[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

Through most of Bush, all of Obama, and now plowing down the road until the end of history with Trump, this here blog has been going strong for nearly 14 years. Next year is the big anniversary of the first time I thought, "Blogging? Shit, any monkey can do that."

And through it all, the orgasmic good, the ferociously bad, and the obscenely ugly, Rude Readers have been there by the thousands, gluttons for punishment, coming here for a rhetorical purge so they can face the world a little less burdened.

Here's the deal: Every couple of years (because I'm not NPR), I wanna update the computer, try out a couple of projects (like a podcast and more video), and restock the whiskey cabinet. I might even pay another visit to Miss Stephanie Miller out in L.A. if you guys give the scratch for a plane ticket.

So I do a fundraiser. Every year, Rude Readers come through with donations big and small.

If you wanna donate this year, if you got some spare cash, you can do it the usual way, through PayPal.

Just pound that button over there on the right or click right here. Hell, I even take credit cards.

[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

So here we are, once again, looking at Republican policies that result in deaths and damage. We already knew that the disastrous decision to switch the water source for Flint, Michigan, which was done by emergency managers appointed by Republican governor Rick Snyder in order to save money, led to elevated lead in the water, elevated lead in the kids, and undrinkable, unusable water. Hell, we know now that a handful of people died of Legionnaire's disease because of bacterial contamination in the water, too.

Now we get the gut-churning news that the water caused the pregnancy rate to plunge and fetal deaths to skyrocket in Flint during the 18 months the contaminated water was running through the faucets and fountains there. That's not hyperbole. That's from a report by Kansas University researchers, which saw a 12% drop in the pregnancy rate and a 58% rise in the fetal death rate, a number the scientists called "horrifyingly large."

Need a graphic representation of this? Here ya go:

The top line is the fertility rate in 15 other cities in Michigan, which is fairly consistent. The line that takes a dive is Flint. (Also of note: In general, the fertility rate in Michigan improved once the Affordable Care Act was passed.)

That's as clear evidence as you could ask that Republicans' concern about fetuses stops once abortion politics are taken out of the equation. And let's not deny the racist implications here of making a majority African American community essentially guinea pigs in a budget-cutting experiment. We used to say that conservatives only care about children before they are born. But the truth of the matter is that they only care about fetuses when they can use that "care" to whip up their ignorant base.

There is something I keep coming back to whenever I read or hear about Flint, something I wrote back in January 2016: "Michigan has a $700 million surplus in its state budget. It would have cost perhaps $100 a day to put phosphates into the water when the supply was first switched to prevent the water from corroding the pipes" and leaching lead into the water. It was foreseeable and preventable. An ounce of prevention, man, just the tiniest bit. I wonder how much funding was spent on things like the militarization of the police instead of making people's homes safe at a fundamental level.

The authors of the study conclude, "Our results suggest that a more lax regulatory environment in the context of drinking water may have substantial unforeseen effects on maternal and infant health, including large reductions in the number of births." They call for greater spending on the EPA and more regulations to protect essential things like, you know, water.

Which just makes me realize how deeply screwed we are from womb to grave right now.

What it’s like for girls

Sep. 22nd, 2017 03:39 pm
marnanel: (Default)
[personal profile] marnanel
I've always dressed androgynously and worn my hair long since childhood, because of being nonbinary, but this was the first time I'd got this treatment. I think it gets more common after puberty?

When I was about fifteen, I participated in a thirty-mile walk to raise money for charity. The final checkpoint was a pub, and of course everyone went into the beer garden and lay down on the grass.

Now you know how when you've been exerting yourself, you can walk fine until you stop, whereupon your muscles seize up. Well, after lying on the ground for a few minutes I got up because I needed to go into the pub and find the toilet, and of course I could hardly walk. So I hobbled towards the pub door.

A middle-aged man walked up and held my elbow, saying, "Let me help you, my dear."

First thought: wtf?! Why has this creep grabbed my arm without asking?

Second thought: Oh! In these baggy walking clothes, he thinks I'm a girl.

Third thought: Wait a moment. That means that girls get this sort of treatment all the time and I'VE NEVER NOTICED.

It was seriously a life-altering moment.
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

(Don't forget: The Rude Pundit's Biennial Fundraiser/Whiskey Support is happening now.)

Republicans are desperate to pass a bill they can claim repeals and replaces the Affordable Care Act. They have to do it because they said they'd do it, even though what they said all along is they would pass something better and any analysis by anyone not a GOP meat puppet shows that everything they've attempted to pass is far, far worse, so they're not really doing what they promised except at the crudest level.

But fuck that. Republicans just want to go around the country and crow that they did it, goddamnit, even if that means they have to stand on a stack of corpses to be heard. There's your image of the 2017 GOP: Mitch McConnell in the September 30 twilight, tortoise howling in victory atop the bodies of his dead and dying constituents, who would still vote for him.

Now, in an attempt to fist-fuck the Graham-Cassidy-other-assholes bill through the Senate, Republicans have decided to just say, "Fuck it" and flat out bribe Alaska's Lisa Murkowski. And what is the bribe? Alaska gets to keep Obamacare.

No, really. Here's a summary of the proposal: "Alaska (along with Hawaii) will continue to receive Obamacare’s premium tax credits while they are repealed for all other states. It appears this exemption will not affect Alaska receiving its state allotment under the new block grant in addition to the premium tax credits." On top of that, Alaska's Medicaid funding not only doesn't get cut; it gets more. The amendment to the bill "provides for an increased federal Medicaid matching rate (FMAP) for both Alaska and Hawaii."

In other words, Republicans are admitting that the only way they can get Senator Murkowski to vote for the bill is to make sure that Alaska doesn't have to deal with much of the bill, especially when it comes to funding. In otherer words, major portions of the bill are a fucking scam and the GOP is admitting that.

Hell, back in June, Murkoswki said as much. "Let’s just say that they do something that’s so Alaska-specific just to, quote, ‘get me.' Then you have a nationwide system that doesn’t work. That then comes crashing down and Alaska’s not able to kind of keep it together on its own." Now we get to see if Murkowski, who really fucking hates McConnell, has the courage of her own damn words.

There are so many lies bound up with this blatant buy-off. Like the lie of how they want states to be able to figure things out on their own. Well, can Ohio, Vermont, Nevada, and other Republican-led states, as well as the Democratic-led states, now say, "Hey, we want that same fuckin' deal as Alaska, man"?

Or how about the lie of how much they trust the states. Louisiana's other shitty senator, John Kennedy, wanted to ban states from setting up single-payer systems. Why? Because something, something, freedom, no doubt: "I don't think states should have the authority to take money from the American taxpayer and set up a single-payer system." And, in a stunning bit of parody, Kennedy said, "I think the only way we are going to solve the health care problem in America is through the private sector." Motherfucker, the private sector is the health care problem in America.

This whole effort is such a savage farce that you half expect it to end in an orgy in a pool of money where the Republicans fuck each other with rolled up wads of cash to the masturbatory delight of the Koch brothers while the Mercer family fondles each other in joy.
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

Yes, yes, yes, next week marks 14 years since I first put pot smoke-stained fingers to whiskey-sticky keyboard and barbarically yawped out the beginning of this here blog. It was a desperate time, with the worst president in history plunging us into a war based on lies before wrecking a strong economy that had been handed to him by a Democrat. Hmmm...

Fourteen years is about 830 in blogger years, and the scarred hellscape of this internet highway is littered with the remnants of blogs great and small that have come and gone. Some have moved on to greater success, some have passed away, some have just wandered off into the desert, driven mad, no doubt, by the snowballing barrage of fucknuttery that comes rolling our way.

But, goddamnit, this stubborn sumbitch is still here, through a book, a CD, two stage shows, and radio and TV appearances. With a brief pause to recalibrate in the wake of the election of the new worst president in history, this here Rude Pundit has been a constant companion to many of you. Let's keep riding along. And to those of you who have just recently joined in the convoy barreling through the American carnage, welcome aboard.

So, every couple of years, I ask for money, which you have always kindly, generously, amazingly donated. I'm not gonna lie. There's no noble cause here. I'm gonna buy a new computer, and I'm gonna restock the whiskey. Plus one or two other things:

If she'll have me (and I think she will), your donations will help me go back to Los Angeles to join Madam Stephanie Miller for another go round on her Happy Hour Podcast. The first two were utter, embarrassing, hilarious filth. Let's go again.

Oh, and I'm gonna start my own podcast. Yeah, fuck it. Everybody will have a podcast some day, so why the hell not. And, if I get enough, I'll do a few more videos.

Here's the deal: You can donate by clicking over there on that PayPal button on the right or right here. It even accepts credit cards.

And here's something new: I've started a Patreon page. Yeah, monthly subscribers will get extra bonus posts and stuff and it starts at just $1 a month. That's right. The cost of a cup of bodega coffee once a month will get you special, extra rude punditry. I've got a simple goal of 1000 subscribers, with that podcast and more video stuff as the result.

Oh, and, hell, I'll open this up for any questions. You don't have to donate to ask, just like you don't have to donate to read. I'll answer a couple over the next week of this fundraiser

But I'd sure appreciate whatever affordable, adequate love you can toss in the hat.

Back soon with more ravenous rudeness.
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

There's a ton of insidious shit going down in the massive clusterfuck that is the effort to bring the Graham-Cassidy-and-the-rest's "Lynch Obamacare" bill to a vote in the Senate before September 30. Motherfuckers are just flat out lying about shit now in order to get support.

For instance, they insist that the bill protects people with pre-existing conditions. Here's co-sponsor and Louisiana Senator Bill "I Look Like a Creepy Panty-Sniffer" Cassidy on CNN this morning: "There's a specific provision that says that if a state applies for a waiver, it must ensure that those with pre-existing conditions have affordable and adequate coverage." But what the fuck is that? The bill doesn't define "affordable" or "adequate." And I have looked at the fuckin' bill itself. Funny thing: except for one time, the word "affordable" is used only to talk about the Affordable Care Act, which seems to have cornered the fucking market on affordability.

Where's that other usage? In the waivers section. What the bill has about states getting waivers from requirements for the block grants that will take the place of Medicaid is simple. On pre-existing conditions, the waiver applications have to say "how the State intends to maintain access to adequate and affordable health insurance coverage for individuals with pre-existing conditions if such waiver is approved." You see the wide wiggle room there? States just need to say how they "intend" to "maintain access." That ain't a fucking requirement to do anything but say, "Yes, let me pave the road to Hell some more with my fucking intentions." It is not an ironclad assurance in the way Cassidy and Graham are promising it is, the lying shit-sacks.

So you might say, "Well, obviously, if a state doesn't do what it says it's going to do, its waiver can be taken away, right?" No, you fucking credulous dolt. Because, see, once the state gets the waiver approved for one year, it's considered approved for every year after that. Let's go to the bill: "If an application of a State submitted under this subsection is approved by the Administrator for a year, the application shall be deemed to be approved by the Administrator for that year and each subsequent year through December 31, 2026." In other words, Texas can write in its waiver application, "Oh, we totes intend to make sure the cancer patients get affordable, adequate coverage, scout's fuckin' honor, man," and then they don't have to do a goddamn thing because there's no mechanism to take away the waiver once it's given.

Oh, and the waivers are decided by the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Who appoints that person? Who the fuck do you think?

Another tit-punch in the bill is its blatant attack on anything to do with abortion (with the usual trio of exceptions). First, it says that any insurance that includes abortion coverage is not a "qualified plan," which means that several states, like California, Oregon, and New York, where abortion coverage is required, would have all of their plans immediately ineligible for tax credits to individuals and businesses.

On top of that, there's this groin kick in the middle of the bill: "no Federal funds provided from a program referred to in this subsection that is considered direct spending for any year may be made available to a State for payments to a prohibited entity, whether made directly to the prohibited entity or through a managed care organization under contract with the State." What is a "prohibited entity"? Any place that "is primarily engaged in family planning services, reproductive health, and related medical care; and...provides for abortions." So here is a back door way to slash spending on Planned Parenthood. Dream fulfilled, motherfuckers.

By the way, the bill mentions the word "abortion" 15 times. It uses "pregnancy" 8 times, most of them having to do with abortion. These fucknuts are obsessed.

When I originally started to write this post, I was intending to talk about how Graham-Cassidy-fuck-you dicks over states that expanded Medicaid under the ACA, how it was a calculated punishment for those who dared to be compassionate, how it was taking money away from liberal states like New York and California to give to the ones run by savages, like Texas.

But this isn't just an anti-blue state or anti-Obama bill. It's anti-human, as in "inhumane," as in "devoid of humanity." Which is the motto of the Republican Party.

Books No. 51-52

Sep. 20th, 2017 10:45 am
sarahmichigan: (reading)
[personal profile] sarahmichigan
Book No. 51 was "The Book Thief" by Markus Zusak. This is an award-winning YA novel set during WWII. Liesel goes to live with a foster family because her mother is ill and is having a hard time raising Liesel and her brother as a single mother during the war. Liesel's brother dies on the train on the way there, but Liesel ends up with two kind foster parents in the town of Molching. She becomes especially attached to her new "papa" who plays the accordion and hides a Jew in the basement. I wasn't sure if I was going to like this book at first, because I found the literary device of having Death tell the story to be a little precious, and it tended to throw me out of the "willing suspension of disbelief" in every freaking chapter. I did end up getting attached to Liesel and her foster family and the friends she made in her new home, though. I hear the movie is overly-sentimental, and from the trailer, it does look a bit white-washed. Liesel is fun because she doesn't have to be perfect to be a sympathetic character. She lies, steals, and curses, but she has a good heart and loves  books. The novel is ultimately about how words and books can bring comfort in extraordinary times. I guess it's a sign of a good writer that I found parts of the storytelling annoying and still ended up moved by the book.

Book No. 52 was "March: Book One" by John Lewis, co-written with Andrew Aydin and illustrated by Nate Powell. This series of nonfiction graphic "novels" is getting a lot of attention because Book 3 in the series won the National Book Award for YA lit, the first graphic book to do so. I thought I recognized the drawing style, and that's because Nate Powell illustrated "The Silence of Our Friends," which I read earlier this year and liked very much. I found this book very powerful and am definitely going to be reading Books 2 and 3. It tells the story of Congressman John Lewis who was a founder of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and a pivotal figure in the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. In this first of 3 books, he tells of his youth and how he got involved in nonviolent action and desegregating restaurants and lunch counters. One thing I didn't realize is that they practiced being nonviolent before taking part in an action. They would role play being a protester or being a heckler to see how they would react to verbal abuse and physical harassment. Lewis says some people decided they would have to help the movement in other ways because they weren't convinced they could remain nonviolent during an action. Such fascinating history & beautiful illustrations. HIGHLY recommended! 

The other books I've read so far this year: )

Savage Love

Sep. 19th, 2017 05:15 pm
[syndicated profile] savagelove_feed

Posted by Dan Savage

Can a straight guy find love with a lady with a penis? by Dan Savage

I am a 35-year-old straight guy. I met a nice lady through the normal methods, and we hit it off and have grown closer. I think we are both considering "taking it to the next level." We are on the same intellectual wavelength, enjoy the same social experiences, and have a lot of fun together. So what could be the problem? My friend decided it was the time to inform me that she is transgender, pre-op, and will not be having gender-reassignment surgery. This was quite a shock to me. I'm not homophobic, though I've never had a gay experience. I'm open-minded, yet there is a mental block. I like this person, I like our relationship thus far, and I want to continue this relationship. But I'm in a state of confusion.

Confused Over Complicating Knowledge

Lemme get this out of way first, COCK: The nice lady isn't a man, so sex with her wouldn't be a "gay experience" and homophobia isn't the relevant term.

Moving on...

You're a straight guy, you're attracted to women, and some women—as you now know—have dicks. Are you into dick? Could you develop a taste for dick? Could you see yourself making an exception for her dick? It's fine if "no" is the answer to one or all of these questions, COCK, and not being into dick doesn't make you transphobic. Evan Urquhart, who writes about trans issues for Slate, argues that in addition to being gay, straight, bi, pan, demi, etc., some people are phallophiles and some are vaginophiles—that is, some people (perhaps most) have a strong preference for either partners with dicks or partners with vaginas. And some people—most people—want their dicks on men and their labia on/vaginas in women.

"There's no shame in it, as long as it doesn't come from a place of ignorance or hate," Urquhart writes. "Mature adults should be able to talk plainly about their sexuality, particularly with prospective partners, in a way that doesn't objectify or shame anyone who happens to be packing the non-preferred equipment."

Some straight guys are really into dick (trans women with male partners usually aren't partnered with gay men, and trans women who do sex work typically don't have any gay male clients), some straight guys are willing to make an exception for a particular dick (after falling in love with a woman who has one), but most straight guys aren't into dick (other than their own).

Since you're confused about what to do, COCK, I would encourage you to continue dating this woman, keep an open mind, and keep taking things slow. You've got new information to process, and some things—or one thing—to think about before taking this relationship to the next level. But don't drag it out. If you conclude that the dick is a deal breaker, end this relationship with compassion and alacrity. You don't want to keep seeing her "to be nice" if you know a relationship isn't possible. Because letting someone live in false hope is always a dick move.

A few months ago, I started dating someone. I made it clear early on that I didn't feel comfortable being in a nonmonogamous relationship. They said that's not usually what they're into but they weren't interested in seeing anyone else and they had no problem being monogamous. It's not that I don't trust them, and they've never given any indication that they're unhappy with our arrangement, but I can't shake the fears that, though they won't admit it (maybe even to themselves), they'd prefer it if our relationship were more open and I'm taking something important away from them. Can someone who usually doesn't "do" monogamy feel fulfilled in a "closed" relationship? Can it work out, or will they just slowly grow to resent me for this?

Deliriously Anxious Monogamist Nervously Inquires Today

If you stay together forever—what most people mean by "work out"—your partner will definitely grow to resent you. It could be for this reason, DAMNIT, or for some other reason, but all people in long-term relationships resent their partners for something. If it’s not monogamy, it’ll be something else. And if monogamy is the price of admission this person is willing to pay right now, let them pay it. There are a lot of people out there in closed relationships who would rather be in open ones and vice versa. And remember: What works for you as a couple—and what you want as an individual—can change over time. Resentments too.

My relationship with my husband is bad. We have been together for twelve years, and we were married for eight years before getting divorced last year. We have small kids. We reconciled four months after the divorce, despite the affair I had. I have a history of self-sabotage, but in my relationship with him, it has become near constant. Everyone thinks I'm a smart and kind person that occasionally makes mistakes, but I'm not that person with him. With him, I'm awful. I make promises I don't keep and I don't do the right things to make him feel loved even though I do loving things. We have been in couples therapy a number of times, but I always derail the process. I have been in therapy solo a number of times with similar results. I always get the therapists on my side and no real change happens. I want to change but I haven't. I want to stop hurting him but I keep doing it. He doesn't feel like I have ever really fought for him or the relationship. Why can't I change?

My Enraging Self-Sabotaging Yearnings

It's unlikely I'll be able to do for you in print what three couples counselors and all those therapists couldn't do for you in person, i.e., help you change your ways—if, indeed, it's your ways that require changing. Have you ever entertained the thought that maybe there's a reason every counselor or therapist you see winds up taking your side? Is it possible that you're not the problem? Are you truly awful, MESSY, or has your husband convinced you that you're awful in order to have the upper hand in your relationship? (Yeah, yeah, you had an affair. Lots of people do and lots of marriages survive them.)

If you're not being manipulated—if you're not the victim of an expert gaslighter—and you're awful and all your efforts to change have been in vain, MESSY, perhaps you should stop trying. You are who you are, your husband knows who you are, and if he wants to be with you, as awful as you are (or as awful as he's managed to convince you that you are), that's his choice and he needs to take some responsibility for it. By "stop trying" I don't mean you should stop making an effort to be a better person or a more loving partner—we should all constantly strive to be better people and more loving partners—but you can't spend the rest of your life on a therapist's couch. Or the rack.

If you truly make your husband miserable, he should leave you. If your marriage makes you miserable (or if he does), you should leave him. But if neither of you is going anywhere, MESSY, then you'll both just have to make the best of your messy selves and your messy marriage.

On the Lovecast, Dan chats with Slate writer Mark Joseph Stern about left-wing anti-Semitism: savagelovecast.com.




[ Comment on this story ]

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

When do we get to stop being embarrassed, huh? Every time that President Donald Trump opens his lamprey mouth and shakes his semen-colored mane, it's like another shiv in the gut while we stand in the prison shower that is the United States in 2017.

"Which group of shit-sniffing baboons is he gonna talk to this time?" we wonder. Will it be the crazed conservative hawks, the ones whose savagery make Democratic hawks look like confused parakeets? Will it be his base, whose heads are evolving into the shape of a permanent dunce cap, the one-third of the American populace who pretend they want anarchy when, really, all they want are more guns and fewer dark-skinned people? Will it be the unsatiated capitalists, the ones who would monetize child rape if they thought they could squeeze a few more pennies out of the bloodied anuses of babies? And usually, it's all three, to varying degrees, with Trump a carnival barker yelling at the freaks and carnies to scoop up the spilled popcorn and toss it back in with the rest to sell again tomorrow.

At the United Nations today, Trump spoke stiffly and boorishly, his pinch-fingered hand gesticulating like he was jacking off his own micropenis. It was like some kind of dumb college prank, where you make the stupidest freshman get up at karaoke and sing the National Anthem instead of some damn Ed Sheeran song. Put a MAGA hat on that bitch, and you've got a Trump voter.

Whatever you think of the U.N., most of the leaders in that room are people who have dedicated their lives to the politics of their nation. Most of them are vastly educated, well-read, worldly, and, to varying degrees, smart enough to know a fucking idiot when they see one. So you had to imagine the reactions to Trump at the General Assembly ranged from horror to bemusement to calculating how easy it would be to roll this rube (looking at you, Saudi Arabia).

Did Trump brag about how great things are now that he's been president for all of 8 months? Fuck, yeah, you know he did. Actually, apparently, his presidency started even earlier: "The United States has done very well since Election Day last November 8th. The stock market is at an all-time high -- a record. Unemployment is at its lowest level in 16 years, and because of our regulatory and other reforms, we have more people working in the United States today than ever before. Companies are moving back, creating job growth the likes of which our country has not seen in a very long time." Yes, I'm sure Hage Geingob, the president of Namibia, who has a PhD in international relations from the University of Leeds, really thought that Trump deserved the credit for this. (By the way, interestingly, Geingob came to the United States to start college at Temple University, in Philadelphia, in 1964 before transferring to Fordham University in New York City. Trump started at Fordham in 1964 before transferring to the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.)

Were there lines that should have made any sentient world leader just crack up with sad laughter? You bet. "In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch," Trump had the gall to say as most of Central and South America, a good chunk of East Asia, and assorted islands from all over the world rolled their eyes so hard they saw their own brain pans.

Sure, but did he sound like a pathetic, low-level thug who wants everyone to think he's a made man? Aw, come on. That's his default mode. He warned, "We can no longer be taken advantage of, or enter into a one-sided deal where the United States gets nothing in return." He threatened, "The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea." And, yeah he called Kim Jong-un "Rocket Man." In front of the U.N. It's like having your drunk aunt shake her bare titties at her nephew's graduation.

And, obviously, Trump talked as if no one else there has any idea how the world works. "If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph," he said in a line that's right out of his Captain America fanfic. He continued, "When decent people and nations become bystanders to history, the forces of destruction only gather power and strength." Certainly, every country that has dealt with terrorism, which is a fuck-bunch of 'em, appreciated being told they should not be bystanders.

On it went, with shitting on the Iran deal (which is working, despite every feeble protest Trump makes), praise for Russia and Turkey, called out the "loser terrorists," and repeated a blatant lie: "Our country has achieved more against ISIS in the last eight months than it has in many, many years combined."

Yeah, it was like piss from heaven that all the golden showers lovers on his side could bathe themselves in. And everything you need to know about the speech, and everything that you believe about it, is contained in how you think about this: One of the first people to praise the speech was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who tweeted, "In over 30 years in my experience with the UN, I never heard a bolder or more courageous speech."

Yes, it's so very brave to threaten to wipe out a desperate tiny country, to walk away from a peace deal, and to ignore the greatest threat to the planet, climate change, altogether. We're riding the short bus to Armageddon. And there are no stops ahead.
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

Ah, remember when Mighty Maverick John McCain was the mighty maverick hero last time there was a vote on a bullshit health care "reform" bill with his mighty mavericky thumbs-down? Remember the ejaculations of praise for this irascible cockhead doing something decent just to fuck with Donald Trump? Remember his slobber-coated speech where he said of the Senate, "Let's trust each other. Let's return to regular order"? Remember how he insisted, "Let the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee under Chairman Alexander and Ranking Member Murray hold hearings, try to report a bill out of committee with contributions from both sides. Then bring it to the floor for amendment and debate"?

