Cui Bono if Joy Ann Reid is taken down?

Sid

Let's see.

Racists. Ku kluxers. White nationalists. Nazis with their guns, filthy brown shirts and swastikas and faces contorted with hate.

Right wing bloggers.

Right wing news (propaganda) outlets like Breitbart and Fox.

Twisted evangelicals.

Other right wing crazies.

Not any of us, that's for sure.

and have been for years.

Sometimes even on the near left.

It's one reason that the women's movement broke off on its own.

Not really you and I, but 'us' as a group of Democrats.

If we really want to get somewhere, we have to stay together.

Now, I'm a white guy in his late fifties, so take what I say with that particular grain of salt. But, here's the thing. From my perspective, the old civil rights movement was working. When it stopped working was when the black activists split off.

The women's movement broke off on its own, as you say, and became the weaker for it.

The antiwar protests over Vietnam petered out and everyone sort of went their own way.

The LGBTQ people protested, were ridiculed, beaten bloody and murdered for no reason but who they are.

Then many in my (our?) generation sold out and focused on personal enrichment rather than making our society a better place for all.

Now, we've become little better than a nation of sociopaths, it seems, and we Democrats are often accused of 'identity politics.'

Having been poor and having been disabled, I can readily understand and feel the anger of the poor and the disabled.

Having never been black, or female, I cannot so readily understand and feel that anger.

But it seems to me if we all stick together and quit splitting off, we might just get some ECONOMIC and some SOCIAL justice. I'm still smarting, you know, from Bernie's defeat because of the 'he's a racist' meme that went around - to me clearly a right wing (Russian?) smear designed specifically to divide us so that we could be conquered.

So, our candidate Clinton won by nearly 3 million votes, but was defeated because the Republicans cheated yet again. This is the third time they've cheated in a presidential election since 2000. They are ripping apart everything good this nation ever had going for it, and systematically raping our treasury and the earth itself.

But now...hey, how about that Joy Reid??? Gosh, blah, blah, blah.

You see how gullible we are as a group. We're debating the Joy Reid blog from a decade ago WHEN OUR SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, POLITICAL AND MORAL FABRIC IS BEING RIPPED APART RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.

Not to lecture you per se, and please do excuse the rant. But I'll tell you (and whoever else reads this) that we must stick together and stop falling for right wing smear jobs and the old divide-and-conquer strategy that has been used by the monied classes over, and over, and over, and over against us until we might as well...what?...acquiesce and accept the primacy of the billionaire parasites, the MIC and big corporations?

NEVER.

Because the "left" was run by white straight able bodied men, who put their issues first, and anyone else had to take a back seat. As one woman who lived through it said, "Women were expected to serve coffee to the men while they determined the future of the movement, as well as strategy, then were expected to participate in "free love" when the meetings were over. A woman's "true freedom" seemed to be equated with how much she served the needs of the men- if she, for instance, became an adult when she disobeyed her mother and slept with her boyfriend.

You can see where that would lead nowhere for women. Reproductive rights certainly aren't "the worse" for the women's movement, nor is decent childcare, nor workplace harassment, nor being able to have a line of credit separate from a husband.

I'm disappointed you think that any of those groups who made the decision that white men weren't going to be the ones to help their cause, are "the worse for it."

This return to dismissing issues that don't specifically affect white straight able bodied men as "identity politics" and the only issues that are "universal" are the ones that affect white straight able bodied men directly is the really divisive dynamic.

Not to lecture you per se,....

My point is we all need to stick together. I can't change what happened in the past, but we sure could stick together now. The only reason Bernie, or me, or anyone else who is railing against each group splitting off is that if EVERYONE decided we want social and economic justice NOW, then we'd have it.

I do concede the women are half the population, so yeah, if they split off then they can still get things done. Not so much for other smaller groups.

That's all I'm saying. So don't be disappointed. Just because I'm a white man doesn't mean I cannot stand with oppressed people and help the common cause as I can.

What bothers me is that I see monied interests behind the divisiveness, laughing. Because that is the strategy and has been the strategy ever since my grandfather bled in the streets as a union organizer back in the 20s and 30s. Divide and conquer.

