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

[hyped78]

Well, there we have it.

Transwomen are discriminating against *real* women. That's the unspoken subtext that existed before and now you've gone and acknowledged it. Thanks for, again, showing at the heart of every ban-caller is the belief that trans women are not women.

Did I write "real" women or did you just write that to distort my words? Tsc Tsc, that's not very honest there, now is it? Adding words to what I'm saying to then make a forced conclusion, hmm hmm, a bit desperate, I dunno.

[worstblogever]

In 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and in 2021, that “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” presented profiles of the eleven-term U.S. House Representative for Ohio’s 1st Congressional District, Steve Chabot, who felt it necessary during Congressional testimony regarding Hillary Clinton’s e-mails from former Attorney Genereal Loretta Lynch to give her a history lesson about that time that Bill Clinton was receiving fellatio from Monica Lewinsky, and they went and tried impeaching the president. What does that have to do with Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, or Hillary Clinton, directly at all, you ask? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. But for whatever reason, Chabot thought it relevant to remind everyone that Bill Clinton got a hummer in the Oval Office one upon a time, just in case Loretta Lynch or the public had never heard before.That isn’t entirely an isolated incident regarding Hillary Clinton getting smeared by Rep. Chabot, though, as after several Benghazi hearings through the past three or four years that have turned up no evidence of any wrongdoing, no rumored “stand down” order, and no evidence that an order to send in the military would have saved the lives of any of the four people who died in the attack on the embassy, he still has told the public that a “smoking gun” proving Clinton’s involvement was criminal was found.

But don’t worry, he doesn’t save his baseless accusations for Hillary Clinton alone. When news first broke over the supposed “IRS Scandal” (which ended up not showing any targeting of conservative groups, specifically by the IRS), Steve Chabot seized on the opportunity to wonder “How high up does this go?” and insinuating that it was on an order that went all the way to the Obama White House.

This isn’t to say that Rep. Chabot is a boy scout, himself exactly. Shortly after he was re-elected back into office in the 2010 Tea Party Wave, he hosted his first town hall in his district (while his fellow Republicans were in the process of gerrymandering to make more favorable to him by the 2012 elections). And during that 2011 Town Hall, Chabot ordered police present to begin confiscating cameras so that no one could photograph or film what was happening for “security reasons” that were never explained… Chabot apparently wanted to control what might get out and onto Youtube, also taking care to only allow pre-screened questions to be asked by those present. This plan to restrict his constituent’s rights backfired because it was caught on camera by the media, whose cameras were NOT confiscated.

Anyway, over his decades in the House, Chabot has one of the more partisan records not just for legislation he’s supported, including being a co-sponsor of the Defense of Marriage Act, voting for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton for lying about having an affair with Monica Lewinsky,voting for a constitutional amendment to allow government buildings to erect monuments of the Ten Commandments, and an amendment to ban same-sex marriage. He has voted for a myriad of strict anti-choice legislation, has twice tried to defund Planned Parenthood, and is so conservative in terms of pro-life that he voted for the Terry Schiavo Incapacitated Persons bill. Chabot’s record on bank legislation is disastrous, as he voted for the Gramm-Leach-Billey Act, which repeals key parts of the Glass-Steagall Financial Regulation Act and opens the door for big banks to create the 2007 Sub-Prime Mortgage Housing Crisis, and against Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform, to resolve that crisis. He voted for the Iraq War Resolution in 2002. Chabot voted for the 2013 Government Shutdown, and then voted to keep the government closed when the time came to reopen it.

Our biggest update on Steve Chabot would be that after he showed Americans he was a man who back in 1998 was more than happy defend the integrity of the investigators who were rabidly digging into every aspect of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s lives in the hopes of getting them impeached… that same guy suddenly would like to point out that the investigators working on the Mueller investigation show some signs of bias because 9 of them at some point in their careers donated money to Democratic candidates, and not a single member of Mueller’s team has ever donated money to Donald Trump’s political campaigns. Never mind that Mueller himself, and most of his investigators are registered as Republicans, or that it’s perfectly legal for them to donate money to whatever political campaign they choose… suddenly, twenty years after he wanted the Lewinsky investigation to be declared non-partisan… NOW Steve Chabot can’t believe FBI investigators would be above reproach when hunting for the truth about Donald Trump’s presidential campaign colluding with Russians to get him elected.

[Dalak]

Stop being so mean.

I mean it's not like discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry are shown by supporting segregation in any scenario.

[worstblogever]

If you can explain why trans athletes - if there is no certainty that they don't have an unfair advantage vs. women (and there is no scientific consensus) - can and should participate in women's professional/ adult/ etc. sports, thus discriminating against women? You say "discrimination", I say "discrimination". See, it goes both ways.

This attempt at "flipping the script" you just tried is utterly ridiculous, and on brand with typical, "it's bigotry to call ME the bigot" or "it's racist against me to call me racist" for views that are plainly that.

And there isn't "certainty" only because their are serial liars furthering a transphobic narrative that they DO have an advantage. Guess what?

I don't have to prove a negative. I can just do a simple search and pull up that they've literally done studies and they have none.

Your "uncertainty" is only that you are refusing to believe facts, and clutch onto your own bigoted opinions to attack a marginalized group at length.

[hyped78]

I mean it's not like discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry are shown by supporting segregation in any scenario.

haha funny. Again, nice try though. I appreciate the effort.

[Dalak]

This attempt at "flipping the script" you just tried is utterly ridiculous, and on brand with typical, "it's bigotry to call ME the bigot" or "it's racist against me to call me racist" for views that are plainly that.

And there isn't "certainty" only because their are serial liars furthering a transphobic narrative that they DO have an advantage. Guess what?

I don't have to prove a negative. I can just do a simple search and pull up that they've literally done studies and they have none.

Your "uncertainty" is only that you are refusing to believe facts, and clutch onto your own bigoted opinions to attack a marginalized group at length.

It's the same "uncertainty" that exists relating to the 2020 elections, Climate Change, and whether the Earth is Flat.

[hyped78]

This attempt at "flipping the script" you just tried is utterly ridiculous, and on brand with typical, "it's bigotry to call ME the bigot" or "it's racist against me to call me racist" for views that are plainly that.

And there isn't "certainty" only because their are serial liars furthering a transphobic narrative that they DO have an advantage. Guess what?

I don't have to prove a negative. I can just do a simple search and pull up that they've literally done studies and they have none.

Your "uncertainty" is only that you are refusing to believe facts, and clutch onto your own bigoted opinions to attack a marginalized group at length.

Some free advice: If you include, as basis for your argument, a Wikipedia link, maybe you won't be taken very seriously. I say this without malice.

"Flipping the script" - it's what everyone on this thread has been doing to me. And I'm not trying to flip anything, I countered your argument.

There isn't certainty because there is no scientific consensus. I have provided several links and articles (not wikipedia) for that. You are free to read them - or not. I don't care either way. For example:
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-do-...ort/a-58583988
E.g. ""Pretty much any way you slice it, trans women are going to have strength advantages even after hormone therapy. I just don't see that as anything else but factual," said Joanna Harper, a medical physicist at Britain's Loughborough University."

(cites different studies and scientists, it's not Fox News)

[CSTowle]

It's almost as if some people's perception that immigration is a reason for racism is ... not true?

Actually, it is a true. It is *a* reason. It's not the reason, but it is a reason. Racism is a form of tribalism, and tribalism is hardwired into us. Like many other things (selfishness, aggression, other Republican traits) that we have to try to train ourselves out of as we transition from childhood to adulthood to varying degrees of success.

Racism exists anywhere there's a large enough racial tribe able to identify outsiders. And it certainly has a strong history in Europe, but it is reaching a new level thanks to recent mass migration from Africa and the Middle East. More tribes interacting, more tribalism. Don't have to be a sociologist, psychologist, or even historian to know that it's inevitable.

Sure, you're right. But that doesn't mean that kids need to feel guilty because they were born with a specific race, or because of what their "ancestors" did or didn't do. That's ideology and propaganda.