Yeah, fuck all that noise. Now that the new spiked dildo of health care, the Graham-Cassidy-etc bill, is threatening to be rammed up the hemorrhoidal anus of the American people, with just about every fucking terrible thing as the last attempt intact, McCain said that he wanted to hear from Gov. Doug Ducey of Arizona. Ducey had opposed the previous Trumpcare bill because it dicked over Arizonans on expanded Medicaid. Now Ducey has said he supports Graham-Cassidy-who-the-fuck-cares, even though the aforementioned dicking remains, and McCain has tweeted that he's still feeling cranky about the process but is "inclined" to support the bill.

And even if McCain ends up going thumbs-down again, fuck him for even contemplating an upraised thumb. Either you've got principles or you don't, motherfucker.

In all the time the GOP has had, since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, since the election, since the failure of the "Fuck You, We Don't Care If You Die Bankrupt" bill in July, they have not made a case for repeal except "We said we'd do it." It's like a bunch of morons promising to light their farts if their favorite team wins a championship. The only people who wanna see that are other morons. Right now, we're down to 8.8% of Americans without health insurance, and a good number of those are because of the assholes in Republican states not expanding Medicaid.

Who does this bill help? It's faith-based legislation. Republicans say that Obamacare is making you suffer, so, if you're GOP-inclined, you believe it's making you suffer (even if it's paying for your chemo or psoriasis medication). And you have staked your entire political belief system on your investment in this bullshit. You'd rather die a miserable death than admit that you were always the mark for a bunch of low-rent Barnums. This way to the amazing egress, idiots. Grab a snipe on your way.

I wrote last week about the remarkable care I received in the UK for free. I was in the middle of the fourth largest city in the country, and every complaint I've heard about single-payer was rendered utterly and completely false.

Yet here we are, unable to even agree that tens of millions of people, including those with pre-existing conditions, who are now covered by the Affordable Care Act, deserve to be treated as human beings. What a stupid goddamned society we've built. It's repulsive. It's disgusting. It's immoral. And yet so many of our dumb fellow citizens think this is the way things ought to be.

The cruelest trick that capitalists ever played on Americans was making them believe they didn't need everyone else. Our fake rugged individualism will be our undoing.

And for those of us who do give a shit about our fellow Americans, it's once more to the phones to make Senators fear for their careers.
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

It had been a stressful few weeks, with far more than the usual amount of fuckery and frantic frenzy, and I arrived in Liverpool last Friday on a total of about 4 hours of sleep in two days. Walking around the Liverpool One area shortly after dropping off my bags, heading towards the Tesco to get some supplies, I realized that I was sweating like Nicholas Cage on a meth bender and my heart was racing like, well, the same. I felt a tightness in my chest, short of breath, needing to sit down, and I thought, "Well, fuck, this would fuck up the next week or so." When your Dad dies of a heart attack at 46, you take that shit seriously.

So I found a National Health Service walk-in clinic just around the corner from Tesco. It was in the same space as the NHS's sexual health office, which offered free morning after pills, among other things. I went in and there were maybe twenty people sitting there. I don't know how many needed sex-related attention and how many needed regular medical help. But a very nice receptionist took my name, date of birth, and phone number, and then she asked what was wrong. I described my condition without the mention of Nicholas Cage or meth, which could have confused the whole situation. She very nicely told me to take a seat and that triage would be with me shortly. The triage nurse, I learned, examines everyone to see who might need to get in sooner than others. Apparently, I was looking terrible enough to be bumped to the front of the line.

After a few moments, I was called back to see the nurse practitioner, Niamh (pronounced "Neeve" because, well, Irish names). I can honestly say that I've never been treated with as much care, patience, and good humor by a medical professional as I was by  Niamh. She asked permission every time she wanted to do anything, from take my blood pressure to listen to my pulse. Even as I kept insisting that I was probably just exhausted and whiny, she took everything about my condition incredibly seriously and assured me that I should just follow through with what she was recommending. "It won't cost you anything," she said more than once, as if understanding the anxiety that Americans have about health care spending. "Unless you're admitted to hospital." She laughed and joked, and we talked like we're human beings having a conversation, not a transaction.

Niamh asked me a few questions about health insurance in the United States and shook her head at it. "I'm afraid we're going to head to that kind of system," she exclaimed. She told me a story about when she and her family - husband and five children - visited New York City the previous year. Her youngest, a toddler, had gotten an ear infection, so they went to a walk-in clinic, just as I had come to this one. She told the receptionist that they would pay out of pocket for expenses because they would be reimbursed when they came home. "Now, they prescribed my little one a medicine," Niamh said, "one that I know is in that locked cupboard behind you. And I know that it costs about three pounds. Do you know how much they charged me in the states? $354." She laughed, as one can when they get the money back for outrageous expenses. I told her that her experience is pretty typical.

Apparently, the way the UK system works is that whoever is taking care of you stays with you until you are moved on to the next person. Niamh recommended that I go to the Royal Liverpool Hospital for blood tests. She called ahead to see if they could move me through quickly because she knew that I wanted to get back to what I was doing. And she insisted, gently, that I take an ambulance to the hospital, even as I said I could just take a cab and would be embarrassed by such a fuss. She thought I was foolish for saying that and said that she didn't want to have to worry about anything happening to me on the ride over. I relented when she said I wouldn't be wheeled out on a stretcher. Just a wheelchair.

The two EMTs were also kind and professional and chatty, utterly and completely concerned with my well-being. One of the EMTs, a woman named Phil, told me that she had just gotten into the Royal Coast Guard sea rescue training program. The other, a man named Jack, told me about his two teenage boys, one who loves history and one who was an IT guy. When we arrived at the hospital, they advocated for me to get treatment, even though my blood pressure had returned to earth and, really, I was feeling much better. Phil and Jack said their good-byes when a nurse took me (by now, I was on a wheeled stretcher) to check me in, sitting in the hallway outside the emergency room. I was placed next to another gurney with a grizzled old man there who said he was "Mike" and wanted me to fist-bump his scabby, fungal hand. I did because, fuck, why not.

People working there wanted to talk about New York and New Jersey. One attendant, an old guy named Mick who sounded like John Lennon, chatted me up about Bruce Springsteen and Jake Clemons. The nurse who did my ECG (my second of the afternoon) wanted to talk about The Sopranos and places she could visit from the show (looking at you, Holsten's Ice Cream).

Finally, I was brought to a curtained room in the ER where, after a bit, a doctor came in and took blood samples. The doctor examined me again and, even though she insisted I should stay for another two hours and await the lab results, she brought me forms where I could discharge myself, promising I would call to see if the tests showed anything. (Spoiler: They didn't. I was fine.) As I filled out the forms, I asked her and the attending doctor, who needed to witness, for restaurant recommendations, which they readily gave me.