I'm not arguing with you about the merits of each group, or the depths of oppression each group has experienced. ALL I'm saying is if we stand together we are stronger. That really is all I'm saying.

The point of that sentence is pretty clear in what you think are the lack of the "merits" of the women's movement once it separated from the white straight male led Left.

Now you are backpedaling, and have shifted that off to "smaller groups" - I assume you are talking about LGBTQs?

You keep saying "unite!" but you don't clarify how positive discussion, and some dissent means we aren't. Who is supposed to be quiet? Those who point out where privilege, bigotry and misogyny have reared their heads?

I think that the Democratic Party, with it's coalition of various progressive groups is as unified as we need to be - it allows for diversity, and that is our future.

If you are stating that we should be walking lockstep behind a manifesto, say, that of a self-styled, white straight male "visionary," be in Marx or any other, that will not happen. That will make us weaker, frankly. We aren't the tea party. We are diverse, and that is our strength. If you want to talk numbers, the demographic of the leadership of the Left in the 60's is rapidly becoming a minority.

If you think that listening to those coalitions and what they are experiencing, respecting that, and folding it into progressive action is somehow "divisive," that is going backwards, not forward.

That is what I am really saying.

Right what else matters?

Actually...am so interested in seeing studies and articles recently talking about the real reason people voted for Comrade Trump and that it is the fear that white men, because of the expansion in numbers of 'minorities' and the ascendance of women, are afraid they are losing their dominance and their place at the head of the line. But I'm guessing you are as aware of these studies as I am.

There's something called the Internet Archive. You can look at archived versions of websites going back, in some cases, to 1996. Some of the posts in question were archived in 2006: https://web.archive.org/web/20060225041734/https://blog.reidreport.com/2005/10/harriet-miers-and-lesbian-hair-check.html . Reid has made and apologised for comments that could be interpreted as homophobic. What seems more likely: that someone who's said one homophobic thing has said other homophobic things, or that said person is the victim of a conspiracy to tarnish their reputation that involves falsification of digital records dating back over a decade? Ockham's razor suggests the former.

... post which is one the main reasons her experts believed she was hacked.

It would've required not just altering the text on the extant blog but also altering the archived text in the Internet Archive page with the relevant 2006 timestamps. (Or altering the text prior to the first archived page in 2006.)

... a minority group and no one commenting at all.

That's highly improbable

From her experts the hacked pages from her site were archived on TWBM

Many were also archived by the Library of Congress; see here: http://ws-dl.blogspot.ch/2018/04/2018-04-24-why-we-need-multiple-web.html

Either a malicious actor has altered information in multiple web archives as part of a disinformation campaign, or someone who has a known history of homphobic comments has a more extensive history of homophobic comments. Again, logic says the latter.

... been hacked first.

Hopefully she has an offsite archive that shows the post or lack of them

See here (Library of Congress, archive date 25 Jan 2006): http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20060125004941/http://blog.reidreport.com/

Or here (Internet Archive, captured 22 Feb 2007): https://web.archive.org/web/20070222030051/https://blog.reidreport.com/labels/Tim%20Hardaway.html

The claims of Reid's lawyers do not stand up to scrutiny, since many of the claimed posts can be verified as having been archived nearly contemporaneously to their posting.

Using it against us. Can we please give this some time to play out... please

There are no replies which is a dead giveaway.

https://blog.dshr.org/2017/09/attacking-users-of-wayback-machine.html

https://repository.wellesley.edu/scholarship/158/

Not buying it, sorry.

said stuff years ago and forgot or she was hacked...I stand with Joy either way...and have little tolerance to those who allow the GOP to call the tune and then dance happily to it.

When ALL of her other archived posts have lots of comments? People see what they want to see and disregard information that contradict what they want to believe.

Like Maddow saying something overtly racist and no one saying anything

and that Joy shouldn't be jettisoned from the face of democratic politics one way or the other, but that seems like a silly oversight if you have this kind of capability...though, entirely possible to make.

I can't see her just making those posts and not getting any pushback.

None of her followers remember them, none of her editors remember them, they don't match her expressed views at the time, they have no replies, she was on the air working when they were supposedly posted, they're not written in the same style as she used, they used different wording, etc etc etc.

This whole thing stinks of a set up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=ioBhGmfYDKo

The same posts are also in the Library of Congress web archive (see here).

... this is what her experts are claiming; Her blog site was hacked at some time and post changed with ghosting text then her site scraped and archived.

Since she has a history of making casual homophobic and transphobic comments there, too.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Have a nice day Comrade!

These alleged "comments" are worse, and totally pout of character.

Keep your gullible disinformation to yourself, please.

They together all have amnesia about these specific unusual, offensive & out of character posts?

to lynch a black woman.

before the facts are known.

No one is throwing LGBTQ people under the bus. Lots of people that have robustly supported LGBTQ rights are asking whether the attack on Joy Reid is valid given the weakness of the alleged case against her. Joan Walsh is no hater of LGBTQ people, if fact, she has been stout in fighting with them for equal rights in housing, employment and personal safety. Joan Walsh has also read a lot of Reid's writings and call Reid a personal friend. I have no friends or family that are anti-LGBTQ, but I have met and briefly dealt with people that were, believe me, when a person dislikes LGBTQ people, they can't hide their hatred, even when they try hard to do so.

...President Barack Obama was throwing them under the bus before he was even sworn in.

Surely you remember.

and here's David Axelrod saying Obama lied about his support of same-sex marriage in 2008: https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/02/10/david-axelrod-says-obama-lied-in-2008-about-his-gay-marriage-views

Which looks a lot like "throwing under the bus" from where I sit.

And the laws changed.

A key component: the POTUS is Commander in Chief of our military forces.

First, there was the Pentagon survey about how military personnel felt about LGBT soldiers and same-sex marriage. Result: the younger generation on the whole does not care. I think a lot of us already knew that.

A few more steps, and the military declared it would recognize the same-sex spouses of military personnel. This was HUGE, because may I remind you there are military bases in all 50 states, and all 50 states are bound to recognize legal contracts from other states. Military personnel live in the civilian communities surrounding those bases, forcing recognition by locals.

Naturally the SCOTUS decision played a really big part, but in my opinion an absolutely major step was taken when the CIC directed the US Armed Forces to come into the 21st century, just as the Armed Forces were directed to racially integrate a few generations before that.

But hey, I know Obama didn't ride in on a unicorn that farted rainbows and he didn't have a magic wand.

He just got the job done.

Even right here on DU.

As recent posts indicate.

One can see it often in the pontificating on how "identity politics" is distracting us from the REAL problem, the UNIVERSAL problem of ... white men not having the standard of living they feel they are entitled to.

I don't think it is that simple. No major benefit to penalize her for the past when in the present she is saying the right things. Sends a message that if you are not right over your entire lifetime, you deserve to lose your job?

I was raised Catholic and really was pro-life for a while - maybe until about age 21 or so. Do I deserve unemployment? Now?

It appears there's an acceptable timeframe for homophobic comments, as long as it's from "our side." Joy is pushing 50 -- with all that's gone on since fucking Ron and Nancy, she should have known better.

years ago and maybe some not at all...McCarthyism is alive and well...the purity police on the left won't stop enabling the right until every effective progressive is destroyed...who is next I wonder.

Interesting that none of those spreading the lies about Reid are participating in them.

My Latin is rotten

Judging by many posts on DU, it seems to be evident who benefits from taking down a progressive black woman who doesn't fear what white straight men on the far left (and the women who draw their identity from the men they align with) disapprove of.

That just can't be allowed to continue. There are career politicians who must NOT be questioned!

Check the op edits/archives.

You’re welcome

as it was, which didn't specify what it was questioning.

I hope that clarifies things.

You know, in the two posts above yours.

I suppose you think that they can't speak for themselves?

I would hope you thought more highly of them.

...on unsubstiantiated evidence.

There are days when the stupidity just wears on my last nerve.

when it seems like we're witnessing a smear campaign against a Liberal happening all over again and people are falling for it--again.

So many here thought that she "had it coming."

Whether or not it was based completely in fact is secondary.

It happens.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/politics/22sherrod.html

for a good while now, because something something establishment and because she refuses to join the revisionist cool kids who want to pretend Obama never did anything for anybody...

Anyone who is a Democrat who becomes successful gets shot at by hackers and haters.