She’s also obviously trying to ride the fence here by not committing to trans rights. Fuck that.
Good to know laws are the immortal word of God, infallible and inherently correct. Not just something a few dipshits made in a room at some point. It’s not like slavery or anti-miscegenation used to be “the law” too
Also, everyone knows laws come to us fully formed, inscribed on stone tablets from the top of a mountain
Not to mention the laws that would make Kamala only 3/5ths of a person and unable to vote. But hey, follow the law
The way people talk about the 3/5s compromise is weird to me. Slaves were still considered property and fully not citizens, it was just how they were counted on the census for the purpose of the House of Representatives (i.e. how many representatives slave states should get). The logical answer, considering slaves had no right to vote, is that the census should not count them as citizens for the purpose of a slave state’s representative count, and it was slavers pushing for them to be counted as though they were full citizens in a political power grab that was the problem. It was the positive, rather than negative, side of 3/5, i.e. the present 3/5 and not the absent 2/5, that represented an injustice to slaves. The compromise never should have been made because, for this purpose, they never should have been counted as citizens at all until they were freed, and the compromise strictly gave power to the slavers.
Incidentally, assuming Kamala lived in a free state (which her home state of California was), it wouldn’t apply to her at all, she’d just be a normal citizen.
Great point. Thanks for that. I was more just making a joke about her hypocrisy saying “follow the law” in the US as a POC and woman. But I’ll keep that in mind about the 3/5ths compromise
Oh look the dems have zero principles and are ditching one more group of people as though they are expendable.
While also saying they’re the only ones who will protect rights.
: where did you get those laws?
: where did you get those laws!?Among many good points that Adam Johnson
makes, I appreciate his repeated reminders that politicians aren’t hapless captives of public opinion. They’re capable of steering public opinion and do so on the daily (see the characterization of Hamas as baby-beheading sadists, or college protestors as Sieg-Heiling antisemites) just rarely to the benefit of anything good.In a rare dub Joe Biden went on TV and forced Obama into supporting gay marriage. And wouldn’t you know it, that worked out pretty well for them and the Democrats in the long run
I like the way Lenin refers to it as “so-called public opinion”
What text does he say that in?
speech to the first comintern
“Freedom of the press” is another of the principal slogans of “pure democracy”. And here, too, the workers know — and socialists everywhere have admitted it millions of times — that this freedom is a deception while the best printing presses and the biggest stocks of paper are appropriated by the capitalists and while capitalist rule over the press remains, a rule that is manifested throughout the world all the more strikingly, sharply, and cynically, the more democracy and the republican system are developed, as in America for example.
The first thing to do to win real equality and genuine democracy for the working people, for the workers and peasants, is to deprive capital of the possibility of hiring writers, buying up publishing houses, and hiring newspapers. And to do that the capitalists and exploiters have to be overthrown and their resistance suppressed.
The capitalists have always used the term ‘freedom’ to mean freedom for the rich to get richer and for the workers to starve to death.
In capitalist usage, freedom of the press means freedom of the rich to bribe the press, freedom to use their wealth to shape and fabricate so-called public opinion.
In this respect, too, the defenders of ‘pure democracy’ prove to be defenders of an utterly foul and venal system that gives the rich control over the mass media. They prove to be deceivers of the people who, with the aid of plausible, fine-sounding, but thoroughly false phrases, divert them from the concrete historical task of liberating the press from capitalist enslavement.
—Lenin, Congress of the First Comintern
What does that even mean? There are at least 50 different laws regarding gender affirming care in the US because of our dumbass constitution. So this means… whatever each state has as their laws on the books is a-ok with her? So if goddamn Alabama has shitty laws, you (Kamala) support those laws?
If “leave it to the states to decide” is her actual implied position, then she isn’t actually supporting trans rights and won’t do anything to preserve them. Trans rights were literally the very thing every dem brings up when we say there’s no difference between her and Trump. To let the states restrict trans rights as much as they want IS the position of Trump and the GOP, jfc!
And not that it should matter ofc, but note that the interviewer didn’t say something like “let minors have access to gender affirming care”. So according to Kamala, if a state makes a law that blocks say a 45 year old from accessing care, then she’s good with that I guess? I mean there are transphobes out there who would pass laws for that.
So if goddamn Alabama has shitty laws, you (Kamala) support those laws?
100%
Leaving it up to the states is the de-facto way of absolving yourself of the need to do anything.
It’s gay marriage all over again. Conservatives lost that fight, so they’ve moved on to the next vulnerable group. Dems are frothing at the mouth, eager to join republicans so they can take off their mask regarding homosexuality after trans rights are eliminated.
What does that even mean?
It means “i don’t give a shit”
It makes sense. She threw in with Biden, whose official position in A Debate was that segregation should be left up to each state to decide.
I am so sad to have called it back in goddamn september in e-mail conversations with a friend trying to convince me to
Friend: I am always thinking of the least advantaged in these contests, and I know for sure that LGBTQIA+ people, black and brown people, and women will all be threatened in different ways if Trump gets elected.
Me:
As soon as Kamala was endorsed by Biden and her coronation was assured, the Nytimes was already proffering advice on which groups to kick out of the lifeboat. Surprise, it’s Queer people. I quote:
- U.S. liberals have adopted some positions on gender issues that are out of the mainstream. Doctors in Europe, for example, believe the scientific evidence doesn’t support gender transition hormone treatment for many children. Most Americans agree — while also opposing discrimination against trans people. Many prominent Democrats are well to the public’s left on this subject. If Harris took a moderate position, she could undermine Republican claims that she is an elite cultural liberal. (nytimes)
If the Harris campaign takes this advice, which they might, given they’ve tried to outflank Republicans on immigration. How are they going to protect LGBTQIA+ individuals? Because it starts with trans kids, and genderqueer individuals, and looking the other way on book bans, and it devolves into whether gay marriage is too contentious, or that should it exist at all; the Supreme Court might overturn Obergefell, given all the dissent and concurrences written by Thomas, and Alito. The democrats are not effective at protecting rights. Because they do not want to be.
Doctors in Europe
“Doctors in Europe” jfc. “Professionals in Asia” believe that the swastika is completely fine decoration for your business.
Europe is a continent with a bunch of different countries with a wide spectrum of politics (from neoliberal succdems all the way to whatever Orban is!)
“Doctors in Europe”. Wtf kind of nothing-sentencen is that? “Doctors in Europe” also believe the opposite. “Religious officials in the US” believe in judaism.
What doctors though? Which ones specifically? Name them.readers of the nyt read europe and think erudite super libs, not bloodthirsty gammons and fascist hungarians
The only reason that the position that gender affirming care save lives is “left of the mainstream” if that is even true is because the right has unabashedly attacked trans people and convinced people that kamala wants to trans your children and all the illegals, with zero pushback.
The literal only reason left to
for this lunatic is that, if a bill re establishing roe v wade comes to her desk, she will PROUDLY sign it into law. Whoop di fucking dobut we all know the parliamentarian will keep that from happening
I really want to see her eat shit in the election
apologies for not memeing on this, but the parallel that immediately comes to mind is when Kavanaugh was getting confirmed, he said that Roe v Wade was “settled law”. she is absolutely going to enact some anti-trans bullshit.
I genuinely believe she won’t enact anti-trans bullshit herself, at the executive level.
However, what she will do - and frankly this is maybe more destructive - is allow every state to make their own anti-trans laws without any pushback from the federal government. Texas will ban and gender affirming care for people under 26 (this is an idea that’s already been floated since “your brain isn’t fully developed until your mid 20s”) and Kamala won’t do shit to stop it.
allow every state to make their own anti-trans laws without any pushback from the federal government.
Which is also what Trump is promising
beaten dead animal but military service at 18 is fine…
Yeah. Divide and Rule. At least a year ago Erin in the Morning estimated (guesstimated?) There were at least 250,000 internally displaced refugees in the us specifically fleeing anti-trans legal pogroms. The “Colorado Natives” (
) love to whine about all the Texas license plates here without a single thought about who would be fleeing texas to the only reliably blue stronghold in the region.What are the odds that they’ll overturn Lawrence v. Texas and Kamala will do nada?
Data for Progress - Democrats Need to Be Stronger Advocates for Trans and Queer People
Our polling reveals that Republican politicians advocating for anti-LGBTQ+ legislation are out of step with the American electorate. Likely voters oppose this legislation and are willing to support Democratic politicians who directly fight it.
However, despite the progress made in trans rights and increased visibility of trans people in American society, many Americans remain uninformed about transgender people. Anti-trans activists exploit this lack of awareness to push discriminatory legislation. Our polling highlights that knowing trans people and experiencing queer culture significantly improves likely voters’ support for trans and queer rights. Increasing public awareness and understanding of transgender and queer people shouldn’t solely be the responsibility of trans people. The Democratic Party should also play an active role in this effort, using its platform to demonstrate to Americans who have never met a trans person that trans people are just as human as they are.
Visibility = Freedom in data. But
crowd is courting neocons while telling “the left” to get bent.Healthy democracy where despite this these anti lgbt laws are about to increase
someone should ask her why we’re not following the law on arms exports to “Israel”
Damn, I was betting on her at least waiting till the day after the election. Those queer former friends of mine must feel a bit flummoxed.
The law goblin waddles into the office of the President with a new law, and tugs at the sleeve of the President’s suit.
“Oh! Didn’t see you there! Is that a new law? For me? Thank you very much!”
The President ruffles the hair of the law goblin as it hands over the new law. Reaching into one of the drawers of the desk, the President pulls out a bag of Spicy Cheetos and gives it to the goblin, who runs away with it and dives through the oval office goblin flap.That’s how I think it happens pretty much
Then the mind goblin comes in
Become ungovernable
She thinks she’s going to get like 90% of the vote by being both a democrat and a republican.
