Finally Friday Reads: Short Fingered Vulgarian is Vulgar meanwhile Back in the USSovietRepubliklans

Good Morning Sky Dancers!

It’s Friday, so of course the news is off the wall. I miss my Daddy terribly but I’m really glad that he didn’t live to see the World he fought a war to create crumble at the hands of the Russian potted plant in the Oval Office and his enablers like #MoscowMitch and #LeningradLindsey.

Here’s something you shouldn’t share with your grandchildren ever!  But, hey, he’s the new Evangelical Christian Savior so maybe it’s now a sacred gesture!

 

Trigger Warning:  Icky Vulgarian hand gestures.

 

The big question we have to ask ourselves now is Who are We as a Country? No, really, after all these years as a some what flawed but better than anything else out there constitutional democracy with aspirations towards a more perfect union we now face a group of fanatics who are redefining us into a theocracy and an authoritarian kleptocracy. What has a small group of white republicans and their greedy, power hungry representatives made us into? Will we be able to stop this?

Will Wilkinson writes this Op Ed for the NYT today: Conservatives Are Hiding Their ‘Loathing’ Behind Our Flag. The molten core of right-wing nationalism is the furious denial of America’s unalterably multiracial, multicultural national character.”

The Republican Party under Donald Trump has devolved into a populist cult of personality. But Mr. Trump won’t be president forever. Can the cult persist without its personality? Does Trumpist nationalism contain a kernel of coherent ideology that can outlast the Trump presidency?

At a recent conference in Washington, a group of conservatives did their level best to promote Trumpism without Trump (rebranded as “national conservatism”) as a cure for all that ails our frayed and faltering republic. But the exclusive Foggy Bottom confab served only to clarify that “national conservatism” is an abortive monstrosity, neither conservative nor national. Its animating principle is contempt for the actually existing United States of America, and the nation it proposes is not ours.

Bitter cultural and political division inevitably leads to calls for healing reconciliation under the banner of shared citizenship and national identity. After all, we’re all Americans, and our fortunes are bound together, like it or not.

Yet the question of who “we” are as “a people” is the central question on which we’re polarized. High-minded calls to reunite under the flag therefore tend to take a side and amount to little more than a demand for the other side’s unconditional surrender. “Agree with me, and then we won’t disagree” is more a threat than an argument.

The way the nationalist sees it, liberals always throw the first punch by “changing things.” When members of the “Great American Middle” (to use the artfully coded phrase of Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri to refer to nonurban whites) lash out in response to the provocations of progressive social change, they see themselves as patriots defending their America from internal attack.

The attackers — the nature-denying feminists, ungrateful blacks, babbling immigrants, ostentatiously wedded gays — bear full responsibility for any damage wrought by populist backlash, because they incited it by demanding and claiming a measure of equal freedom. But they aren’t entitled to it, because the conservative denizens of the fruited plain are entitled first to a country that feels like home to them. That’s what America is. So the blame for polarizing mutual animosity must always fall on those who fought for, or failed to prevent, the developments that made America into something else — a country “real Americans” find hard to recognize or love.

The practical implication of the nationalist’s entitled perspective is that unifying social reconciliation requires submission to a vision of national identity flatly incompatible with the existence and political equality of America’s urban multicultural majority. That’s a recipe for civil war, not social cohesion

I see nothing driving the Republican party today but Racism and personal greed.  What does it mean to reject pluralism?  Remember when our national motto was not about some angry sky fairy that wasn’t supposedly a commie but “E pluribus unum?”

Nothin’ says Statue of Liberty quite like this: “Trump Supporters Cheer As Immigration Rights Sign Gets Torn At Rally. Protesters with banners that read “Immigrants Built America” and “Chinga La Migra” were escorted out of the event in Ohio” via HuffPost.

People at President Donald Trump’s rally in Ohio grew rowdy as they clashed with demonstrators advocating for immigration rights on Thursday, cheering when a protest sign got ripped.

Protesters chanted and held banners that read “Immigrants Built America” and “Chinga La Migra,” which is Spanish slang for “Fuck Border Patrol/Immigration.”

