All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[CaptainEurope]

Iran's attorney general has announced that the morality police has been disbanded.

Might just be a distraction, but it sure makes the government look like they blinked.

[Tendrin]

But I was *assured* that LibsofTiikTok just posts funny cringe libs on twitter to millions of people with no discernable impact!

https://twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1599231495117320195

[worstblogever]

On this date, in 2014, in 2015, and in 2016, "Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day" published profiles of Greg Brannon, a former OBGYN who moved to the Tar Heel State because he idolized its famous senator and proud segregationalist, Sen. Jesse Helms. Brannon, in spite of being a doctor, argues against vaccinations, and falsely claimed there is a link that shows women getting abortions end up at higher risk for breast cancer. Brannon compared food stamps to slavery, property taxes to the Holocaust, claimed that the Affordable Care Act created death panels (it didn’t) and that the ACA is somehow a part of the New World Order that will be established in the United Nations Agenda 21 conspiracy theory. That should come as little surprise considering he was once president of an organization called “Founder’s Truth” that believed the mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado and the Boston Marathon bombing were “false flag” attacks and that water fluoridation is a plot to control the populace. Brannon also has gone on record to say that the Founding Fathers believed in Fetal Personhood, and stated his support for nullification of federal laws at the state level.

On this date in both 2017, as well as 2018, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” profiled Ed Henry, a former member of the Alabama House of Representatives originally elected in the 2010 Tea Party Wave. Henry’s name came to the fore in 2016 in a big way, because he was one of the first Alabama Republicans to file articles of impeachment against Gov. Robert Bentley after the former Govenror went and done goofed by sleeping with one of his top aides, who was drawing a six-figure state salary. Ed Henry’s is a bit of a hypocrite, though on being staunchly against creepy old dudes, considering some of his awful reactions to CSGOPOTD legend, U.S. Senate candidate and former Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore being a pedophile with multiple victims coming forward to accuse him, and a mall, YMCA, and local police departments coming forward to say that they banned Moore from places where teenage girls were when he was in his 30s and trolling for jailbait. It might be one thing if he was only one of the Alabama Republicans who denied that the accusers who came forward were telling the truth, but instead, Ed Henry suggested that the women coming forward “should be prosecuted” because they failed to report on Roy Moore’s pedophilia decades earlier, and keep him off the streets. Henry went on record that he didn’t feel like Roy Moore being accused of being a sexual predator/pedophile combination should end his campaign, that those withdrawing support for Moore were “cowards”, and that Roy Moore was the actual “victim” in all of it. Then again, maybe there’s a bright side to Ed Henry’s hypocrisy. Back in 2015, Ed Henry was campaigning hard for a bill he submitted to restrict abortion clinics from operating within 2,000 feet of a school. He argued at the time that his idea was not unlike how sex offenders aren’t allowed within that distance of school, and that it wasn’t unreasonable to treat abortion providers like sex offenders. Legislative extremism is par for the course for Henry, as one of his first sponsored pieces of legislation was an attempt to nullify the Affordable Care Act. He also supported an obviously unconstitutional bill that shows why he liked Roy Moore, proposing a monument of the Ten Commandments built on state property, and supported legislation to protect confederate monuments. He voted for a bill to outlaw abortion if a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can occur as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, before most women even realize they are pregnant., an attempt at drug testing welfare recipients, a bill to re-establish the electric chair as a means of execution in the state of Alabama, a bill to make it legal for officials to refuse to perform marriage ceremonies, a last ditch effort to try and stop same sex marriage that wouldn’t work, and even a bill to allow child placement agencies to deny services based on their religious beliefs, which translates to Henry would like orphanages to be able to tell gay people they’re not allowed to provide a loving home to a child on account of their sexual orientation. On June 7th, 2018, he was arrested and indicted on 14 corruption charges for accepting kickbacks from a medical clinic that was being investigated for being a “pill mill” that overprescribed opiates. Henry’s legal woes seem to have ended his career, and was sentenced to two years’ probation. We’ll note that we shouldn’t really be surprised, given that he was a co-chair for the 2016 Donald Trump campaign for president in Alabama, which is a title we’re not unaccustomed to seeing people being brought up on charges for (See Ralph Shortey and Bill Nojay).

