HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » EffieBlack » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 29 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Feb 2, 2007, 11:43 PM
Number of posts: 14,249

Journal Archives

Let's be real: EVERY president and most senators and MOCs have done things in office we can condemn

Every single president in modern times has pursued, advanced and implemented policies that we find abhorent. All of them have knowingly taken actions that foreseeably resulted in the deaths of innocent people. All of them have given orders to kill people (for example, Obama's orders to kill bin Laden and the Somali pirates - and those are just ones we know about). All of them have made decisions that balanced the good of some against the good of others.

By the same token, virtually every senator and Member of Congress has voted for and supported actions and policies that were arguably immoral - war resolutions, arms sales, etc.

So, if we feel morally compelled to trash George H.W. Bush on the day he died because we believe he engaged in immoral behavior in public office, we should be prepared to condemn every single other public official for their immorality, including those we love and support, such as President Obama, Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters, Joe Biden, etc. - and extend that condemnation to ourselves for endorsing and electing them.

Or, we can recognize that governing - like life itself - is extraordinarily complicated and doesn't always lend itself to cut-and-dried, black-and-white moral judgments.

One of the things that distinguishes Dems from Republicans: we don't dance on people's graves

Or so I thought.

Do better, people.

A reflection on ageism against women in politics

Ageism is a particular problem for women in politics, who, unlike their male counterparts, didn't have the freedom or opportunity to launch careers at a young age that enabled them to develop the requisite experience earlier in their lives. Because of discrimination or a decision to raise families (something men could do while building careers but women had to do as an either/or) or a combination of both, many women weren't able to start laying the groundwork for leadership roles until later in life. And now, when despite a late start, they do manage to catch up through sheer hard work, smarts and grit, they're dismissed because they're too old - or euphemistically, "it's time for new blood."

It's a Catch-22 for these women - the years they put in are used against them - "she's been around too long" - without any recognition that for many of those years they were "around," they didn't have any realistic opportunity to move into leadership positions. Yet they toiled away under that glass ceiling, supporting the cause with dedication and skill, while their male counterparts whisked past them, onward and upward . But now that the opportunities are available (opportunities they earned), they get no credit, only demerits, for all those years of experience.

Many of the powerful women we see men trying to push aside fall into this category: Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Diane Feinstein - all women who started their political careers later in life. It's one of the reasons I was delighted to see Barbara Lee moved into a newly-created leadership position after being edged out as Caucus Chair by a younger man, likely because she wasn't a fresh enough face.

Unless and until we acknowledge and address this historical double standard and women have had a full opportunity to catch up, I'm not buying the "we need new blood" argument used against older women in power. Thanks to the long history of rampant discrimination, older women (and older minorities, for that matter) ARE new blood.

I, for one, am thankful they fought the good fight and are still willing to stay in the game. Their wisdom and experience enrich and benefit us all.

Tim Scott just stopped Thomas Farr's nomination in it's tracks!

Thanks to all who called his office!

South Carolinians: You can help stop the confirmation of Thomas Farr to the federal court

Thomas Farr, one of the principal architects of the modern-day voter suppression in South Carolina is poised to be confirmed to a lifetime appointment to the federal district court.

The vote is close, but Sen. Tim Scott has not announced his position - if he votes no, the nomination will probably fail. He previously shot down another anti-civil rights nominee by announcing he would vote no. Scott, an African American, has no business voting for this man. He probably knows it, but needs to feel some serious pressure from his constituents.

If you or family live in South Carolina, PLEASE call Sen. Scott and tell him to VOTE NO on FARR!

(202) 224-6121

Can we take a moment to step back and gaze in awe at the Baddest of the Badasses, Hillary Clinton?

This woman faced down what is probably the most massive criminal attack on any political figure and our election system in U.S. history and, despite the best efforts of a determined, immoral and craven cabal, STILL managed to get 3 million more votes and come within a hair of taking the Electoral College and becoming president - and through and after it all, stood strong and kept her dignity and her cool.

Make no mistake. Hillary. Clinton. is. a. BADASS.

Am I the only one who thinks Mueller wasn't the least bit surprised that Manafort leaked to Trump?

Mueller wasn't born yesterday and he's no babe in the woods. He and his team knew exactly who they were dealing with.

I don't believe this came as any surprise to Mueller. In fact, I think it's likely that Mueller set Manafort and Trump up

Stacey Abrams, a black woman, came within 55k votes of beating a white man for governor in Georgia

We're seeing a big push for Beto to run for president, but none for Stacey. Why is that? It couldn't be because she hasn't indicated she wants to run since, until the past couple of days, Beto was saying unequivocally that he would not run.

It can't be because she lost her race given that also applies to Beto, who actually lost by a slightly larger margin 2.6% v. Stacey's 2.4% - while facing fewer obstacles.

The only reason I can think of is race/gender - hardly a leap given the number of Dems who have insisted that now is not the time to go all identity politicky with a woman or minority because only a white man can win in 2020.

Is there another reason that Stacey Abrams, a dynamic, exciting, inspirational and expectations-and-glass-ceiling shattering candidate is not being touted as a presidential contender?

My major concern about the Beto for President push

Just about everything I've heard or read endorsing a Beto O'Rourke presidential run focuses almost exclusively on his youth, charisma and ability to generate excitement among young people. While all of those are valuable attributes in a candidate, they aren't the most important and I haven't seen much discussion about substance and his ability to manage and govern.

At this point, the Beto for President drive strikes me more like a fan club built on a cult of personality than a serious political movement likely to have real results.

I certainly could change my mind and perhaps will in time. But right now, I'm just not there.

John Pavlovitz's message to non-racist white Mississippians:

As always, he's dead on.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 29 Next »