At the time, Trump was falsely accusing Democrats of caring more about inhumane conditions for migrants detained at the border than about the conditions of U.S. citizens.

The president paused his speech for almost three minutes as the scuffle broke out and one of the protesters’ banners was ripped. Security guards eventually escorted the demonstrators out of the stadium.

The crowd roared when the small group of protesters left, and almost the entire arena broke into chants of “Na-na-na-na, hey-hey, goodbye!” and “USA!”

“Cincinnati, do you have a Democrat mayor?” Trump asked sarcastically as he resumed his remarks.

Image result for leningrad lindseyAnd that follows this horrifying act by Leningrad Lindsey yesterday: “#LeningradLindsey trends after Graham forces asylum bill through Senate committee.” via The Hill.

The hashtag “LeningradLindsey” trended on Twitter Thursday after Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) forced a controversial asylum bill through committee.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday advanced a bill to overhaul U.S. asylum laws, waiving committee rules to force the bill through to the full Senate, where it likely won’t get the 60 votes it needs to pass.

But Graham’s move to push the bill through the panel outraged Democrats who say the South Carolina senator broke the rules on how lawmakers take up legislation in order to move a partisan bill along.

Image result for putin's puppetAnd KKKremlinCaliguala insists the Russians didn’t interfere in one of the most bizarre pressers of his Mad King Rule to date.  “Donald Trump doubts Russian meddling in 2020 election, disputing Robert Mueller” via USA Today.

President Donald Trump on Thursday questioned former special counsel Robert Mueller’s assessment that Russia is already interfering in the 2020 presidential election, dismissing the notion just as he did after the 2016 election.

“You don’t really believe this. Do you believe this?” Trump told reporters at the White House as he prepared to leave for a political rally in Cincinnati.

His words were in response to a direct question about whether he raised Mueller’s assessment during a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump said he did not discuss election interference with Putin during a phone call Wednesday.

Mueller, whose staff prepared a report detailing efforts by Russians to hack Democrats and manipulate social media platforms during the 2016 election, said last week they will try it again in 2020.

“They’re doing it as we sit here,” Mueller said during high-profile House hearing.

Image result for moscow mitchAnother unbelievable headline was made by Icky Lizzy Cheney : “REP. CHENEY ACCUSES TRIBES OF “DESTROYING OUR WESTERN WAY OF LIFE” OVER SACRED GRIZZLY PROTECTIONS.”  This story is via Native News Online Net.

On a momentous day for Tribal Nations, Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-WY), the House Republican Conference Chairwoman, stated that the successful litigation by tribes and environmentalists to return the grizzly bear in Greater Yellowstone to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) “was not based on science or facts” but motivated by plaintiffs “intent on destroying our Western way of life.”

One of the largest tribal-plaintiff alliances in recent memory prevailed in the landmark case, Crow Tribe et al v. Zinke last September, when US District Judge Dana Christensen ruled in favor of the tribes and environmental groups after finding that the Trump Administration’s US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) had failed to abide by the ESA and exceeded its authority in attempting to remove federal protections from the grizzly. Tuesday, USFWS officially returned federal protections to the grizzly.

Removing protections from the bear, revered as sacred to a multitude of tribes, would have left the grizzly vulnerable to high-dollar trophy hunts and lifted leasing restrictions on some 34,375 square miles. Extractive industry, livestock and logging interests are among those desirous of capitalizing on the area, a region comprised of tribal treaty, reserved rights and ceded lands.

“IF THIS WASN’T LIZ CHENEY AND THE ERA OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, YOU MIGHT BE RENDERED SPEECHLESS BY THE INSENSITIVITY AND MENDACITY OF THE STATEMENT,” SAID TOM RODGERS, A SENIOR ADVISER TO THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN TRIBAL LEADERS COUNCIL (RMTLC), WHO TESTIFIED AT MAY’S CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ON THE TRIBAL HERITAGE AND GRIZZLY BEAR PROTECTION ACT. HR 2532, INTRODUCED BY HOUSE NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN RAUL GRIJALVA, WAS INSPIRED BY THE GRIZZLY TREATY SIGNED BY OVER 200 TRIBAL NATIONS.