I've sped up the last part here, but, from walking into the clinic to leaving the ER of the hospital, it was a total of four hours. And there was not a single person I met who seemed angry or beleaguered or disgusted by the system they worked in. Every one of them was simply devoted to making sure I was ok. No profit motive. No forms to fill out. No card to check. No in-network or out-of-network. No phone calls to beg for approval. I didn't pay a dime. That's how you treat a guest.

I was blown away. Obviously, I know it can't always work so smoothly and efficiently (and that there are rocky times ahead for the NHS), but, holy shit, there was something so sane and humane about the entire process that I felt a revulsion towards what we're put through in the United States just to try to not die, the degradation of putting a price tag on our health.

If we actually lived up to the ideals that we supposedly have as Americans, we'd look out for each other by making sure that no one has to have one's worth measured against what one can afford.

Fucking pass single-payer. Or stop fucking pretending that we're a society and just admit that the USA is a Darwinian dystopia.
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

(Today, I saw an anti-Brexit rally in Trafalgar Square with thousands of people cheering to stay in the EU. Meanwhile, in the United States, we're still bumblefucking our way through the Trumpocalypse. Here's a perspective on that from Paul in Florida. Note: He has chosen to use a lowercase "t" in "Trump.")

I've lived in Florida since my family moved to stay back in 1976. Dad just retired from the Navy,  and we moved close to where my mom's parents were. Since then, through college and into work and now into my 40s, the Sunshine State is all I can remember ever living in.

Some parts of Florida are relatively low-key about politics, or at least there's enough diversity among the people that you aren't drowned by the far right stuff. But it's there. You'll see the anti-abortion billboards in the smaller-populated counties up north, or along I-4 in the central corridor where a lot of evangelical and hard-right Protestant churches gathered during the 1980s population boom.

When trump started his campaign, there just seemed to be a shift in the mood. It may have been I grew more sensitive about it, but I started seeing more super-trucks driving around with the CBF whipping from the payloads. This was also when I noticed the bizarre exhaust pipes those trucks had, which issued black smoke and bad odors every time they revved out at a stoplight. I finally found out about Coal Rollers, which truckers had to waste money on to make their engines belch out more carbon shit all to piss off any hippie treehuggers in their midst. It's insane, and it explained the mindset of a trump voter so perfectly.

I did notice about five people on my Facebook pages - I follow them because of local activities - suddenly getting more open about their anti-Obama views. After November, one of them got so vulgar about it - posting the racist photos and memes floating out there - I finally had to defriend him. I hadn't had to do that in four years (I try to be respectful with the FB friends with differing political views, and engage when there's corrections or arguments to make, but I try to avoid the whole blocking thing).

Part of the problem of living in trump Country is having to live in a state that is of two minds about politics: the population leans Democratic overall, but terrible voter turnout - either from apathy or the twisted gerrymandering that's hampered Florida for decades - keeps the Republicans in power at the state level, and disproportionately powerful in Congress and elsewhere. The Blue sides are mostly in the urban centers - South Florida, Tampa, parts of Orlando, the college town of Gainesville - but the Red areas are spread all over, giving the GOP a geographic advantage over the populace.

As a result, the voters keep pushing for smaller classroom sizes and more schools, better election districts, more funding for environmental protections (especially our Everglades and other wetlands), and other progressive issues... while the elected officials keep ignoring the referendum mandates and push their tax cuts and land development pet projects.

On a personal level, I do what I can to tune out the wingnut stuff, and stay in touch with online channels of like-minded moderates and progressives. But nearly everybody I know like that doesn't live in Florida; I keep feeling like I'm the only one here in the state struggling to fight against the ignorance and grief. I know there are others who share my views and my current sorrows, but I can't see them. And it just gets so lonely.
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

(As I continue my search for a decent meal in London, I've turned the blog over to some red staters who are not fond of our president. It's for all of us who are sick of hearing about Trump voters who don't give a damn if Trump is boning Ivanka. Today's entry comes from Kent Jensen from way out in Idaho. He explains the "cognitive dissonance" that it takes to love Trump while being from that state.)

I live in the reddest state in the union. Others may claim this title, but they are poseurs. Idaho is not only run by Republicans; it’s owned lock stock and barrel by them. All state officers are Republicans. Republicans hold 84 percent of the seats in the state legislature. In every decision by Trump to kick the U.S. down to the bottom of the ladder, Idaho’s congressional delegation has been at the forefront. Pull us out of the Paris Climate Accords? Murray Energy-owned Senators Risch and Crapo were two of the signatories to the letter urging Trump to do so. Get rid of DACA? Governor Otter and our Attorney General were on board to sue the federal government over DACA. If Trump wants to strip millions of their health care, the boys from Idaho would help. Need to defend Trump’s Russian collusion? Call Senator Risch. In fact, I’m not sure that these political jellyfish would abandon Trump even if he were caught throwing the pee hookers off the Ritz-Carlton Hotel balcony.

Idaho has an anti-federal government stance that is an inch deep and a mile wide. Idahoans complain about the federal government, but this state would dry up and blow away without it. The Snake River plain is one of the richest agricultural sections in the entire United States, and its existence depends upon the BLM’s management of dams on the Snake River that provide irrigation water. Rural counties receive substantial payments from the federal government that help pay for county services and schools. Idaho forests have some of the best fishing and hunting grounds in the US, all maintained by the federal government. Yet Republicans believe that their very lifeblood is being wrung out of them by the government.

They support Trump’s anti-trade stands, yet Idaho’s three largest trading partners are China, Mexico and Canada. If Trump did away with NAFTA, Idaho’s agricultural exports would sink. Trump’s elimination of the Pacific Rim trade pact has already impacted Idaho’s beef producers. Yet, nary a discouraging word is heard about Trump.

Additionally, Idaho Republicans love Trump’s anti-immigration stance, even though undocumented workers and their DACA-eligible children have been the ones who have labored to keep the agricultural engine purring along.

Idaho’s Republican Party also believes that it is the moral barometer of the state. Nowhere is this evidenced more than among the Mormon religion, which is dominant in south-central, eastern, and southeastern Idaho. The Mormon religion claims to hold itself to an overarching moral standard. Yet Idaho’s Mormons gave wholehearted support to Trump. Many believe that Trump is doing Jesus’s work and that good Mormons cannot be Democrats. Since they worship authority (you’ll never find any student protests at BYU), Trump’s penchant for authoritarianism doesn’t even get a second thought, nor does Trump’s aversion to the truth.

Even though Nazis were evicted from northern Idaho by the SPLC, they’re back. The forests of northern Idaho are full of last dayers, preppers, militiamen, or whatever they call themselves now. They claim to be the vanguard of white nationalism.

So, with its latent racism, it’s kinship with authoritarianism, along with its blatant hypocrisy, Idaho is the perfect state for Trump. Don’t get me wrong; there are many good people who live here, which is why the Trump support puzzle is so hard to decipher. Cognitive dissonance is my explanation, and, even though it was not formulated here, its roots grow deep and strong in Idaho.

A few days ago a neighbor posted to Facebook a meme that stated he had voted for Trump and if that made us angry, it didn’t matter because he was going to vote for Trump again. He’s probably right, and if Trump is still around in 2020, Idaho will throw its support his way. It’s the Republican thing to do out here.

Savage Love

Sep. 13th, 2017 04:00 am
[syndicated profile] savagelove_feed

Posted by Dan Savage

A straight mom wants to provide her queer daughter with some good sex-ed advice. by Dan Savage

My teenage daughter just came out to us as gay. We told her we love her and support her. As a heterosexual, cisgender mother, how do I make sure she gets good advice about sex? I don't want her learning from other kids or porn. Do you know of any good, sex-positive advice books for lesbian teens?

My Inspiring Daughter Deserves Lesbian Education

"I wish every parent felt this way about their child's sexual development, regardless of the child's gender identity or sexual orientation," said Peggy Orenstein, author of Girls & Sex: Navigating the Complicated New Landscape. "All young people—girls especially—need open, honest discussions about sexual ethics, including talking about pleasure, respect, decision-making, and reciprocity, or we are leaving them at the mercy of the messages they get from both the mainstream and 'adult' entertainment industries."

Orenstein's book—required reading for parents of girls and boys—drives home the need for comprehensive sex-education programs emphasizing the giving and receiving of pleasure. In the absence of sex-ed programs that empower girls to see themselves not just as instruments of another's pleasure but as autonomous individuals with a right to experience sexual pleasure—with a partner or on their own—girls wind up having a lot of consensual but crappy sex.

That said, MIDDLE, one big takeaway from Orenstein's research should come as a comfort to you: Bi and lesbian girls enjoy an advantage over their heterosexual peers.

"In some ways, MIDDLE can feel more confident about her daughter as a gay girl," said Orenstein. "Lesbian and bisexual girls I spoke to for Girls & Sex would talk about feeling liberated to go 'off the script'—by which they meant the script that leads lockstep to intercourse—and create encounters that truly worked for them. I ended up feeling that hetero girls—and boys, too—could learn a lot from their gay and bisexual female peers. And I don't mean by watching otherwise straight girls make out on the dance floor for the benefit of guys."

Since gay and bisexual girls can't default to PIV intercourse, and since there's not a boy in the room whose needs/dick/ego they've been socialized to prioritize, queer girls have more egalitarian and, not coincidentally, more satisfying sexual encounters.

"Young women are more likely to measure their own satisfaction by the yardstick of their partner's pleasure," said Orenstein. "So heterosexual girls will say things such as, 'If he's sexually satisfied, then I'm sexually satisfied.' Men, by contrast, are more likely to measure satisfaction by their own orgasm. But the investment girls express in their partner's pleasure remains true regardless of that person's gender. So the orgasm gap we see among heterosexuals (75 percent of men report they come regularly in sexual encounters versus 29 percent of women) disappears in same-sex encounters. Young women with same-sex partners climax at the same rate as heterosexual men."

As for good, sex-positive resources for teens of all identities and orientations, Orenstein had some great recommendations.

"I'm a big fan of Heather Corinna's S.E.X.: The All-You-Need-to-Know Sexuality Guide to Get You Through Your Teens and Twenties," said Orenstein. "She also produces the Scarleteen.com website, which is fabulous. Other inclusive, sex-positive, medically accurate websites include Sexetc.org and Goaskalice.columbia.edu. And MIDDLE could think about giving her daughter a subscription to OMGYes.com, an explicit (but not tawdry) site that educates about the science of female pleasure. And finally, I think everyone who is a woman—or has had sex with a woman or ever hopes to—should read Emily Nagoski's book Come As You Are. Even if you think you know it all, Nagoski's book will transform your sex life."

Follow Orenstein on Twitter @peggyorenstein.

My husband and I are currently separated on a trial basis. He took all our condoms when he moved out, and I want to ask him if he plans on having sex with other women. I don't have any intention of sleeping with other people while separated, but I think he may be interested in doing so, in part since we have been sexually active only with each other and he is trying to "find himself." If either of us were to have extramarital sex without the consent of the other, I would consider that cheating. We've also been having sex with each other throughout our separation. But my husband refuses to discuss this aspect of our separation. He will discuss only co-parenting or financial issues. I would be okay with him having casual sex but not a romantic sexual relationship.

Wondering If Fidelity Enforceable

Taking the condoms + refusing to discuss the sexual terms of your separation = your husband is almost certainly fucking other women. He probably figures it'll be easier to get your forgiveness after the fact than to get your permission in advance—and if you don't get back together, WIFE, he won't even have to ask for forgiveness.

If your husband refuses to have a dialogue about the sexual aspect of your separation, then you'll have to make him listen to a monologue. Tell him you assume he's having sex with other people and, if that's not the case, he'll have to use his words to persuade you otherwise. If he sits there in silence, or his words are unpersuasive, tell him you now feel free to have sex with other people, too. And while you can ask him not to enter into a romantic sexual relationship with anyone else, WIFE, you ultimately can't control how he feels about who he's fucking while he's out there finding himself. If you aren't comfortable fucking your husband while he's fucking other women—and he almost certainly is fucking other women—let him know that and cut him off.

I'm a 32-year-old straight male. Back in April, I met this girl. She seemed interested, but before we went out, she told me that she is a demisexual. (I had to google it.) After a few dates, she had me over to her place, we watched a movie and started making out. But when I started to put my hand between her legs, she calmly said, "Let's not get ahead of ourselves." No problem, I told her, I wasn't trying to rush her. Fast-forward a couple months. We're still going on dates, we hug and kiss, we hold hands, we cuddle on the couch and watch movies—but still no sex. Is demisexuality real? Should I keep pursuing her?

Is She Interested Totally Or Not?

Demisexuals are real people who "do not experience sexual attraction unless they form a strong emotional bond," according to the definition at Asexuality.org. We used to call people who needed to feel a strong emotional bond before wanting to fuck someone people who, you know, needed to feel a strong emotional bond before wanting to fuck someone. But a seven-syllable, clinical-sounding term that prospective partners need to google—demisexuality—is obviously far superior to a short, explanatory sentence that doesn't require internet access to understand.

You've shown respect for this woman's sexual orientation, ISITON, now it's her turn to show some respect for yours. I don't mean by putting out if she's not ready or not interested, but by offering you some clarity about when or whether she'll ever be interested. You're seeking a romantic relationship that includes sex—which is not unreasonable—and you've demonstrated a willingness to make an emotional investment before a relationship becomes sexual. You don't (or shouldn't) want her to consent to sex under duress—you don't (or shouldn't) want her to have sex just to keep you coming over for cuddles—but if she doesn't see you as a prospective romantic and sexual partner, ISITON, she should tell you that. If this relationship isn't on track to become sexual, tell her you're open to being friends—truly intimate friends—but you'll have to direct your romantic attentions (and more of your time) elsewhere. recommended

On the Lovecast, comedian Amy Miller. Listen up at savagelovecast.com.




[ Comment on this story ]

[ Subscribe to the comments on this story ]

Books No. 49-50

Sep. 12th, 2017 03:51 pm
sarahmichigan: (reading)
[personal profile] sarahmichigan
Book No. 49 was "Two Serpents Rise" by Max Gladstone. I listened to the first in this series ("Three Parts Dead") as an audiobook a few years ago and absolutely adored it. It took me a while to get around to reading the second in the series in part because I kept hoping to find an audiobook of it (I didn't) and because my local library didn't have it and I knew I'd need to use inter-library loan (or buy it). I'm glad I finally got around to this one, because it's at least as excellent as the first in the series. It's set in the same world where gods, who are the embodiment of their believer's faith, compete with Craftsmen and Craftswomen, who are basically magical lawyers and MBAs. While the first book was set in what appears to be a North American city called Alt Coloumb, this one is set in a vaguely South American city called  Dresediel Lex (DL). Our main character, Caleb, works at Red King Consolidated, which manages the desert city's water supply through Craft, but his father is one of the last priests of the old gods. Someone is fucking with the city water supply, perhaps to screw up a proposed merger between RKC and another water-management concern. Caleb has to find out who is messing with the water supply and why, while also juggling falling in love and dealing with his outlaw father, who pops in and out of his life unexpectedly. The book combines magic, sacrifice, water rights ethics, parkour and more into a fun mix. I really dig Gladstone's writing and plan to read more in his "Craft Sequence."

Book No. 50 was "A Mind for Numbers: How to Excel at Math and Science (Even If You Flunked Algebra)" by Barbara Oakley. While this book is most obviously about math, it's really a primer on how memory and the brain work and lots of practical, down-to-earth tips for better studying and time management, no matter what field of study you apply it to. It made me wish I was taking an advanced math class so I could put more of the tips into practice, but I still found many tips and tricks that will serve me well as a freelancer, mainly concepts around why we procrastinate, how to get back on track, and how to manage time better generally. The book is very accessible, because it not only has practical tips from Oakley, but personal stories of people who put some of these tips into practice. Oakley herself flunked math classes throughout high school and college but decided when she set out to become an engineer that she had to make herself better at math, and this book is a culmination of the research she did with brain scientists, psychologists, professors and others. If you're taking tough math or science classes or know a teenager who is, I highly, HIGHLY recommend this book. (Here's a TEDx talk she gave on learning how to learn.)

The other books I've read so far this year: )
[syndicated profile] rudepundit_feed

Posted by Rude One

(Note: I'm out of the country for the week, taking some personal time, boss. In my absence, some great rude readers have written about life as a Trump hater in states that Trump won. Think of it as a necessary corrective to all those fucking New York Times stories about Trump voters sticking by their "man." Today's post is by Arizona resident Lauren E. Dillon)

Arizona is a lot like hell: the heat licks like flames, the air desiccates once-supple flesh, and sinners bloated with pride and privilege converge and bluster in incomprehensible callowness.

It’s at its worst in Scottsdale. These are not Rust Belt victims of modernization and downsizing. These are well-to-do white men stewing in their own juices of privilege and self-assuredness. They look upon a liberal woman like me, outspoken in my defense of brown skin, climate science, and equal rights, as deluded and below them.

They live sustained by their collective prejudices and unwavering in their Fox and Breitbart News-buoyed opinions. This is the land of Sheriff Joe with his tent city concentration camp, chain gangs, pink boxers, and Hispanic roundups. Often, they’ve served in his posse (yes, that’s what he named it), believing they’ve done their civic duty.

This is also the land of John McCain, once admired for his “maverick” qualities, now derided for defying their Orange Messiah. Whether he realizes it or not, McCain’s pulling a Lee Atwater, saving healthcare and attempting to cure Congress to make up for giving us Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber, hawking war after war, and spewing racial epithets and insensitive put-downs.

And then came Trump. In a land where the Old West attitude of openly carrying weapons and defying social norms is celebrated, a loudmouth racist who derides everyone but their white male selves, who scorns intellect and science in favor of nineteenth century business and societal attitudes, who makes no effort towards diplomacy or decency, was manna from Wal-Mart. Any bags who once attempted to plug their inner douche have let it gush unimpeded. And they are legion.

But we live here and must for the time being. We own a house, have a grandchild enrolled in school, work decent paying jobs. Do I hate Arizona? Sometimes. Often. But I see glimpses of hope amid hate. When The Scourge came to town to rewrite his Charlottesville response and tease of his eventual pardon of Racist Joe, my 12-year-old grandson and I stood in 107 degree heat, holding signs above our heads with thousands of others, all united knowing this country is better than an imbecilic man-baby and his puffed-up minions. Downtown Phoenix contains large swaths of blue, as does Flagstaff and Sedona and Tucson. The Resistance grows, sometimes beaten back by overzealous police, overreaching executive actions, and personal despondency. But it grows.

We won’t let Pussygrabber and the Conceited Motherfuckers win. Because the answer to that one campaign question? Everything. We have everything to lose.

September 2017


Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 23rd, 2017 07:56 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios