HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » beam me up scottie » Journal
Page: 1

beam me up scottie

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: The Green Mountain State
Current location: Red state in the bible belt
Member since: Sun Oct 10, 2004, 08:05 PM
Number of posts: 57,349

About Me

Journal Archives

Sure it is, you tried to make this about Bernie but your analogy failed..

Every time a Dem is criticized here we get to watch round after round of BUT WHAT ABOUT BERRRRRRRNNNNNNNIIIIIEEEEE?

It's hilarious. In fact I think we need to create a drinking game for it, like the one where we all drink if Susan Sarandon is brought up.

Maybe Bernie Bingo. Or Bernie Boogeyman.

Hmm, have to give that some thought.
Posted by beam me up scottie | Thu Aug 31, 2017, 07:05 PM (3 replies)

Appreciation thread for Donkees!

I don't get back here often but I want you to know you have my respect and gratitude for your contributions to DU.

I don't know how you do it but I'm glad you do.

Posted by beam me up scottie | Thu Aug 31, 2017, 02:08 AM (30 replies)

Except he kinda did.



More than once:



Poor horsies.
Posted by beam me up scottie | Wed Aug 30, 2017, 11:17 PM (2 replies)

Here's Bernie advocating universal health care on the house floor in 1991:



In addition to cosponsoring John Conyers' house bills Bernie also introduced two previous Medicare for All bills in the Senate, once in 2011 and again in 2013.

Just in case anyone thinks he hadn't been promoting this issue since he was first elected.

Go Bernie and Kamala!

Posted by beam me up scottie | Wed Aug 30, 2017, 11:01 PM (1 replies)

Agreed. Maybe it's time to repost a rant.


But as long as you asked, I think pro-life men who shame women by defining abortion as the "taking of another life" (murder) are self-righteous, judgmental, fundamentalist asses.

I also think pro-life men who opine at length about how they are "personally opposed" to abortion and expect us to be grateful because they say they'll 'allow' us to make our own decisions are condescending blowhards. They believe they're entitled to judge us even though they've never known what it's like to worry that a pregnancy might ruin their health or kill them. They're completely clueless and incapable of understanding how terrifying the thought of having a child can be when you're alone and poor.

Pro-life men never attack other men who destroy fertilized embryos because as we all know it's not about the sanctity of life, it's about controlling women's bodies.

I don't think pro-life men have the right to lecture us about our opinions or our decisions. I really don't care about their moral objection to certain medical procedures and I wish they would shut the hell up about it.

Lastly I think it's none of these pro-life men's damned business what we do with our bodies and they should focus on their own reproductive organs. If pro-life men have an overwhelming urge to lecture others about morality they can go after legislators who oppose sex education, easy access to birth control and funding for family planning. Because women who need abortions aren't the ones who are behaving immorally.

I say this as a woman who's had an abortion and refused to allow anyone to shame me for making that decision.

I hope this clears up any confusion about what I think of pro-life men who shame women for having abortions.

Posted by beam me up scottie | Wed Aug 2, 2017, 05:30 PM (0 replies)

Let's change one word in your post and see what happens.

Why civil rights CANNOT be a litmus test in EVERY * SINGLE * DISTRICT!

There are many districts, mostly on the South, ripe for the picking that are redder than red and if you ran a Democrat who constantly said they do not personally support civil rights in answer to the civil rights question, they might actually win.

The key is, if a Democrat won the redder than red fucking district by paying such lip service on the civil rights issue, that's one more vote for Nancy Pelosi for majority leader. Tell me, how many votes that limit civil rights are going to come up in Nancy Pelosi's House? Precisely ZERO, so those two or three ant-civil rights Democrats from red districts mean FUCK ALL to that particular issue.

The main thing purists on every issue MUST remember is this, ALL POLITICS IN CONGRESS IS A NUMBERS GAME!!!

If we don't have 50% +1 in a House of the Congress, we CANNOT control the agenda in that House.

Keep in mind, Bob Casey (D-PA) is NOT pro-civil rights and his views on rights have yet to mean SHIT when it comes to civil rights.

218 Democratic members of the House and 51 Democratic Senators.

That's the goal.

Everything else is BULLSHIT!



If someone posted that I would check my calendar to see what century it was. Would anyone here actually expect us to support a white supremacist? Because that's what it's like, anti-choice politicians think women are second class citizens. They want to deny us bodily autonomy.

Reproductive rights are civil rights. Women understand what's at stake better than anyone and we don't need to be lectured about the process. We get it. We understand that politicians aren't perfect, we don't want perfection, we don't expect perfection. What we want is for party leaders to state unequivocally that reproductive rights are non-negotiable and for our allies to understand why we are angry when they don't.

We get it. We want to win too. We know how the game is played. We know sometimes we have to choose between the lesser of two evils. But we are tired of always being asked to put our civil rights on the block for the good of the party.

Lgbt people have also been asked repeatedly to wait patiently for their civil rights, they were called purists and accused of being single issue voters who wanted a 'pony'. But they sucked it up and did the right thing. Because they get it.

Those of us who stand to lose our civil rights get it. And we will probably do the right thing again. But we are angry right now and we need to vent.

We get it.

Do you?
Posted by beam me up scottie | Tue Aug 1, 2017, 07:18 PM (5 replies)
Go to Page: 1