On this date in 2019, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” profiled Michael Clark, who was first elected to the South Dakota House of Representatives in the 2016 elections. He had blind support for conservative policy, supporting a ban on abortion at 19 weeks, and moving the concealed carry of firearms without a permit among other hard right legislation during his one term in office. What brought a hasty end to Michael Clark’s career was that only about five months ahead of his first re-election, he got on Facebook and gave his deep thoughts about how much freedom business owners should have, and he felt that such freedoms should include the ability to return us to the days of segregation, and allow them to turn away people of color:”A businessman should have the opportunity to run his business the way he wants. If he wants to turn away people of color, that’s his choice.” Now, if you’re thinking that his apology could undo the damage on such a horrid opinion, he took the time to explain that he knew his statement was very racist and wrong, but that it was just a poor attempt at justifying why businesses should be allowed to refuse to do business with gay people:” "I made some comments here on Facebook, defending a Colorado Baker decision not create a cake for a homosexual wedding. The comments I made were very racist. I would like to apologize for those comments. Businesses should not be able to discriminate solely based on race, sex, national origin, age, or handicap." So even in that apology, he acknowledged he still wanted to discriminate against someone. Michael Clark fell short of holding onto his seat in the South Dakota legislature by 67 votes.

On this date in 2020, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” profiled Saundra [McDowell, who in 2020 was a Republican Primary candidate to be the next Governor of Missouri. She was a dedicated Covidiot as her main campaign plank, not just questioning public health mandates but proudly going out and risking not just her own health, but the health of others in the name of freedom. This passion was downright fanatical, as she referred to wearing a mask as a “demonic ritual”, badly quoting the Book of Corinthians in her deranged rant about it. Because it’s always good when conservatives start interspersing scripture with the Constitution and in no way terrifying. It’s not an isolated thing, either, as she watched the 2018 election returns where Democrats won in races all over the country and thought of that as a “demonic attack” as well. She called the protests between Black Lives Matter protesters against those who commit police brutality as a “battle between good and evil”. Guess which side she thinks is “evil’?. Saundra McDowell got 12% of the vote in the Republican primary. She currently remains at large in the public, a threat to public health in her own actions, and her rhetoric. We don’t know how many people she’s going to get killed, but it will almost definitely be a non-zero number.

On this date in 2021, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” profiled Phil Arlinghaus, who was one of sixteen Republicans in 2020 vying to be the next U.S. House of Representatives in Tennessee’s 1st Congressional District, and who promoted that run with a video of himself wearing this hat that says “Roger Stone did Nothing Wrong”. Arlinghaus is a pastor, podcast host, and adherent of the Qanon conspiracy theory who talked about “ending sex trafficking and human trafficking” (noble on the surface until you realize that’s the “pizzeria sex dungeon” part of the Qanon theory talking) and defined his stance on abortion to be “pro-life from womb to tomb”. Arlinghaus’ goals if elected included eliminating the Internal Revenue Service and institute a national sales tax, and he was a supporter of Donald Trump’s white nationalist ego-stroke project of building a physical border wall all along the U.S./Mexico border. Phil Arlinghaus finished thirteenth out of the sixteen candidates running in his attempt at office, getting just 282 votes in the GOP primary. He will likely continue making conservative podcasts and content until he is banned from most platforms. As for now, he seems unlikely to reach office, we’ll set aside his profile at this time to cover another wacky Republican today instead. (Current crazy/stupid scoreboard, is now 1159-55, since this was established in July 2014.

[worstblogever]

Mike Azinger
Welcome to what is the 1159th original profile here at “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day”, where we’re profiling West Virginia State Senator Mike Azinger, who ignored his mother when she told him his face would stick like that if he didn’t know it off, who has held office for District 3 of the West Virginia State Senate since 2016 after a two year stint in the West Virginia House of Delegates.

Mike Azinger popped up on our radar in January of 2021 like a lot of Republicans did… for being present during the attack on the Capitol by Trump supporters after backing Trump’s “Big Lie” for weeks, and then in the wake of the failed coup, trying to blame all the violence on “Antifa”. He decried any member of the Republican Party who tried distancing themselves from Trump’s coup attempt, but did his damnedest to blame the deaths of police officers on phantom “leftists”.

”The events that day are so awe-inspiring and patriotic and peaceful that it would almost bring you to tears. These Marxists and leftists are trying to make it look like it was something we should be put in jail for.”