No, there's no need for guilt but there is a reason to consider systemic factors that weigh more heavily on others than themselves for no good reason and by no choice of their own. Because recognizing you have a problem is the first step to solving it. Denying it or attributing it to far-left ideology is burying our heads in the sand, because we'd like to believe we're good people and racist is a half a step above pedophile or literal Nazi so we're scared to be labeled or to feel as if we're being labeled as such.

But if we really want to be good then coming to terms with reality (again, not of our choosing) in order to work to change it is essential. Because choosing to do nothing because the first step is uncomfortable is a choice, and a bad one.

There's someone out there who wrote far more eloquently than I ever could about how a tolerant society must not tolerate intolerance - it's a paradox that must be observed less it be torn down from within.

Yup.

There are some things that shouldn't be tolerated and some things that are just not up for debate.

On some level, yes. Nazis being allowed to march? I'm OK with. Nazis being able to buy prime time political ads and get on the Presidential Debate stage? No. Punching a Nazi (or the pathetic and misguided fools who pass for such nowadays, so devoid of personality or accomplishment they have to fall back on their skin color for something to be proud of)? You should be locked up.

There's also the "who decides?" question. On some things, Nazis taking political power or condoned pedophilic sexual relationships, sure. We're all in agreement or close enough (minus Nazis and pedos and Nazi pedos) so as not to make a difference. But as you move further from the "no-brainer" you'll find that what seems a no-brainer to you might not be to people on the other side of the aisle, and even your own (see the punching a Nazi debate I just referenced).

So being able to declare certain topics "off limits" or "not debatable" becomes just a way to shut down disagreement. It's an even lazier form of the tactic of insulting and dehumanizing an opponent so as to dismiss their argument (easier to ignore someone than to make a valid argument against them).

[hyped78]

It's the same "uncertainty" that exists relating to the 2020 elections, Climate Change, and whether the Earth is Flat.

See, more silly comparisons ("whataboutism", no?)! I can see you're a master at that.

https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-do-...ort/a-58583988

""Pretty much any way you slice it, trans women are going to have strength advantages even after hormone therapy. I just don't see that as anything else but factual," said Joanna Harper, a medical physicist at Britain's Loughborough University."

[worstblogever]

Well, outside of that, his voting record also shows he’s a partisan hack:

• January 23rd, 2019: Rep. Chabot voted against HR 648, because he was gleeully enjoying the longest government shutdown in history.
• February 28th, 2019: Steve Chabot votes against HR 1112, a bill which would have required universal background checks on all firearm purchases, and close the gun show loophole.
• June 4th, 2019: Rep. Chabot votes against the Dreamers Act, because he’s too xenophobic and partisan to care about immigration reform.
• July 16th, 2019: Steve Chabot votes against a resolution to condemn Donald Trump for his racist statements that four people of color in Congress should “go back where they came from”.
• December 18th, 2019: Chabot ignores his Congressional duty to hold a president who has been proven to commit high crimes and misdemeanors accountable and votes against the first impeachment of Donald Trump.
• May 15th, 2020: Chabot votes against the HEROES Act, to further support the healthcare industry and citizens affected by the Covid-19 pandemic.
• December 10th, 2020: Chabot signs his name to an amicus brief to the Supreme Court, begging them to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The same election that he won re-election in.
• January 6th, 2021: Steve Chabot votes for the objection to the electoral college’s votes in the 2020 election, a failure to send any sort of message that he wasn’t intimidated or sympathetic to those who attacked the Capitol to attempt a violent coup.
• January 13th, 2021: Rep. Chabot votes against the second impeachment of Donald Trump, because the Republican Party no longer feels like they should be accountable for anything, including failed coups that result in the deaths of both their participants and police officers.
• February 4th, 2021: Steve Chabot votes to keep Marjorie Taylor Greene’s committee assignments, because he wouldn’t want her to be accountable for all the bigoted remarks and conspiracy theories she’s spread online (probably because she’s a kindred spirit).
• February 25th, 2021: Chabot votes against HR 5, the latest version of the Equality Act, that would provide workplace protections for LGBTQ Americans.
• March 3rd, 2021: Rep. Chabot votes against HR 1, a bill created to prevent the corruption of money in politics, and protect voter access to the ballot box.
• March 3rd, 2021: Steve Chabot votes against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021.
• March 10th, 2021: Chabot votes against the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, because he feels people deserve to die in poverty during a pandemic.
• March 17th, 2021: Rep. Chabot votes against the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act, likely because they feel the 2nd Amendment remaining absolute is more important than preventing people with a history of domestic abuse from owning a firearm (which statistics show, makes them more likely to use those firearms against women in their lives).
• May 19th, 2021: Steve Chabot votes against HR 3233, the creation of a commission to investigate the Capitol Attack.
• November 5th, 2021: Steve Chabot votes against HR 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
• March 31st, 2022: Chabot votes against HR 6833, the Affordable Insulin Now Act, which would limit the cost that drug companies could list insulin at to $35 and make sure no diabetic was priced out of surviving their condition. Steve Chabot would rather they be gouged by pharmaceutical giants and/or die.
• May 18th, 2022: Steve Chabot is one of 192 Republicans who vote against HR 7790, to create supplemental funding for infant formula (while claiming to be pro- life).
• May 18th, 2022: Rep. Chabot votes against HR 350, the Domestic Violence Prevention Act, because these days, a plank of the Republican Party is ostensibly domestic terror.
• May 19th, 2022: Chabot votes against HR 7688, a bill which would help prevent gas companies from gouging customers on prices.
• July 15th, 2022: Steve Chabot votes against House Amendment 262, which would require the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and Secretary of Defense to publish a report on the infiltration of American law enforcment by Neo-Nazis and white supremacists, offer measures to be taken to remove them from their ranks, and prevent further infiltration by others.

Ohio’s 1st Congressional District now has a +4 Republican lean, since his district was reconfigured and now includes all of the city of Cincinnatti, which can’t be a good sign considering Chabot barely only pulled 52% of the vote two years ago. He spent 2021 trying to avoid looking like an utter hypocrite for having voted for the impeachment of Bill Clinton, but refusing to even consider doing so for Donald Trump, and his only defense is the lies Donald Trump has told “weren’t under oath”.

Please note, he at least acknowledges Trump lies about committing crimes. And he doesn’t care.

Steve Chabot is currently taking the brunt of the scandal that he’s too clueless to have noticed that one of his own campaign staffers successfully embezzled $1.4 million dollars from his 2018 re-election campaign, and is refusing to talk to the media regarding how such a thing could happen.

He’s also going to have to worry about redistricting that is likely to alter the partisan make-up of his district so it’s harder for a Republican to win office there as he faces off against Democratic challenger Greg Landsman.

And now, in 2022, with Roe v. Wade overturned, Chabot’s decades of anti-choice obstinacy could factor in to the final tally…

What we’re saying is, keep your fingers crossed, but there’s a good chance that Chabot’s bounced from office after about a quarter-century of bumbling around DC.
 

[CSTowle]

I am reading this thread now. Let me start by saying that, unlike many folks on this thread, you obviously know the meaning of having a political debate and civilized/ constructive discussion on a politics thread. So thank you for this and I hope some of the other folks can learn from you.

Let me start by saying that, whatever happens, I think Biden is an honest and decent man. At a time when character matters (*cough* Trump *cough*, or even *cough* Boris *cough*) that already matters quite a lot.

I think that, generally speaking, right or wrong, we need to listen to the voters. The same voters that elected him in are now turning away from this administration:
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/18/p...-us/index.html

It's all focused on the economy. There is still plenty of time to turn things around, of course.

Inflation - as I've posted before, there is high inflation everywhere for different reasons, but the US at 9.1% in June 2022 is definitely at the high end of the inflation spectrum and a good part of that is because of US monetary policy. Some countries, through a combination of higher interest rates, selling treasury bonds and overall removal of monetary mass from the economy, have made a better job of constraining inflation than what the US has done to this point. Remember that many European countries, for example, imported gas from Russia and food from the Ukraine. The supply chain issues are certainly global but the way each country has responded to inflation is local. Inflation in most western countries is bad, in the US it's worse!
From that CNN article: "Biden's approval rating in the poll stands at 38%, with 62% disapproving. His approval ratings for handling the economy (30%) and inflation (25%) are notably lower."
It's a bit the same about gas prices - they're up everywhere but the US, as an oil & gas producer, shouldn't have the same issues that some countries that produce zero oil & gas are facing.
I also think that Biden blaming the Ukraine invasion and "greedy corporations" is basically wrong.

Foreign Relations - I think Biden's stance on Russia and China has been good. However, for example, his recent trip to Saudi Arabia was a complete joke. Does this matter to the US voter? Probably not.

Big Lie - completely agree with you there, it's not easy to inherit a situation where a big chunk of the country thinks that the election was stolen. There's no easy way to overcome that.

Supreme Court Wade vs. Roe - well, blame the Democrat voters who didn't turn out, or didn't want to vote, for Hillary Clinton in 2016. Elections matter.

Afghanistan withdrawal - US had to leave Afghanistan and it was already decided that would happen. However, the actual withdrawal process could have been better managed.

Joe's age - when you say that he's "lost a step", I totally agree. It's clear, there's no reason to sugarcoat that he's lost a step - I mean, he's quite old, it's not a surprise.

Southern Border - I think you didn't mention this point but that's a complete mess (I guess that's on Kamala?)

I also mostly agree with your last sentence but I think the jury's still out on what will happen in 2024 (the economy is in bad shape; will it get better? no idea). What happens if the Democrats lose both the House and the Senate, how much can he do in the last two years of his term? What if Covid comes back with a fury?

On his approval rating, again as you and I have both said it only matters what his numbers are leading to 2024 and what the economic reality is then. As far as inflation, yes it is bad for many reasons and we did print more money than many other countries and rely on imports for more of our goods than others. But the alternative would be not printing that money and extreme poverty and a worse economic outcome than the current one. That spending (from both Administrations) did help people, if not always the folks it was meant to or in the ways they were meant to.

Gas has the ongoing inflation and Ukraine issues and a Democratic Administration that is trying to combat global climate change because we do need to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels eventually. That's going to cost us, though the price is going down. I agree that it's a shame we fell right back into bed with the Saudis, but I never expected that wouldn't happen and likely puts him in a better place to maintain power going forward so hopefully the gamble is worth it.

On hesitant or no-show Democrats being to blame for the Supreme Court makeup, absolutely. Why those of us over here have to be ready to get folks up for voting in the midterms. On Afghanistan and the withdrawal, I agree it could have been handled better but I'm so glad it's over I'll take it. I wish we'd withdraw from many of our foreign bases, but recognize the reality of the situation.

On the border, I don't care nearly as much about immigration as many do but I also know we have so many other priorities at the moment that can't get passed and most of them are far less controversial or politically costly than comprehensive immigration reform so I'm not holding my breath.

[worstblogever]

See, more silly comparisons ("whataboutism", no?)! I can see you're a master at that.

https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-do-...ort/a-58583988

""Pretty much any way you slice it, trans women are going to have strength advantages even after hormone therapy. I just don't see that as anything else but factual," said Joanna Harper, a medical physicist at Britain's Loughborough University."

You have one source, that is not a scientist, and whose "study" included EIGHT candidates. That's it. Small sample size. Poor science.

Here's Dr. Emma Hilton, explaining why Joanna Harper is factually and scientifically wrong, based on actual research.

So if Harper is your "proof" you don't have any.

[worstblogever]

Some free advice: If you include, as basis for your argument, a Wikipedia link, maybe you won't be taken very seriously. I say this without malice.

"Flipping the script" - it's what everyone on this thread has been doing to me. And I'm not trying to flip anything, I countered your argument.

There isn't certainty because there is no scientific consensus. I have provided several links and articles (not wikipedia) for that. You are free to read them - or not. I don't care either way. For example:
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-do-...ort/a-58583988
E.g. ""Pretty much any way you slice it, trans women are going to have strength advantages even after hormone therapy. I just don't see that as anything else but factual," said Joanna Harper, a medical physicist at Britain's Loughborough University."

(cites different studies and scientists, it's not Fox News)

"IT'S JUST A WIKI ARGUMENT, YOU DON'T HAVE A VALID ARGUMENT".

This ignores all of the many, many citations, including of scientific studies at the bottom of that article to back it up.

Also, see my above post about Dr. Emma Hilton blowing a hole in your bigoted argument.

[hyped78]

On his approval rating, again as you and I have both said it only matters what his numbers are leading to 2024 and what the economic reality is then. As far as inflation, yes it is bad for many reasons and we did print more money than many other countries and rely on imports for more of our goods than others. But the alternative would be not printing that money and extreme poverty and a worse economic outcome than the current one. That spending (from both Administrations) did help people, if not always the folks it was meant to or in the ways they were meant to.

Gas has the ongoing inflation and Ukraine issues and a Democratic Administration that is trying to combat global climate change because we do need to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels eventually. That's going to cost us, though the price is going down. I agree that it's a shame we fell right back into bed with the Saudis, but I never expected that wouldn't happen and likely puts him in a better place to maintain power going forward so hopefully the gamble is worth it.

On hesitant or no-show Democrats being to blame for the Supreme Court makeup, absolutely. Why those of us over here have to be ready to get folks up for voting in the midterms. On Afghanistan and the withdrawal, I agree it could have been handled better but I'm so glad it's over I'll take it. I wish we'd withdraw from many of our foreign bases, but recognize the reality of the situation.

On the border, I don't care nearly as much about immigration as many do but I also know we have so many other priorities at the moment that can't get passed and most of them are far less controversial or politically costly than comprehensive immigration reform so I'm not holding my breath.

I partially agree that the numbers are more important leading into 2024. Even if he doesn't run in 2024, strong approval numbers are important for whoever comes next. But aren't the numbers important in 2022, in a year of midterms? I know that presidential approval ratings and a midterm vote don't necessarily fully correlate (I think @worstblogever mentioned that before, or maybe it was someone else), but I think it's safe to assume they have some sort of an effect both ways, even if it gets some people to vote for the GOP just as a "protest".

I agree that the trade-off between inflation and economic growth/ job creation is a tricky one - and Economics isn't super duper scientific - but that's one of the main ways the performance of Presidents is evaluated, fairly or unfairly. So if people are seeing less money in their pockets, they're going to blame their President. It's not just in the US, of course.

Climate Change - there's an interesting phenomenon happening in the Netherlands, where farmers are protesting/ rioting against government laws aimed at curbing emissions. One of their points is that those laws will destroy their livelihoods, while the impact of Dutch emissions, as a % of global emissions, is very low. Unless all countries get their act together, including China, India etc. having an appetite to act decisively, I don't think we're gonna solve anything. 40 degrees celsius here in London this week is a good proof of global warming and climate change.

Afghanistan withdrawal - should've happened many years ago, in hindsight, I think

Border - quite candidly, I don't know how many illegal immigrants have crossed and how many more will potentially cross, and I don't think "we'll build a wall and Mexico will pay for it" solves anything haha, but countries need to be able to control their borders

[hyped78]

"IT'S JUST A WIKI ARGUMENT, YOU DON'T HAVE A VALID ARGUMENT".

This ignores all of the many, many citations, including of scientific studies at the bottom of that article to back it up.

Also, see my above post about Dr. Emma Hilton blowing a hole in your bigoted argument.

This Dr. Emma Hilton?
https://twitter.com/fondofbeetles/st...74222992961547

"There have been two academic reviews of musculoskeletal changes in transwomen suppressing testosterone. Both conclude that loss of muscle mass and strength is small, and that STRENGTH ADVANTAGE OVER FEMALES IS RETAINED."

For the record, I never said that there's no science saying that trans do NOT have advantages over females - of course there are. But there is also science saying that trans DO HAVE advantages over females. You're kind of ignoring this point, probably on purpose (I've also posted some articles that say it's inconclusive or that support trans participation in women's sports - I acknowledge these exist, while you completely disregard the existence of opposite articles as if this is dogma - it isn't, I'm sorry)
But instead of realizing that, it's much easier to cry "bigot!", as you just did... once again.