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

[hyped78]

I'm not more concerned about the tiny number who might change their minds - but I grew up in a conservative household and still often frame arguments from that perspective. I took the same tac for marriage equality.

The issue with creating a new thing like marriage is all the rights that go along with it that people don't think about until they come up. Did you remember to specifically spell out all of those with civil unions? Did you remember to close the loopholes to prevent a corporation from forming a civil union with a parking lot for a tax break? You know what does both of those things, with a surefire guarantee to not screw anything up? Marriage, that's what. I thought conservatives were supposed to oppose creating new laws when the ones we have can handle things.

Same thing with transgender rights - if 'transition regret' is even a thing (and if it is it isn't a very big one) then puberty blockers seem like an already existing solution to the issue, with the added bonus that they make any eventual transition easier. Obviously not for everyone - if you only even begin to figure yourself out in your 40s it's obviously to late for puberty blockers to do you any good. But why should something that causes no harm when used as directed be a problem simply because it isn't for everyone. That would be like destroying the world supply of penicillin because of the people who can't take it.

Which gets back to my issue with puberty blockers - even if you wholeheartedly believe that plenty of people change their minds after transitioning, the existence of something that allows one to wait on that decision before it is irreversible should be something you support, not oppose. That gives away the truth behind the dog whistle, that they don't care about the kids at all, they just want an excuse to hate those who are different.

“marriage equality” - is that next on the SCOTUS “To Do” list?

[Catlady in training]

But no one is forced to read, or not to read, this or that story, this or that comic book. You can't force people to read/ buy what they don't want to.

Of course. Did anyone here suggest that? All that was said is that it's rich that people react so strongly to comics they don't read, without having any facts about them.

I read that one issue Russians have is that they use maps from the 60s.

Why do they actually have to use paper maps, anyway?

Some soldiers might have problems handling more complicated technology. I mean, if they are in awe of asphalt roads, flushing toilets and washing machines ...

[CaptainEurope]

Of course. Did anyone here suggest that?

Of course not. It's a strawman argument. We say "people talk about stuff without informing themselves first" and next thing we get accused of trying to force people into an elitist education.

[hyped78]

Of course. Did anyone here suggest that? All that was said is that it's rich that people react so strongly to comics they don't read, without having any facts about them.

People are still free to react even if they don’t read those comic books. If someone doesn’t like the notion of a bisexual Superman, can’t they say they don’t like that notion without actually reading the comic books?

E.g. I can react in “favor or against” by reading this, instead of having to actually read the comic book:
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/...xual-dc-comics

It’s like the movie “The Lady of Heaven” that was banned here this year (and there?). The folks asking for the ban actually never watched the movie but they knew the movie was offensive to their beliefs (Muhammad being shown in the movie)

[CaptainEurope]

I haven't read the last tweet, but I think what is said about Portugal in it is outrageous and should be grounds for a spanking.

[Catlady in training]

People are still free to react even if they don’t read those comic books. If someone doesn’t like the notion of a bisexual Superman, can’t they say they don’t like that notion without actually reading the comic books?

Sure, and then we can laugh at them that they thought it was about Clark Kent. "What do you mean it's not Clark that is bi? They said Superman, Clark Kent is Superman. What son? Clark has a son? Since when?"

Never mind that the argument many of them used was that "Superman is with Lois Lane", therefore he can't be gay. Even if it was Clark being bi, that still doesn't change anything about Lois being his soulmate.

[hyped78]

Sure, and then we can laugh at them that they thought it was about Clark Kent. "What do you mean it's not Clark that is bi? They said Superman, Clark Kent is Superman. What son? Clark has a son? Since when?"

Never mind that the argument many of them used was that "Superman is with Lois Lane", therefore he can't be gay. Even if it was Clark being bi, that still doesn't change anything about Lois being his soulmate.

True. But there’s also a lot of people who realize that it’s Jonathan Kent and they still don’t like the notion of a “bisexual Superman”. And they are entitled to that opinion, even if they haven’t bought and read those comics.

[Malvolio]

True. But there’s also a lot of people who realize that it’s Jonathan Kent and they still don’t like the notion of a “bisexual Superman”. And they are entitled to that opinion, even if they haven’t bought and read those comics.

But any opinion will be more respected if it's an informed opinion. Opinions based on facts should always get more respect than opinions based on bullshit.

[hyped78]

But any opinion will be more respected if it's an informed opinion. Opinions based on facts should always get more respect than opinions based on bullshit.

Of course. But doesn’t this already inform whether you are probably going to like the comic book or not?
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/...xual-dc-comics

“The Man of Steel will be in a same-sex relationship while combatting the climate crisis and protesting against the deportation of refugees” - I am personally not interested in buying/ reading this, falls into a "woke" realm I have no interest in; others find this interesting? Fine, that's great. I’m not bashing it but I’m also not interested in it. “Deportation of refugees” sounds like ideological material I have zero interest in reading.

And it goes both ways. I saw someone criticizing a couple of days ago a supposed “anti woke comic book” (don’t remember the name of the title) - well, that person hasn’t read that comic book. They still have a valid opinion nonetheless.
And how many are praising these Superman comics without actually having read them?

[worstblogever]

On this date in both 2014, as well as 2015, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” published a profile on Joe Walsh, the former Illinois Congressman. After news leaked that he refused to pay a six figure sum in child support to his ex-wife, threw several temper-tantrums directed at constituents, went out of his way to take part in the slut-shaming of Sandra Fluke by telling her she needed to “GET A JOB” and stop asking for birth control to be covered by her insurance, and then his disgusting attempt to attack the military service of his opponent, Purple Heart winner and multiple amputee Tammy Duckworth, he failed to get re-elected to the U.S. House in the 2012 elections. Since, Walsh has gone into, what else? Right-wing talk radio. Since taking that job, he decided to complain about African Americans “being on the government plantation” to celebrate Martin Luther King Day. he would try and make the case on air for why a certain NFL team from Washington, D.C. should be allowed to keep their racist nickname by blurting out as many racial slurs, including the n-word, on air as he could, and then acted surprised when he got suspended for it. We waited a year, and then got to update Walsh’s profile to talk about how in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attack, Walsh went on Twitter to rage against CNN and MSNBC for refusing to show the controversial cartoons of the prophet, Mohammed, on air, and said because they were “appeasing cowards”, he hoped that their offices would “be where the Islamists strike next”. After the mass shooting that took the lives of several Dallas police officers by a lone wolf shooter motivated by racial animas, Joe Walsh decided to get on Twitter again, and warn President Obama and Black Lives Matter that it was all out race war, because “real America” was coming for them. He somehow is still broadcasting.

On this date in 2016, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” shared our profile of Scott Jones, a Sacramento County sheriff who challenged Democratic Rep. Ami Bera for his seat in the U.S. House of Representatives for California's 7th Congressional District in the 2016 elections. In May of 2016, and a lawsuit against Sacramento County Sheriff's Department awarded the plaintiffs $3.5 million dollars (which the taxpayers will have to pay). Apparently the SCSD had a pervasive environment of bias for giving preferential treatment or promotions to men, at the expense of female sheriffs, and when those women reported it, the men in the department started to retaliate by harassing them for blowing the whistle, siccing internal affairs on them in retribution, or punitively transferring them. Then, unsealed court documents have revealed a deposition from a woman not among the plaintiffs saying that he had a sexual relationship with a subordinate female deputy, who described being groped and kissed by Jones in the office repeatedly, and that he was trying to persuade her to attend conventions with him in Reno. (Jones is married with four children, like so many other Republicans representing "family values"). He did not, of course, win and go to Congress.

On this date in 2017, as well as 2018, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” profiled Arizona State Senator Steve Montenegro, elected to serve District 13 in that body after spending 2009-2016 working in the Arizona House of Representatives. He is a rarity among Republicans… Montenegro isn’t just a Latino Republican… he’s actually an immigrant from El Salvador. And, that made him an interesting individual to watch during the debate over Arizona’s SB 1070 a few years ago, where he voted in favor of it, and argued that a law which allowed Arizona law enforcement to racially profile suspects and detain individuals based on their own judgment if they were suspected of being an illegal immigrant wasn’t racist insisting that it was meant to “target coyotes”. After he supported SB 1070, a local Christian AM radio station began to get phone calls from the Montenegro’s church, saying that they were illegal immigrants who went there, and that they had donated money towards Montenegro’s college. Montenegro, of course, claims it was “scholarships, loans, and help from his family”. When you factor in his background in ministry, and that he once served as an intern to the quite bats*** Evangelical Arizona Congressman Trent Franks, it should come as little surprise that he’s other full-blown GOP theocrat. After an atheist colleague gave a “prayer” to open up a session in the state legislature by thanking Carl Sagan and others, Montenegro respond by freaking out and changing the rules so that prayers within the legislature MUST mention God. He sponsored bills so that the clergy can turn away gay couples, sponsored a “religious freedom” law so that Arizona businesses could discriminate against the LGBTQ community, and even tried working to prevent same sex couples from adopting children. Montenegro also co-sponsored SB 1433, a bill aimed at trying to justify why Arizona should be allowed to nullify federal law, bills to have elective courses about the Bible taught in public high schools, voted for a bill to allow Arizona employers to refuse to provide health insurance coverage for employees’ contraception. Montenegro also supported bill which would allow law enforcement to make unannounced inspections of abortion facilities, as well as Arizona Republicans’ bonkers bill to have citizens start regarding gold and silver as legal tender. Steve Montenegro took a chance in the 2018 elections, and rather than run for re-election to the State Senate, he opted to run for Arizona Secretary of State, instead. And, as it turns out, Montenegro chose poorly, and lost in the GOP Primary for Arizona Secretary of State, and then in desperation, he tried running for the seat in Congress vacated by his old mentor, Trent Franks, after Franks tried adapting the Handmaid’s Tale to real life and got exposed by the #MeToo movement. Which, SURPRISE! Montengro’s a bit of a hypocrite, as text messages were uncovered between him and an aide where she sent him topless photos and he lamented not having her around (remember, “family values” ordained minister with a family, here). He is currently out of office, and may never recover from the hypocrisy of a sexting scandal as a minister.

On this date in 2019, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” profiled Craig Brittain, a 2018 GOP Primary candidate for the U.S. Senate in Arizona, who was seeking the seat left by the retiring Jeff Flake. While we feel like maybe being a pornography mogul would be something that would be make someone a long shot to be a successful political candidate, we think the fact that Craig Brittain has made his living as a purveyor of REVENGE porn is what makes him utterly unfit for any office, unless if by “office” we mean “prison cell”. What should not come as a revelation is Brittain continues to have a generally disgusting way of talking to women, sometimes calling them unflattering c-words online, or flat-out telling them their “womanlives” are worth nothing. Because how else can you run a revenge porn site unless you think women are subhuman? Brittains’ “business” is under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission, which not shockingly, he wants to abolish. Also, in the interest of being a libertarian-wing Republican who takes the ideology to near anarchic levels of non-governance, he would like to also abolish the Federal Communications Commission, Internal Revenue Service, United Nations, Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Reserve, Transportation Security Administration, Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. As far as campaign rhetoric, Brittain claimed to want to be the biggest ally he could for Donald Trump, constantly harassed journalists on social media for not supporting his campaign in print like he would prefer, and accused Democratic Primary candidate Deedra Abboud of being “a sponsor of terror” which we’re sure had nothing to do with the fact that she’s a Muslim and he’s a deranged bigot. And that’s not an isolated event, as he has yelled at a venture capitalist on Twitter and called them “towelhead piece of s*** invader” and “raghead”. Which is even more strange because there’s no indication that the person he was screaming at is in any way Muslim, Sikh, or of any African or Asian descent. Brittain’s defense against all these incidents of abusive behavior on Twitter? “It wasn’t me, it was some messenger”. Craig Brittain’s campaign for U.S. Senate faced several challenges. The first being, he’s still Craig Brittain, bigoted revenge porn mogul. The second being is he is currently banned from Twitter, for accusing several survivors of the Parkland shooting of lying about being on campus during the rampage. He filed a lawsuit in protest of his banning, and we’re pretty sure that Twitter is going to win it based on previous precedent over their terms of use and kicking people off the site for “abusive behavior”.

[Tendrin]

I'm not more concerned about the tiny number who might change their minds - but I grew up in a conservative household and still often frame arguments from that perspective. I took the same tac for marriage equality.

The issue with creating a new thing like marriage is all the rights that go along with it that people don't think about until they come up. Did you remember to specifically spell out all of those with civil unions? Did you remember to close the loopholes to prevent a corporation from forming a civil union with a parking lot for a tax break? You know what does both of those things, with a surefire guarantee to not screw anything up? Marriage, that's what. I thought conservatives were supposed to oppose creating new laws when the ones we have can handle things.

Same thing with transgender rights - if 'transition regret' is even a thing (and if it is it isn't a very big one) then puberty blockers seem like an already existing solution to the issue, with the added bonus that they make any eventual transition easier. Obviously not for everyone - if you only even begin to figure yourself out in your 40s it's obviously to late for puberty blockers to do you any good. But why should something that causes no harm when used as directed be a problem simply because it isn't for everyone. That would be like destroying the world supply of penicillin because of the people who can't take it.

Which gets back to my issue with puberty blockers - even if someone wholeheartedly believe that plenty of people change their minds after transitioning, the existence of something that allows one to wait on that decision before it is irreversible should be something you support, not oppose. That gives away the truth behind the dog whistle, that they don't care about the kids at all, they just want an excuse to hate those who are different.

Just to be clear, I wasn't really aiming that at you, since you and I largely agree here, just more in general since we get a lot of 'But WhaT If ThEy ArE WRoNG?' which is just amounting to 'maybe if we make them wait long enough and throw enough obstafcles in their way they'll stop being trans'.

[hyped78]

Just to be clear, I wasn't really aiming that at you, since you and I largely agree here, just more in general since we get a lot of 'But WhaT If ThEy ArE WRoNG?' which is just amounting to 'maybe if we make them wait long enough and throw enough obstafcles in their way they'll stop being trans'.

But do you agree with transition for 18+ or do you prefer to have the option for under 18s? (and, if so, at what age?)

[Tendrin]

But do you agree with transition for 18+ or do you prefer to have the option for under 18s? (and, if so, at what age?)

I think that's best left between a child, a parent, and their doctor. From what we know about transition, there's not even necessarily a medical reason to wait even until 16, and definitely not 18. The waiting time is entirely created because society largely hopes kids will stop being trans if we make them wait and throw enough obstacles in their way under the guise of helping them 'make sure'. In nearly all cases, they don't stop being trans.

[worstblogever]

On this date in both 2020, as well as 2021, “Fanatical Republican Extremist of the Day” first profiled the U.S. House Representatives from Oklahoma’s 1st Congressional District, Kevin Hern, a McDonald’s franchisee who won his first term in office back in 2018 after he narrowly escaped a GOP Primary with 55% of the vote, and then won in the general election with 59% against Democrat Tim Gilpin, sliding into the House seat formerly held by Jim Bridenstine.

Kevin Hern is also brazenly corrupt, as his friends’ companies back home in Oklahoma and all its McDonald’s franchise were apparently one of the first in line to snatch up every last dollar in PPP loans to line his pockets with $1-2 million in taxpayer dollars during the Covid-19 pandemic, while all the peasants in his district could wait for their $1200 pittance. This shouldn’t come as a surprise, as he has refused to abstain from voting against legislation that would directly affect his businesses since being sworn in, actively campaigning against bills to affect fast food franchisees.

Rep. Hern also lauded Donald Trump’s stupid f***ing idea to host his first campaign rally in months in Tulsa during the Covid-19 pandemic as “a testament to the people of Oklahoma”. The predictions of health experts warning against it have came true and over 500 infections occurred from that event alone… so apparently Hern wants to celebrate Trump killing people like the dumb s*** he is.

Now, let’s explore Hern’s voting record in his first two terms:

• October 23rd, 2019: Hern is one of 41 Republicans who, while staring down the possibility of Donald Trump being impeached, stage a ridiculous publicity stunt in response by crashing a classified impeachment inquiry hearing for a “protest”.
• December 3rd, 2019: Rep. Hern is one of 71 Republicans who votes against a resolution to disallow Russia from re-entering the G7 and makes it the G8 until it leaves Ukraine.
• December 18th, 2019: Hern 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.
• March 13th, 2020: Rep. Hern votes against the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.
• May 15th, 2020: Hern votes against the HEROES Act, to further support the healthcare industry and citizens affected by the Covid-19 pandemic.
• December 10th, 2020: Hern 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: Kevin Hern 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. Hern 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: Kevin Hern votes to keep Marjorie Taylor Greene’s committee assignments.
• February 25th, 2021: Hern votes against HR 5, the latest version of the Equality Act, that would provide workplace protections for LGBTQ Americans.
• March 3rd, 2021: Rep. Hern 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: Kevin Hern votes against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021.
• March 10th, 2021: Hern votes against the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.
• March 17th, 2021: Rep. Hern 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.
• May 19th, 2021: Kevin Hern votes against HR 3233, the creation of a commission to investigate the Capitol Attack.
• July 22nd, 2021: Hern is one of 16 Republicans who vote against HR 3895, the Allies Act, which was passed without his support to raise the amount of visas offered and to expedite their issue to Afghan translators and their families to honor our promise to protect them against the Taliban after U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, thus feeling we should go back on our word and leave them to die.
• November 5th, 2021: Kevin Hern votes against HR 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
• May 18th, 2022: Kevin Hern 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. Hern votes against HR 350, the Domestic Violence Prevention Act.
• May 19th, 2022: Hern votes against HR 7688, a bill which would help prevent gas companies from gouging customers on prices.
• July 15th, 2022: Kevin Hern 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.
• July 19th, 2022: Rep. Hern is one of 157 Republicans who vote against the “Respect for Marriage Act”, which would codify same sex marriage into law nationally.
• July 21st, 2022: Hern is one of 195 Republicans who vote against the Right to Contraception Act, which codified the right of Americans to have access to birth control.

Oklahoma’s 1st Congressional District has had a +17 Republican lean in the Cook Partisan Voting Index, so maybe the fact that he got caught funneling PPP loan money to his own businesses would give them enough reason to elect someone who wasn’t so clearly out for himself, and who, in July of 2021, actually came out against the concept of retirement, stating his belief that people should work past the age of 65, and “work until you’re not here anymore”.

We wish his Democratic challenger, Adam Martin, all the luck in the world unseating this plutocratic s***heel.

[hyped78]

I think that's best left between a child, a parent, and their doctor. From what we know about transition, there's not even necessarily a medical reason to wait even until 16, and definitely not 18. The waiting time is entirely created because society largely hopes kids will stop being trans if we make them wait and throw enough obstacles in their way under the guise of helping them 'make sure'. In nearly all cases, they don't stop being trans.

I completely disagree with that. If someone isn't legally old enough to buy a beer, to vote, to drive a car, etc. then that person shouldn't also be able to change gender IMO.
(noting that 18 means "adulthood" in many/most countries, understanding that it is not the same everywhere, e.g. you need to be 21 in the US to buy alcohol)

But I respect your opinion and see your point regarding "wait and throw enough obstacles". We can agree to disagree, of course.