Not only is he a big fan of sedition, he is also a dedicated bully towards the LGBTQ community, not just trying to ban drag queen story hours or medical transition for children while screaming about “indoctrination”, not just saying that a transgender teacher has “a spiritual or mental problem”, but when in August of 2022, after hearing the tale of how a transgender man West Virginia survived being a victim of rape as a child, he sneered, and sent off an e-mail to misgender them and call them “Pathetic”.

Yeah, that’s a dedicated bigot, for sure.

Then it should come as little surprise he co-sponsored a bill to stop “Critical Race Theory” from being taught in schools (even though it wasn’t being taught), co-sponsored a bill to try and prohibit a constitutional right to an abortion (which isn’t how the Constitution works, even hypothetically), and voted to repeal the requirement for a concealed carry license for firearms.

We are loathe to report Mike Azinger won re-election in 2022 after narrowly surviving the GOP Primary, then going on to coast to re-election against a Democrat with 68% of the vote. Whether or not he ends up getting a visit from the Dept. of Justice at some point… well, we’re keeping our fingers crossed. 

[Mister Mets]

But I was *assured* that LibsofTiikTok just posts funny cringe libs on twitter to millions of people with no discernable impact!

https://twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1599231495117320195

Who are you responding to here? It's usually better to include the original comment.

One question is whether the account was incorrect in describing services available at Boston Children's hospital and Children's National Hospital. No one's arguing that she's wrong about mutilation. The main argument is that while the Center For Gender Surgery is within the pediatric hospital Boston Children's Hospital, they do not provide hysterectomies for minors.

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...rovide-hyster/

There was a video of a doctor at Boston Children's Hospital discussing gender-affirming hysterectomies.

Children's National Hospital says that employees incorrectly advised Chaya Raichik that they provide hysterectomies for 16 year olds, and that their website incorrectly advised people "that gender-affirming hysterectomy was available to patients “between the ages of 0-21.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...ysterectomies/

The website of Boston Children's Hospital did state that vaginoplasty was available for people between the ages of 17-35, although they've since updated that.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bos...s-online-furor

Boston Hospital is also saying they're following guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, and that organization was planning to recommend womb and testicle removal at 17.

https://apnews.com/article/gender-tr...831c2bf14f9bbb

If the argument is that this woman should be banned from a social media platform, we should clearly articulate what rules she broke.

Did she fail to do sufficient research before making a disruptive claim?

Is the problem that she's using strong language to indicate her opposition to particular medical procedures?

Is the problem that she's inspired other people who are nasty?

Whatever standard is used against her would also be used for anyone taking strong stands on other issues (police brutality, the conservative Supreme Court, pollution, etc.)

[Tendrin]

Who are you responding to here? It's usually better to include the original comment.

One question is whether the account was incorrect in describing services available at Boston Children's hospital and Children's National Hospital. No one's arguing that she's wrong about mutilation. The main argument is that while the Center For Gender Surgery is within the pediatric hospital Boston Children's Hospital, they do not provide hysterectomies for minors.

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...rovide-hyster/

There was a video of a doctor at Boston Children's Hospital discussing gender-affirming hysterectomies.

Children's National Hospital says that employees incorrectly advised Chaya Raichik that they provide hysterectomies for 16 year olds, and that their website incorrectly advised people "that gender-affirming hysterectomy was available to patients “between the ages of 0-21.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...ysterectomies/

The website of Boston Children's Hospital did state that vaginoplasty was available for people between the ages of 17-35, although they've since updated that.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bos...s-online-furor

Boston Hospital is also saying they're following guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, and that organization was planning to recommend womb and testicle removal at 17.

https://apnews.com/article/gender-tr...831c2bf14f9bbb

If the argument is that this woman should be banned from a social media platform, we should clearly articulate what rules she broke.

Did she fail to do sufficient research before making a disruptive claim?

Is the problem that she's using strong language to indicate her opposition to particular medical procedures?

Is the problem that she's inspired other people who are nasty?

Whatever standard is used against her would also be used for anyone taking strong stands on other issues (police brutality, the conservative Supreme Court, pollution, etc.)

Jesus Christ, Mets. Do you have to be this vile this early in the morning?

Conservatives, as you have yourself, regularly claim that LibsOfTiKtok is just 'reposting cringe liberals', but the evidence right here is that they're ... not doing that. Instead, they're engaged in a pretty obvious stochastic effort againt a children's hospitals and attacking LGBTQ and Transgender people specifically regularly.

You, yourself, give away the game by arguing that 'no one claims she's wrong about mutilation'. Calling gender-affirming care 'mutilation' is wrong, full-stop, and I shouldn't need to explain to you why.

[thwhtGuardian]

Who are you responding to here? It's usually better to include the original comment.

One question is whether the account was incorrect in describing services available at Boston Children's hospital and Children's National Hospital. No one's arguing that she's wrong about mutilation. The main argument is that while the Center For Gender Surgery is within the pediatric hospital Boston Children's Hospital, they do not provide hysterectomies for minors.

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...rovide-hyster/

There was a video of a doctor at Boston Children's Hospital discussing gender-affirming hysterectomies.

Children's National Hospital says that employees incorrectly advised Chaya Raichik that they provide hysterectomies for 16 year olds, and that their website incorrectly advised people "that gender-affirming hysterectomy was available to patients “between the ages of 0-21.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...ysterectomies/

The website of Boston Children's Hospital did state that vaginoplasty was available for people between the ages of 17-35, although they've since updated that.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bos...s-online-furor

Boston Hospital is also saying they're following guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, and that organization was planning to recommend womb and testicle removal at 17.

https://apnews.com/article/gender-tr...831c2bf14f9bbb

If the argument is that this woman should be banned from a social media platform, we should clearly articulate what rules she broke.

Did she fail to do sufficient research before making a disruptive claim?

Is the problem that she's using strong language to indicate her opposition to particular medical procedures?

Is the problem that she's inspired other people who are nasty?

Whatever standard is used against her would also be used for anyone taking strong stands on other issues (police brutality, the conservative Supreme Court, pollution, etc.)

This person is very obviously vile...I don't get trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

The only reason I could see for defending them is if you agree with their point of view.

[Tami]

In good news

From chicken wings to used cars, inflation begins to ease its grip

The price of gasoline is dropping like a rock. Chicken wings are suddenly a bargain. And retailers drowning in excess inventory are looking to make a deal.

After more than a year of high inflation, many consumers are finally starting to catch a break. Even apartment rents and car prices, two items that hammered millions of household budgets this year, are no longer spiraling out of control.

Global supply chains are finally operating normally, as more consumers spend more on in-person services like restaurant meals and less on goods like furniture and computers that come from an ocean away. The cost of sending a standard 40-foot container from China to the U.S. West Coast is $1,935 — down more than 90 percent from its September 2021 peak of $20,586, according to the online freight marketplace Freightos.v

[Tendrin]

This person is very obviously vile...I don't get trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

The only reason I could see for defending them is if you agree with their point of view.

He pretty obviously does.

[Mister Mets]

Jesus Christ, Mets. Do you have to be this vile this early in the morning?

Conservatives, as you have yourself, regularly claim that LibsOfTiKtok is just 'reposting cringe liberals', but the evidence right here is that they're ... not doing that. Instead, they're engaged in a pretty obvious stochastic effort againt a children's hospitals and attacking LGBTQ and Transgender people specifically regularly.

You, yourself, give away the game by arguing that 'no one claims she's wrong about mutilation'. Calling gender-affirming care 'mutilation' is wrong, full-stop, and I shouldn't need to explain to you why.

In this context, we can understand why someone would believe it's mutilation, which is why the factchecks sidestep that argument.

If you disagree with something I've said, post it. There are nuances that may be lost in a summary months after the fact.

I'm still curious about what rule you want social media platforms to follow when it comes to libsoftiktok.

[Mister Mets]

This person is very obviously vile...I don't get trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

The only reason I could see for defending them is if you agree with their point of view.

I'm trying to figure out what rules you want social media platforms to follow.

That policy question is much more important than libsofitktok. What policies do you want social media platforms to follow? What laws, if any, should be passed for that purpose?

[thwhtGuardian]

In this context, we can understand why someone would believe it's mutilation, which is why the factchecks sidestep that argument.

If you disagree with something I've said, post it. There are nuances that may be lost in a summary months after the fact.

I'm still curious about what rule you want social media platforms to follow when it comes to libsoftiktok.

...there is zero reason to believe it's mutilation. To refer to gender affirming medical care like that is seriously messed up.

[Tendrin]

In this context, we can understand why someone would believe it's mutilation, which is why the factchecks sidestep that argument.

If you disagree with something I've said, post it. There are nuances that may be lost in a summary months after the fact.

I'm still curious about what rule you want social media platforms to follow when it comes to libsoftiktok.

She's been suspended from Twitter eight time, Mets. Her constant returns are preferential treatment. I'm not going to play this game with you.

There is no nuance here and this is not your first bite at the transphobic apple.

[Tendrin]

By Natalie Mathes | WASHINGTON – After Twitter allowed the viral hate account “Libs of TikTok” back onto its platform following a seven-day suspension, the extreme anti-LGBTQ account immediately returned to targeting teachers and a children’s hospital for supporting trans youth.

Started by Chaya Raichik, Libs of TikTok first gained a following on social media by scandalizing instances when gender identity and sexuality were discussed in schools and targeting teachers for harassment. Raichik has previously amplified content from the organization led by self-described “Christian fascist” Kelly Neidert, alleging that schools are hiding information about students from parents. Raichik has also previously called for all openly LGBTQ teachers to be fired.

Libs of TikTok has been suspended several times on multiple platforms, including Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter. Raichik had previously been suspended from Twitter for accusing LGBTQ people of “grooming” children, which Twitter confirmed violates its policies against hateful conduct after facing pressure from Media Matters and others. Her Twitter account was also suspended after she targeted multiple hospitals for providing gender-affirming care, leading to violent threats against patients and providers and forcing at least one hospital to request support from law enforcement. (On September 5, Raichik baselessly claimed that a bomb threat against Boston Children’s Hospital “was probably a left-wing person trying to get me suspended.”)

Notably, Raichik previously pledged to redouble her attacks on hospitals providing trans people with health care after she was suspended from Twitter in August.

https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022...nt-back-at-it/

n November 20, 2022, Libs of TikTok received renewed media attention following the Colorado Springs nightclub shooting,[87][88][89][90][91][92] a mass killing that took place at an LGBTQ venue in which five people were killed and dozens more were injured. Club Q, the venue targeted by the shooter, frequently hosts drag events, including those advertised to an all-ages audience. The Independent noted that Libs of TikTok often attracts negative attention to such events with her social media accounts and that harassment and threats are often sent by her followers against patrons and performers following her postings.[88] Hours after the shooting, Raichik used her Twitter account to target a "drag organizaton" in the same state where the massacre took place, underlining the names of two Colorado state legislators, one of which was trans, for supporting it.[87][91][92][93][94] The Advocate criticized the post, saying that: "In the hours after news of the Club Q shooting spread, Raichik, for example, doubled down on her anti-LGBTQ+ messaging by posting about other drag-inclusive events in the state."[89] The LGBT magazine drew attention to an interview previously published on its website with Juliette Kayyem, a former assistant secretary at the Department of Homeland Security, in which it was stated that social media accounts such as Libs of TikTok practice stochastic terrorism by provoking extremist outrage against marginalized groups, but using "vague language that allows the agitator to deny responsibility for the act."[89]

[CaptainEurope]

Who are you responding to here? It's usually better to include the original comment.

One question is whether the account was incorrect in describing services available at Boston Children's hospital and Children's National Hospital. No one's arguing that she's wrong about mutilation. The main argument is that while the Center For Gender Surgery is within the pediatric hospital Boston Children's Hospital, they do not provide hysterectomies for minors.

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...rovide-hyster/

There was a video of a doctor at Boston Children's Hospital discussing gender-affirming hysterectomies.

Children's National Hospital says that employees incorrectly advised Chaya Raichik that they provide hysterectomies for 16 year olds, and that their website incorrectly advised people "that gender-affirming hysterectomy was available to patients “between the ages of 0-21.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...ysterectomies/

The website of Boston Children's Hospital did state that vaginoplasty was available for people between the ages of 17-35, although they've since updated that.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bos...s-online-furor

Boston Hospital is also saying they're following guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, and that organization was planning to recommend womb and testicle removal at 17.

https://apnews.com/article/gender-tr...831c2bf14f9bbb

If the argument is that this woman should be banned from a social media platform, we should clearly articulate what rules she broke.

Did she fail to do sufficient research before making a disruptive claim?

Is the problem that she's using strong language to indicate her opposition to particular medical procedures?

Is the problem that she's inspired other people who are nasty?

Whatever standard is used against her would also be used for anyone taking strong stands on other issues (police brutality, the conservative Supreme Court, pollution, etc.)

I see you joined the "we're gonna get somebody killed" movement.