growing single list of exactly who's gaslighting us now.

Fox News: Rupert Murdoch
Wall Street Journal: Rupert Murdoch
Nate Silver "538" Founder: Recently purchased by Peter Thiel and cryptobro Vitalek Buterin's "Polymarket" predictive platform
Washington Post: Jeff Bezos
Twitter/"X": Elon Musk
Meta: Mark Zuckerberg
Instagram: Mark Zuckerberg
WhatsApp: Mark Zuckerberg


Your turn!

informatively,
Bright

July 18, 2024

Okay Dem "Leaders". I'm listening. Tell me these two things:

First, give me YOUR good, compelling reason why you think an incumbent President who:

Has a stellar record of achievements in the legislative and international relations fields,
Is Presiding over a time when the economy is steadily improving in all the important-to-voters bread and butter areas,
Has been in office while crime has steadily decreased,
Has restored the nation's prestige in the world to a notably high level,
Has been sniffed for scandal by every conceivable opposition research operation and they've come up with nothingburgers all around,
Has an active, competent campaign team, and well-filled campaign fund, and
Has campaign strategy deployed nationwide that has been in progress for many months now

...has a poorer chance of winning the general election than a candidate joining the race less than four months out from election day, who:

Has no track record in the office for which they will be running, no incumbency/experience bonus,
Will have a cadre of disappointed other potential candidates snapping at their heels (see "Unicorns" and "Unity, Democratic, 2024" ),
Will have established fan groups of other potential candidates already disappointed and 'meh' that their beloved pick didn't make it,
Will have to either take over someone else's established campaign staff, strategy and ground operation, OR...
Will have to create a whole new campaign staff, strategy and ground operation in in under FOUR MONTHS,
May or may not be able to legally access funds raised by/for the previous candidate's campaign,
May end up in a draining legal fight over access to campaign funds and resources because see "Unity, Democratic, 2024",
May have serious vulnerabilities exploitable by oppo research,
WILL be seriously vulnerable to the whole "Democrats in Disarray" press pile-on related to the disappointed non-candidates, etc.

Convince me, please.

Second thing to tell me:

WHICH potential Democratic Candidate do you think could overcome all those disadvantages, build unprecedented unity and momentum Party-wide in four months, and blow their way into major victory - and WHY. Give REASONS. Make me believe that one candidate of your choice can pull it off.

I'm listening.

So far all I'm hearing is pearl clutching, fainting, and Russian bots.

But I'm listening. Make your case. Tell me those two things. In detail. I've seen a good few general election campaigns, going all the way back to the Kennedy/Nixon. And I've seen a great many state and local campaigns. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck, but I am open-minded and am capable of appreciating pragmatic realities.

It's just that none of you have GIVEN any pragmatic realities yet. Just dark hints and apocalyptic predictions.

Pony up, or....

SHUT

THE

FUCK

UP

and get behind our successful incumbent.

::taps foot::

I'm waiting...

skeptically,
Bright

July 14, 2024

Normal reaction vs [Redacted] reaction

A normal human being who experienced what happened at [Redacted]'s rally yesterday would have experienced one or all of the following as the incident played out and immediately after:

• Moment(s) of existential fear
  
• Confusion
  
• Anxiety about whether it would continue
  
• Relief
  
• Gratitude to the Secret Service officers who interposed
  
• 'Adrenaline aftermath' - the weak, shaky sensations in the wake of a powerful adrenaline surge
  
• Concern for others potentially injured or killed
  
• Horror and possible anger at the shooter, the conditions that enabled the action, etc.
  
• The deep sense of "Why/Why not?" that can lead to survivor guilt, deep re-evaluation of life choices, affirmation of faith, etc.

A normal human being who is ALSO a politician with a deep sense of mission, on the campaign trail in a fraught environment, would ALSO experience some or most of the above sensations, feelings, and reactions, but their responses might also include:

• Anxiety about the source/intent of the shooter
  
• Concern about the incident sparking additional violence
  
• Defiance and a need to demonstrate a robust response in the face of the threat

A toxic narcissistic sociopath would have experienced very few of the above. Their reponses would more likely be among the following:

• Momentary anger at something unexpected happening when they are supposed to be in control of the environment
  
• The immediate impulse to use and control the narrative to highlight their own agenda in the moment and appear heroic and larger than life
  
• Opportunistic strategizing to use the incident and its aftermath to contribute both to their own aggrandizement and negative consequences for everyone they regard as opposing them

By their works ye shall know them.

pithily,
Bright

July 13, 2024

Think THREE Times. Check the Draft TWICE. Post ONCE.

What am I posting about?

We know little more, at this point, than is contained in the clip available in multiple posts on this site: [Redacted] at a rally. Loud noises that sounded to some commentators like gunshots. [Redacted] reaching for right ear. Red liquid on the right side of his head and face. Secret Service detail hustles him to armored limo.

AND THAT IS ALL WE KNOW RIGHT NOW.

The urge to speculate is almost irresistible, but there are way too many ways speculation, uninformed and without evidence, can make things much worse as the sequelae of this event play out.

I am certain that there are already a veritable legion of law enforcement and intelligence personnel, with the best resources available, working to collect evidence and follow it wherever it leads. I am certain that legion is under the scrutiny of a much larger legion of communications professionals from government, media, and other sources, who will be reporting on every move.

I am also certain that there are suspicious, skeptical, and far better informed than I am experts already analyzing and preparing to critique the above.

Right now, all we have is a few bare facts and a noise level rapidly becoming a Category Five hurricane of bullshit, second-guessing, conspiracy theories, groundless accusations, and other opposite-of-helpful yattering.

I will not be adding to it. If the noise level here on DU becomes too toxic with "It has to be "It has to be 'whatever, because (opinion here)" posts I'll probably start using auto-trash for first time in a very long time.

I would like DU to continue to be the reliable source of cleverly located good information, clearly labeled sources, up-to-the-minute actual news, and reliable triangulation across an array of perspectives.

I would be most disappointed if it devolved into a noisy wasteland of speculation, conspiracy theory, outlandish extrapolation from sketchy details, dodgy sources, etc.

So this is probably too much to ask, but please, fellow-DUers, when you are tempted to post something, think three times about it - does it include any useful factual information or well-informed analysis? Does it provide any illumination of areas seething with fog and chaos? Or is it just a chance to achieve some catharsis via speculation, comment, wishful thinking or the anxiety-driven monging of fears?

Once you have the post drafted, check it twice. Am I just saying more of the same things other DUers are saying? Will this provide a new or different perspective in a helpful way?

Then post, by all means. I'm not asking that people refrain from posting. Just... focus on light, rather than adding to the heat.

hopefully,
Bright

July 11, 2024

I have President Biden's back.

I am not a reporter or opinion columnist.

I am not a Democratic elected official.

I am not a Democratic Party staffer or National Committee member.

I am not a shill for billionaire corporate media owners.

I am not a proxy for self-interested parties from other nation-states pursuing their own agendas.

I am a DEMOCRAT.

I am a VOTER.

And I have President Biden's back.

He has done more for me and the ordinary people of America than any President since LBJ.

The list of his accomplishments is amazing, and he has more real-life experience with the Federal Government than 99.99% of Americans.

Nothing ANY of the above persons can babble, bloviate, concern troll, or insinuate will change my mind.

I am RIDIN' WITH BIDEN, right through 11/5.

That is all.

determinedly,
Bright