gulliver
gulliver's JournalThey can't bully if they lose, but they can if they win.
I essentially agree with every point you make. And I do agree that "now we have this fight going." My point is that we should win the fight.
Labeling, judging, and name calling can be very effective. Don't get me wrong. It definitely (perhaps unfortunately) has a place, but we definitely don't do it well. The Republicans in this case have created a framing where our name calling with names like "bully" or "bigot" is to our disadvantage. That's what "witch hunt" politics are all about, creating an indisputable enemy in people's imaginations. Our best bet is to demolish that framing, not break our swords ("bully" and "bigot" labeling) on a rock.
Still use those words. By all means. Just don't forget to be against "the witch," while calling out that it's a scare tactic used by cynical, Putin dupe, spit-on-the-flag Republican career politicians to draw suckers who should know better.
And, of course, I'm fully behind all the legal battling being done by our team. I'd just like to see us win all the battles.
Taking the bait and failing to counter-punch on the Texas transgender kid wedge issue
The Republican "witch hunt" for what must be a miniscule number of botched gender-affirming health care cases is, of course, a disgusting, dirty political strategy. It's a standard wedge issue for them, just like "bathroom choice" or "partial birth abortion" or "Terri Schiavo." A tiny handful of extreme cases are weaponized for political war against Dems.
How many times are we going to take that bait?
I don't think the best response is to accuse Republicans of "bullying" transgender kids, their parents, and their health care providers. That's punching them in the fist with our faces. It's what they want us to do. It's arguably immoral for us to do that, really, because it weakens us in our pursuit of other Dem and progressive priorities. Moreover, it encourages the Republicans to bully even more people. We need a better answer.
Doctors are not gods, nor are they even pure-hearted, altruistic, ultimate authorities. They're people who need to make a living, just like the rest of us hacks. It's easy for me to imagine a few hack doctors mongering grotesquely incompetent and damaging "gender-affirming health care services." I don't think Dem politics should rely on that type of doctor not existing in nature.
So, a suggestion is that we Dems affirm the rights of parents and children to health care treatment by trained experts for gender-related problems. Then we, perhaps, champion regulations on the health care industry to help ensure the safety and wellbeing of children in those and other cases. We attack the Republicans for being against our regulations.
You'd think Republicans would want to steer clear of the word "weakness."
What was it Republicans in both houses of Congress showed when they let Trump off the hook in two impeachments? Weakness. They knew he did something wrong, but they looked the other way to save their own skins. Now we need to ask, "Would Putin have invaded Ukraine if those Republican cowards had shown courage?"
People really need to call Republicans on their use of the word "weakness." Too often, some hear a Trump-shy, cowardly Republican say Biden somehow showed weakness and, in the spirit of debate, the unfortunate hearer might reflexively wonder to themselves, "Hmm. Did Biden show weakness?" It's nuts how that works. It's sleight of hand. The mind focuses on the word "weakness" and not on the coward who is using the word.
I, for one, don't do that. I hear a cowardly Republican say weakness and I think, "You mean what you showed, and Biden hasn't?"
Dems own all the issues
Democrats are better than Republicans on liberal and progressive issues, obviously. But we're better than Republicans on essentially all issues. We shouldn't cede them an inch of ground on patriotism, family values, religious observance, honest work, honesty, social responsibility, law and order, capitalism, liberty...anything. Our attitude should be that our party is a far better party than theirs in every way.
"What weakness in liberalism are its enemies exploiting?"
Just asking the question is a great service to liberalism. Every liberal should be asking that same question of themselves as a mantra. I like the article a lot, and I always tend to learn from Brooks. I think he might have taken the scenic route in response to the question. That and subject-verb disagreement are my main quibbles.
There is no reason our ideas shouldn't plain dominate if we go by the quality of the ideas themselves. Equality, opportunity, sustainability, justice...no problem. Our problem is mainly an image problem. If one person says, for example, "defund the police" or "tear down that Lincoln statue," all of the rest of us liberals pay for that foolishness. The media hand the mic to anyone. It's their paycheck.
I don't know how to solve the problem of "self-elected, Dunning Krueger effect voices" getting handed mics. Maybe we can firewall the Democratic Party from fools if not all of liberalism. The Democratic Party, unlike liberalism, has an official institution, the DNC. If some self-elected rhetorical maladroit says something dumb and a meme takes off, perhaps DNC arbitration boards can check the statement against the current platform. That would result in an immediate, authoritative response.
For example, someone says, "defund the police." The DNC arbitration board system could very quickly check the platform and note that the platform doesn't in any way support that idea. Biden, Pelosi, and Clyburn don't have to worry and "unsay" what the fool said. The DNC can just "rule on it" and say, "The Democratic Party arbitration board reviewed this idea. The Democratic Party platform firmly opposes defunding the police. Those who support defunding the police do not speak for us."
Then, take it from there and use the "official ruling" to explain to the audience what our position really is.
Do the anti-vaxxers really worry about discrimination?
Maybe they should. Do they really think Republican politicians are going to be able to "protect" them with laws? Sure, some Republican politician bigmouth says it's Ok for you to go into a bar or other business unvaccinated and, what, you're Ok? What about all of your job opportunities going forward? Do you think you're not going to pay in some way eventually? No one's gonna remember your stupid little stand?
The Republican politician panders to you to get your vote as a "free" anti-vaxxer. Hallelujah! That's great for them. But they've done you no favors, my poor trusting friend. You're screwed, but your Republican "buddies" get a cushy political office where they don't have to do much—if any—work for life. What do you get? You get COVID probably, but that's nothing. You also get people looking down on you, shunning you, forgetting to invite you to parties for the rest of your life, and you don't know why (because they don't tell you).
You could have just gotten the vaccine. A couple of shots! (Wow, so tough.) But congratulations, you resisted. And, now, you're a hero crusader sacrificing yourself and your family to benefit a bunch of cynical, opportunistic Republican moron politicians (who think of you as the true moron). You've stuck your neck out...for nothing...for the rest of your life. Dumbest political stance ever taken, and the Republicans goaded your silly ass into taking it. A year from now, you forget how "brave" (stupid) you were, but everyone else remembers you're an idiot.
What about a ten-thousand-dollar bonus to every healthcare worker?
To be paid by immediately increasing the health insurance bill of anyone who isn't vaccinated. I'm just trying to think of a way that Republicans won't get away with burdening and harming our healthcare workers. I think a ten-thousand-dollar bonus to every one of them every time a surge happens would be just compensation. Spend a week in Tahiti with your family, courtesy of Republican anti-vaxxers.
Firing into the air is deadly for one thing.
The bullet that comes back down at its escape velocity can easily pierce someone's skull. The deceased was an idiot at best (assuming he really was firing into the air).
It's easy to say you should give a warning to someone currently firing an AR-15 when you're on the other side of a fence from them. That doesn't sound easy to actually do though. It really depends on the cop knowing the guy was firing into the air which, although deadly dangerous to innocents, might allow for a "Hey Stupid, put down the gun right now!" Unfortunately, the cop would have to wonder if the next shots were coming through the fence at him or going into a civilian on the other side of the fence.
The story doesn't say why the cops were there in the first place. Did they just happen to be walking by the fence when they heard gunshots coming from the other side? Was there some kind of threat? Were the cops called on the house?
I need more info on this one.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleMember since: 2001
Number of posts: 13,180
