Tag Archives: Wall Street Journal

45, Subterfuge, and Russia

24 Mar

Love’s Twisted Secret

Forgive my absence, but I have been experiencing such fatigue from 45 that there are days I can barely hold my head up. We seem to awake to a new disaster from 45 every morning, with his late night or early morning tweets.

Where do we even start to unpack the number of lies perpetrated by 45 and his administration? When do we as a nation say ENOUGH! STOP! Clearly, the morally bankrupt GOP are not going to put 45 in check, as he is implementing the pathetic agenda of the Republican party: stripping people of healthcare, fear mongering, normalizing racism, homophobia, and, misogyny. Sadly, if we impeach 45 we are stuck with people that are just as nefarious and just as sociopathic as he is.

I hear and read about the number of distractions by 45 and have come to my own conclusion that these distractions matter just as much as Trump’s connections to the Russians during his campaign. Sadly, we have at least 25% of the population that can’t be bothered with facts or science. The fact that 45 lied about President Obama wiretapping Trump Tower, the fact that 45 lied about an attack on Sweden, the fact that Kellyanne lied about a fictional Bowling Green massacre and made up a bizarre story that our microwaves are spying on us — none of this seems to be enough for the nation to put these people in check. Where do we go when the leader of the United States outright lies on a daily basis–lies that are so huge that I would think they amount to treason. You know it is bad when even the very conservative Wall Street Journal has had enough of 45 and his lies when they say: “The President clings to his assertion like a drunk to an empty gin bottle,” referring to the complete fiction about being wire tapped.

I also want to come back to this attempt at repealing Obamacare which will strip at least 24 million people of health insurance, including my family. What most thinking people have always known, it has become increasingly clear that the resistance around the Affordable Care Act was rooted in racism–that it was a product of that black president.

On to hypocrisy. The always morally corrupt Mitch McConnell, issued a mandate during President Obama’s tenure that the GOP would block any SCOTUS appointment. Regrettably and most embarrassingly for us as a nation, Merrick Garland was not even allowed a hearing. If we follow the GOP’s logic (wow–talk about oxymoronic) then would it not also stand to reason we should not even bother to entertain allowing the horrifically racist, homophobic, misogynist Neil Gorsuch a hearing while 45 is under investigation by the FBI?

Moving on to the myriad connections to Russian and the tampering of the 2016 election. The number of ties of 45 and his family and administration to Russian is more than just problematic–it calls into question our very democracy. And now sadly, I have to divulge a secret that I hope will finally produce an investigation that will bring down the reprehensible and hypocritical GOP.  Even Vice-President Mike Pence has connections to the Russians–connections that some might find less than savory. Pence has paid for sex with none less than the infamous Katya. Yes, Katya who seemed so innocent on RuPaul’s Drag Race, whom I so wanted to win RuPaul’s All Stars slept with Pence for money. Sorry to have outed this secret of Katya’s.

Oh goodness!  I feel a bit dizzy. The fatigue, anxiety, and fear of the past 60 days of 45 being in office allowed my head to be full of confusing facts. For a minute there, I thought Mike Pence was having sex with Katya. Dear Reader, please practice some serious self-care. We need to stay alert, in solidarity, and we need to find some joy and laughter!

Bigot of the Week Award, January 31: Thomas Perkins and the Wall Street Journal

31 Jan
Bigot of the Week

Bigot of the Week

Sadly, there was yet again a plethora of bigots to choose from this week, but none  so clearly sank to such a nasty level as this BWA, making this week’s winner  an easy choice. Venture capitalist Thomas Perkins wrote a letter to the Wall Street Journal complaining about the way the rich are treated in the United States. Yes, you read that correctly, this rich, straight, white guy is feeling mistreated because a few progressive voices are complaining about the lopsided distribution of wealth and inequitable treatment of people based on their net worth.

The myopia and hypocrisy would be tragically laughable, but Perkins managed to work in a bizarre Nazi reference and some aggressive anti-Semitism.

Writing from the epicenter of progressive thought, San Francisco, I would call attention to the parallels of fascist Nazi Germany to its war on its “one percent,” namely its Jews, to the progressive war on the American one percent, namely the “rich.” … Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descendant ‘progressive’ radicalism unthinkable now?

Did anyone else throw up while reading that? What is this man smoking? American progressives are the “descendants” of the Nazis? Jews in 1930s Germany were the equivalent of Perkins, Romney, Koch, and the other malevolent 1%ers in America? Perkins has no shame, no sense of history, and a stunning lack of awareness of his own power and privilege.

Perkins’ writings were horrific enough. Sadly, the Journal saw fit to print them. Going one step further, after an unprecendented wave of protest hit the paper, the editors published a feature entitled “Perkinsnacht.”  They called his letter “unfortunate, albeit provocative” — begging the question of why they published it — and then stepped up the hypocrisy with this gem:

the vituperation is making our friend’s point about liberal intolerance — maybe better than he did.

So, people calling a nasty bigot a nasty bigot is intolerant? Blasting anti-Semitic, hyper-privileged nonsense as nonsense is intolerant? I don’t think that word means what the editors think it means. This is such a grotesque situation that it leaves me in despair.  Are we to really supposed to pity people who carry enormous amounts of power, wealth, and privilege? I worry that not only does Perkins have no moral compass, but that the Wall Street Journal also lacks any sense of proportion or irony.

Dishonorable mention goes to long-time conservative hack Michelle Malkin, who opted to use her column inches this week to defend Perkins. Wringing her hands about the “grievance industry” of “wealth-shaming,” she accused Perkins’ detractors of participating in a “bullying epidemic.” Just a note, Ms. Malkin — the last refuge of a bully is accusing others of bullying…

Chattel or Progress (?)

16 May

"Turns Out Our Gals are Useful After All"

Thank you to my friend “voice of the trailer” for inspiring this story.  Apparently, the trend continues for women to take their husband’s name, according to a 35-year study published in 2009 in the journal Social Behavior and Personality.  The study also shows that well-educated women with careers that have high earning power tend to retain their names. (I intentionally refuse to use maiden name for obvious reasons.)  Age seems to also play a part.  Women who marry after age 35 are 6.4 times more likely to keep their name.

I do worry that we do not have a sense of history as to what the name change meant, or the other rituals that all indicated that a woman was going to become the property of her husband.  Lest we forget, women were not allowed to own land. Nor should we forget that women could not own a credit card until the mid-1970’s.  I do still worry that as a culture we do not recognize the often times more subtle misogyny that exist in advertising and pop culture.  An immediate example that comes to mind is the television show called Cougar Town, which I find incredibly misogynistic and offensive. I have not seen this show, but the title is very off-putting.  I have had conversations with friends about this and they offer in reply: “We have the same thing with men, we just call them either lucky or dirty old men.”  The offensive difference is that we don’t call them predators, such as cougars.

The other example I will offer is the list of comments at the end of the article I am referring to which contains a number of misogynistic remarks.  Granted the article is from the Wall Street Journal, so my expectations of enlightenment are slim. Here is an example of the sexist comments I read:

Women are very self-serving with respect to gender roles. When it comes to pay raises and promotions they’re all for it, but if the they have to initiate a relationship or pay for a date then they defer to traditional gender roles.–Benny

I feel sorry for Benny’s wife, should he have one.  I suppose I don’t understand the need to assume one’s spouse’s name.  Of course, I say this even as my partner and I changed our names, albeit some of that was to make a political statement, as we are a gay couple that is denied the right to marry.  I also suspect that I take issue with the name change because I don’t see a level playing field as of yet.  Women still do not earn as much money on the dollar as men do, nor are they proportionately represented in our government–look at the House of Representatives as a reflection of this fact.  In short, I’m not convinced we have made the progress regarding gender or race that we think we have.

%d bloggers like this: