She is absolutely not wrong.
this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
241 points (96.9% liked)
politics
25161 readers
1867 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
But then voters might ask why Democrats haven't passed legislation guaranteeing access to abortion or reproductive health services in OVER FOURTY YEARS, during which they had super majorities more than once.
Start inviting questions you can't answer, and it's going to be a bad time for you.
Republicans will literally start hunting queer folks for sport and the white left is still going to find a reason why it means we should spend energy being mad at the Dems.
Maybe they should protect them. Or do you forget when a Democrat created "Don't ask, don't tell"? If you think they're innocent in all of this, you're deluded. I just happen to be old enough to remember their sins.
DADT was a huge achievement for gay rights.
I highly doubt you were old enough to remember or you wouldn't be shitting on it
Ah, yes, I forgot how awesome dishonorable discharge was for vets that served their country. I forgot how many killed themselves after being outed, or fearing being outed.
Sounds more like you don't know what you're talking about. I'm sure you think Bill Clinton did nothing wrong, too. I've never met an open and proud neo lib before. Gross stuff.
Before DADT, the military would investigate suspected gay men like they were dangers to everyone around them. If you were a gay man, you couldn't even go to a gay bar while off duty because you might be being followed by MPs out to catch you doing gay shit.
DADT was a massive improvement and it doesn't deserve to be shit on just because you think it should have gone further.
DADT welcomed more violence and forced victims to remain silent. You're out of your mind on this one. The correct answer was to allow gay men and women to serve, without question and with The same protections all members of the military had.
Carrying water for homophobic policies is exactly the type of nonsense I expect from apologists that don't have their own standards or morals, though. I love it when this type of person jumps out from the woodwork to scold someone for actually having values worth standing up for.
It was also repealed by a Democrat, don't forget that.
And I actually was serving while DADT was a thing. Most of us on the Enlisted side rolled our eyes at it, because we thought it was dumb af to even have it at all. None of us (in my circle of friends anyhow) cared who wanted to bone who so long as it was all consensual.
I had a very close friend who was gay, and we served in Okinawa together. He actually came out TO his leadership to get his discharge because the mission over there was brutal on the workers (aircraft maintenance). Pretty much everyone knew he was, but leadership wouldn't make a move to kick anyone out unless you were actively like "Hey, I'm gay" straight to their face. And when he told his First Sergeant, the guy was like "Airman _____, are you sure you want to be telling me this?" Basically giving him an out to rethink.
He was a solid worker, just couldn't handle it anymore. And he was not dishonorably discharged. It's been a few years since I've heard from him, I should actually give him a holler and see what he's up to.
Anyhow, I say all that to be like, yes, DADT needed to be repealed, just like the trans ban needed to be repealed. But at the time, DADT really was setting the groundwork for many gay rights victories.
If you were actually serving, then you realize gay people were at extreme risk for being outed. Because if you were out that was considered telling which meant you were dishonorably discharged. So there was no relief from being caught by a fellow enlisted service person.
Back in the '90s I was commuting to Virginia for work. We used to go out in a Navy town and see all kinds of shows. In this particular town. There's a drag club that was very popular with some of the Navy guys, and wouldn't you know it? Every once in awhile someone would show up and everyone would panic and run away. They were desperately afraid of being caught and found out. Don't ask, don't tell. Did not fix that problem in any way shape or form.
The point we were originally talking about was protecting the right to abortion. Something that society has agreed for over 40 years should be a legal right, but nobody bothered to codify it in law. Just like the equal Rights amendment, it's ignored until it can be used as a cudgel to force people to vote a certain way. If Democrats actually passed legalized abortion on a national level anytime the last 40 years, two things would be true. One, we would not be in this situation. And two, they wouldn't have the ability to brow beat us against into electing shitty candidates just to eke out a win over other shittier candidates. Who knows, they might even put up a good candidate for once.
You mean that thing that happened because the white left didn't vote and let Republican majorities in both houses happen?
The white left and refusing to accept that the world won't just do revolution without their doing even the sliverest minimum to participate in the direction of politics beyond bitching, name a more iconic duo!
Sorry, this has been going on for over four decades. You don't get to just blanket, blame white left. It's the entire Democratic party, from the states to the FED.
This is correct. The left is utterly incapable of unity on anything for the very good reason that unlike the right, it's a very loosely bound coalition in which each constituent interest group feels very little loyalty to the others. The result is that when we should be coming together to stop the fucking plane from crashing into the fucking mountain, we instead feel it necessary to trot out old internal grievances, back-stab, and in general form a circular firing-squad.
It's why the conservative minority in this country is about to turn us into a right-wing extremist autocratic shit hole even though we vastly outnumber them.
Democracies die when opposition fails to unite in the face of populist autocratic movements.
Alternatively, democracies thrive when people get fed up and demand change. Look at how opinions and even politics swung left after the barbaric, tragic killing of George Floyd. People should get angry about the fact it has been so long, women have gone unprotected nationally, and we as a nation have done nothing to protect abortion since Rowe. That should embarrass us as a nation.
While you are correct in one sense, you've also managed to completely miss the point in a way that to me seems deeply stupid, small-minded and idiotic.
I would ask you what part about my comment you didn't understand, but I can tell that the answer is "nothing," that you understood nothing, that you are utterly incapable of accurately rephrasing my argument, and that as such, you are a disappointing example of your sorry generation.
Lame. Absolutely lame stuff.
I would dispute your claim about there being a "circular firing squad." The firing definitely comes from a very specific direction. Politicians like Joe Biden run on progressive ideas (cancelling student loans, legalizing marijuana, healthcare reform, etc) and then all but drop those promises once they get into office. This is the real "backstabbing" in my opinion. These democratic politicians take massive donations from corporations, Israel, billionaires, etc. Who is going to get the most representation from these politicians? The voters or the donors? Four years later, liberals wonder why progressives aren't willing to jump in and vote for their guy again.
It's like a cycle. We get a blue wave thanks to young, minority, and progressive voter turnout, then those same voters become completely disillusioned after four years. Why? Personally I think it's because liberal (especially white middle class) voters subscribe to "vote blue no matter who," and it's been going on since well before Trump. They see the success of right wing candidates with total voter unity and think they can do the same thing with their superior numbers. However, these liberal voters get too invested with can we do this when they should be thinking about should we do this.
I personally think this mentality has given Democratic politicians a license to ignore their voters, because they essentially have a monopoly on votes from anyone who is not a crazy fascist. This in turn leads to the same repeated stalled progress and disillusionment. As long as Dems don't piss off their base too much, they can maintain this position forever while also providing a ton of value to their donors.
All of this has led me to believe that ranked choice voting may be the best thing we could do to turn our country around, because it would give third party candidates an actual shot and force Democrats (and maybe Republicans) to actually compete for votes because voters would feel more freedom to vote their conscience without pissing their vote away. If there are any initiatives in your state to put ranked choice on the ballot, please get involved.
50 years. Roe v Wade happened in '73
Fair enough, I'm older than I thought.
I don't disagree with how you feel about the Democrats, but anyone who was going to ask that question has already asked that question. Your standard-issue lib-dem is gonna get fired up hearing Democrats talk about abortion rights without thinking too hard about how we got here.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Asked by CBS News “Face the Nation” anchor Margaret Brennan if Biden, who is of Catholic faith, needs to talk about abortion more, Whitmer said, “I think it would be good if he did.”
Whitmer argued people want to know their president “is fighting” and suggested more “blunt language” could be helpful.
Brennan asked Whitmer if she believes this is a “legitimate promise” to voters, as Biden “doesn’t talk about abortion much.”
Biden is the nation’s second Catholic president in history and often attends Saturday evening mass with his family near his home in Wilmington, De., or in Washington, D.C. His faith has come into the spotlight at times when dealing with certain issues central to the Democratic Party but opposed by the Catholic Church, including abortion and transgender issues.
Conservative Catholic bishops have expressed issue with Biden’s support for abortion access, a view that sparked calls for the church not to offer him communion.
As a practicing Catholic, Biden said in June he is not “big on abortion” but believes the Roe v. Wade decision “got it right.”
The original article contains 471 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Biden is anti-abortion, at least softly. He's not speaking up about it for that exact reason. This is exactly what you get when you elect a centrist instead of a progressive, and if you think this is bad just wait until you hear how badly he's shitting the bed on climate change. History will not remember this man fondly, even if it was donald trump who lowered the standards to literal dogshit and convinced the DNC to overlook bernie's massive movement for a establishment "democratic" politician who used to be a segragationist and who had trouble staying awake during the debates. I'm voting green party needless to say but riots are probably the better answer at this point
Just tell him it's like genociding babies. He'll get on board...