“So, in striving to protect our culture, our religious and spiritual freedoms, our sovereignty and our treaty rights – all of which are encapsulated in the grizzly issue – we are ‘destroying’ Cheney’s idea of the ‘Western way of life’?” questioned Rodgers. “I would remind the Congresswoman that at the time of the Lewis and Clark Expedition an estimated 100,000 grizzly bears roamed from the Missouri River to the Pacific Coast. That was all Indian Country. Now there are fewer than 2,000 grizzly bears and our people live in Third World conditions on meager reservations in the poorest counties in the US. Does she really want to talk about ‘destroying’ a ‘way of life’?” asked Rodgers.

So-called Party of Reagan:  WHY WHY WHY this? “US-Russia arms control treaty dies; US to test new weapon” via ABC.  Which side are we on these days?  I don’t get it at all

The United States plans to test a new missile in coming weeks that would have been prohibited under a landmark, 32-year-old arms control treaty that the U.S. and Russia ripped up on Friday.

Washington and Moscow walked out of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty that President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev signed in 1987, raising fears of a new arms race . The U.S. blamed Moscow for the death of the treaty. It said that for years Moscow has been developing and fielding weapons that violate the treaty and threaten the United States and its allies, particularly in Europe.

“Russia is solely responsible for the treaty’s demise,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement released on Friday.

Russia pointed a finger at America.

“The denunciation of the INF treaty confirms that the U.S. has embarked on destroying all international agreements that do not suit them for one reason or another,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement Friday. “This leads to the actual dismantling of the existing arms control system.”

Related imageBB sent this link to me to read and it’s as scary as anything I’ve seen in a while. It’s from the UK site Church and State and it shows us what an obscenely right wing religious nutter we have as AG Barr: “Trump’s attorney general wants god’s moral order enforced by government”.  This is still giving me nightmares.  He’s actually a living breathing THEOCRAT.

J. Beauregard Sessions was a legitimate threat to America’s secular government as Trump’s attorney general, but his theocratic aspirations paled in comparison to Trump’s latest theocratic cabinet member – a conservative Catholic malcontent who is unlikely to ever defend the U.S. Constitution because it is a secular document. It is noteworthy that Sessions only stated that, according to his mind, the separation of church and state in the Constitution is a concept that is unconstitutional. However, his replacement ardently believes that America’s government is duty-bound to enforce god’s laws because there is no place for secularism.

In a 1995 essay, Barr expressed the extremist Christian view that “American government should not be secular;” secularism is an abomination in Barr’s theocratic mind despite the law of the land is unmistakably secular. Furthermore, Barr contends America’s government is supposed to be imposing “a transcendent moral order with objective standards of right and wrong that flows from God’s eternal law;” eternal law best dictated by the Vatican and taught in public schools at taxpayer’s expense.

It is true that as attorney general William Barr will defend Trump’s criminality and corruption; it is one of the only reasons Trump nominated him. However, the real danger to the nation is Barr’s belief that the government’s primary function should be defending and enforcing his god’s moral edicts while ardently opposing any legislative branch effort to make secular laws according to the secular Constitution.

As noted by Michael Stone a couple of weeks ago, in addition to the racism and misogyny one expects from a radical conservative Christian, “Barr is also a bigot when it comes to non-religious people and others who respect the separation of church and state.”

Barr epitomizes the typical extremist religious fanatic by blaming everything from crime to divorce to sexually transmitted diseases on what he alleges is “the federal government’s non-stop attacks on traditional religious values.” In fact, he joins no small number of Republican evangelical extremists who demand that taxpayers fund religious instruction, specifically Catholic religious instruction, in public schools. Barr, as a matter of fact, has called for the United States government to subsidize Catholic education and categorically called for federal legislation to promote Vatican edicts to “restrain sexual immorality;” an explicit reference to his religion’s ban on homosexuality, extramarital sex, and “artificial” birth control. Don’t believe it?

In an address to “The Governor’s Conference on Juvenile Crime, Drugs and Gangs,” Barr condemned the idea of adhering to the U.S. Constitution’s mandated separation of church and state in the public education system. The theocrat said:

“This moral lobotomy of public schools has been based on extremist notions of separation of church and state or on theories of moral relativism which reject the notion that there are standards of rights or wrong to which the community can demand adherence.”

Barr also penned an article in The Catholic Lawyer where he complained vehemently about what he asserted was “the rise of secularism;” something he claims is anathema to a nation he believes should be ruled by theocrats. Barr attempted to give an answer to “the challenge of representing Catholic institutions as authorities” on what is considered right and wrong, or morally acceptable in a secular nation. In discussing what Barr termed was “The Breakdown of Traditional Morality,” the new attorney general complained thus:

“We live in an increasingly militant, secular age… As part of this philosophy, we see a growing hostility toward religion, particularly Catholicism. This form of bigotry has always been fashionable in the United States. There are, today, even greater efforts to marginalize or ‘ghettoize’ orthodox religion…”

Barr is also a bigot when it comes to people who respect the Constitution’s separation of church and state in providing equal rights for all Americans whether theocrats agree or not. Barr’s belief that government is bound to enforce Vatican dictates is what drives his assertion that, for example, equal rights laws demanding that colleges treat homosexual groups like any other student group is inherently wrong.

He claims treating LGBTQ people like everyone else is detrimental because:

“[Equality] dissolves any form of moral consensus in society. There can be no consensus based on moral views in the country, only enforced neutrality.”

Image

Yeah, stuff of nightmares, isn’t it?  Try this read on for reasons to run away from your Trump loving whackado relatives and any one else invading your environs with propaganda.

 

So are they going to keep getting away with all of this?   How long will Trumpist insanity define our country?

What’s on your reading and blogging list today?


34 Comments on “Finally Friday Reads: Short Fingered Vulgarian is Vulgar meanwhile Back in the USSovietRepubliklans”

  1. dakinikat says:

    It’s the weekend!!! Have a good one with your friends and family and turn off the damn TV!!!

    • Enheduanna says:

      Happy Friday Dak! Hope your weekend is great. Thanks for posting – I have turned off the TV mostly, for Dump news anyway, and come here to get the latest.

      Had no idea Barr was a religious whacko. Him and Pompeo. Liz Cheney is showing her roots in a bad way.

      FWIW I do think we’ll be rid of them in 2021.

  2. Delphyne49 says:

    Omg x that picture of Lindsey Graham is priceless! 🤣🤣🤣

  3. RonStill4Hills says:

    I want to see Lindsey and Mitch as the American Gothic couple.

  4. dakinikat says:

    Yes. Because finding out the dude lies on his resume is like, fake news and unfair …

  5. dakinikat says:

  6. NW Luna says:

    Only a recommendation, but at least it’s something.

  7. bostonboomer says:

    Thanks for putting up the article on Barr. I’ve been looking for a chance to post it, but there’s always too much current news.

  8. bostonboomer says:

    I’m getting sick of this new meme that you can’t criticize Obama and by extension you have to leave Biden alone.

    Do you know how many people “attacked” Obama at the debate? Exactly zero. So some people thought he deported too many people. I thought so too. That’s not an “attack.”

    • quixote says:

      There was a Dems-in-Disarray-ZOMG-!!eleventy!! op-ed somewhere (LATimes?), and when I scrolled down to see who wrote it turns out it some Republican speechwriter / campaign maven / Rove-type character.

      His big theme was “Oooooooo, everybody now hates Obama.” Something like that.

      I’d be willing to bet money this is a line of attack that worked well in focus groups and now they’re seeding it out there.

      The really sad thing is way more than enough people are always dumb enough to fall for what works in the focus groups.

      I’m sick of it too. And, yes, he was appalling on immigration. Better than Dump, of course, but so is everybody who’s not a Repub.

  9. quixote says:

    The Dems could be using this early part of the process to repeat a unified message and present a manageable number of candidates for people to get excited about. Psychologists who study making choices can even tell them how many that is. Five. Six at most.

    Instead, I guess it’s Perez and company?, are giving us the Oodles of Tweedles on infinite repeat. /*endless screaming*/

    They should never have allowed Biden or Sanders into the mix. Sure they poll well because name recognition and the Dems made the rest of the field into an endless mass. They’d both be flattened by the Dump. You can’t fight him on his own ground.

    And Buttigieg. What’s he ever done besides let them gentrify black neighborhoods in South Bend? (Yes, I’m being grumpy and unfair. But the fact remains: he is Republican Lite and totally unnecessary.)

    Then we’d be down to five useful candidates. Replace O’Rourke with Inslee, add Castro, and you actually have a field people could get interested in.

    But nooooooooo. /*endless screaming on infinite repeat*/

    • bostonboomer says:

      The reason we have so many candidates is that Perez allowed the Bernie people to control the process. All they did was scream about how everything was rigged by the DNC, which is insane. But Perez felt he had to let everyone into the debates to satisfy Bernie’s demands. I’ll bet Bernie isn’t that happy now about having so much competition.

      • NW Luna says:

        I was reading comments on an Inslee tweet and saw one that said “He’s only in it to steal votes from Bernie! It’s because Bernie won WA state caucuses in ’16 with 70(something)%!

        I replied that Bernie lost the WA state primary to Hillary, and that BTW Inslee has past achievements and detailed plans, unlike Bernie.

        ZOMG! Everyone’s trying to steal Bernie’s votes! Rigged!

        • quixote says:

          Every once in a while I try to imagine what they see in Bernie to find him so magical that he couldn’t lose except by evil incantations. And I can’t. I just cannot. Ideas? No. Looks? No. Effectiveness? No. Pure spirit who hath done no wrong? No. Nix. Nada. Zip.

          The closest I come is that he promised them free money and they’ve been falling all over themselves ever since like a bunch of Repubs who think tax cuts are for them.

      • quixote says:

        I /thought/ I remembered something like that, but wasn’t sure anymore. Hard to identify specific pieces of poo in the tsunami of poo. It’s all a blur.

    • dakinikat says:

      We’ll see whose left standing by september … I’m hoping it clears a path

    • NW Luna says:

      I cannot fathom how Mayor Pete has gotten the adulation he has. He’d be waaaay over his head.

  10. Pat Johnson says:

    For me there is nothing worse on the public stage than a “sanctimonious believer”. And worse, someone like Barr who is a member of Opus Dei, one of the most radical sects in the Catholic Church. Think Anton Scalia as one.

    These people are dedicated to inserting their religious beliefs into the entire society regardless of the law and the Constitution. Mike Pence comes from the Evangelical Wing of Christianity but Catholics have their own branch that mirrors what K Street has been selling for years. Religious domination that is right up there with Muslim Sharia Law.

    This cannot and should not be practiced in an open society. Recognizing one religion over another is what led many immigrants to these shores in the first place. The Puritans were so hated in England and throughout Europe that they had no choice but to flee. As a result the New World was ruled in the beginning by people like Cotton Mather who would have you arrested if you missed church on Sunday. People balked after awhile but not before the Salem Witch Trials took place and murdered a group of people – mostly women – who failed to “measure up” to their standards. It was religion that fostered the laws of the community.

    Barr’s thinking is a throwback to those times when religious fervor outweighed common sense.

    Raised Catholic and having attended 12 years of Catholic school training I remember studying the Constitution taught by a nun. Her admonition was that the greatest amendment was the separation of church and state because without it we would not have the freedom we had to practice the Catholic faith. She insisted that this right must be protected at all times.

    No longer a practicing member of the faith but those words stayed with me. Forcing someone to believe in something they no longer adhere to is criminal. I believe in science. I do not believe in religion. But those who insist on forcing those beliefs on the rest of us are completely wrong. They are a danger to the rest of us.

    Believe what you want. It is your right, But leave me out of your doctrinaire that I must practice what you preach. This is bad policy no matter your intent. It leads to chaos and misery and has no place in the public square.

    One can live a balanced life without religion interfering.

  11. dakinikat says:

  12. dakinikat says:

  13. bostonboomer says:

  14. dakinikat says: