Browse Month

January 2019

Kamala Harris is not a progressive

Kamala Harris is not a progressive. She just plays one on TV, folks.

Why would the President & CEO of Blue Shield of California contribute the maximum legal limit to Kamala Harris’ in 2016?

Do you think, if elected president, she’s going to fight for Medicare for all?

https://twitter.com/philosophrob/status/1089917503894159363?s=21

Oh, good lord.

Oh, good lord. I just had somebody fling an accusation of racism and sexism in my direction because I’m less than enthused with Kamala Harris as the likely Democratic front-runner. Several things to consider:

  • I won’t be voting in the Democratic Party primary, as I’m not a Democrat. (I am also not a Republican, before you set your hairs on the fire.) So, no, this isn’t about preferring an old white dude (Bernie, I suppose), over a woman of color. My objections to Harris are entirely about her really troubling record as a prosecutor, and the fact that she’s largely Hillary 2.0: a corporatist war hawk that I don’t want in the Oval. But, again, I won’t be voting in the Democratic primary, so I can’t swing your primary one way or the other.
  • Since 1996, I have voted for:
    • Ralph Nader and Winona LaDuke twice, in 1996 and 2000.
    • David Cobb and Pat LaMarche in 2004. 
    • Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente in 2008. 
    • Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala in 2012. 
    • Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka in 2016.

…if I had a problem with women or people of color in the Executive, I wouldn’t have voted for them in every single election over the last twenty-odd years, don’t you think?

I have zero problems with the fact that Kamala Harris is black (yes, I’m aware of her parentage, don’t play the “buuuut her mom is Indian” thing, people – she’s more than black enough for it to matter to racists, and you know it), or with the fact that she’s a woman.

Neither of those things are why I won’t be voting for her for President unless the polling in NJ is close enough that I’ll have to. (Just like last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, etc etc).

Sigh.

Democrats, look: if you honestly think Harris is the best qualified candidate to lead the country, go with your chosen god. I’m not here to tell you who to vote for. I’m well aware that my politics and my priorities are waaaay to the left of nearly all of you.

But if you’re going to give the left shiz over its voting priorities, can that criticism be based on why we’re actually voting, and not the fantasy critique that lives in your head?

Please?

It’s gonna be a long campaign season.

If they really wanted to help…

This is why I voted for Jill Stein for President.

Via Twitter:

Most of the politicians now calling for humanitarian aid to the people of Venezuela have voted for crippling sanctions on Venezuela, knowing full well they’d make people suffer by depriving them of food & medicine. If they really wanted to help, they’d start by lifting sanctions.

Trump’s Venezuela point man Elliott Abrams

Jill Stein (via Twitter):

Trump’s Venezuela point man Elliott Abrams:

-Backed death squads in Latin America that murdered 1000s for right-wing dictators
-Lied to Congress to cover up treasonous Iran-Contra affair
-Led 2002 US coup attempt in Venezuela

Still think this is about democracy & human rights?

Socialism has “never” worked…

But… but… buuuuut… socialism has never worked aaaaanywhere… evaaaaaar…. whine whine whiiiiiiiiine….

Amazing news from Sweden! The Swedish Greens Miljöpartiet de gröna have just formed a government with the Social Democrats, blocking right-wing extremists from power! 💚

Via Facebook

Guardian: Immediate fossil fuel phaseout could arrest climate change

The Guardian:

Climate change could be kept in check if a phaseout of all fossil fuel infrastructure were to begin immediately, according to research.

It shows that meeting the internationally agreed aspiration of keeping global warming to less than 1.5C above pre-industrial levels is still possible. The scientists say it is therefore the choices being made by global society, not physics, which is the obstacle to meeting the goal.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/15/immediate-fossil-fuel-phaseout-could-arrest-climate-change-study

The study says we’ve got a 64% shot at keeping the global climate at a sustainable level to avoid mass extinction and desertification if we replace everything in the “fossil fuel infrastructure” – things like cars, airplanes, power plants, and factories – with “sustainable alternatives” at the end of their useful lifespans as we replace them.

But are we really, seriously going to do that? Doubtful.

Oh, look, Tomi Lahren said something stupid…

I’m not linking directly to her tweet (“raising a child genderless is child abuse”) because I’m not about to give her the traffic, but it is totally surprising how every single time there’s a new indictment, Lahren manages to say something new and stupid.