Brett Kavanaugh demonstrated amply today why he should not be placed on the nation’s highest court for the rest of his miserable, over-privileged life.Many of my posts are long, but this one can be comparatively short and sweet: Brett Kavanaugh has a history of drunken sexual violence that has nothing to do with when, exactly, he supposedly lost his virginity (Ewww!), and because of his moral turpitude, which includes his atrocious treatment of women (and girls), of course he is entirely unfit to sit on the nation’s highest court. Kavanaugh has been steeped in rich, white, frat-boy privilege his entire miserable life to the point that he thought that he easily could get a seat on the nation’s highest court despite those whom he has victimized in the past. And Kavanaugh just might still become a U.S. Supreme Court “justice”; but it would be a Pyrrhic victory for the Repugnicans, as the political fallout over the coming years wouldn’t make the short-term, rammed-through victory worth it. Kavanaugh was not put on trial today. No, as U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein stated (and as much as it pains me to agree with her), it was not a trial, but was a job interview. In a trial, you stand to lose what already is in your possession, such as money, property or, if you are incarcerated, your personal freedom. Despite his mountains of white privilege (which has kept him out of prison thus far), no, Kavanaugh is not entitled to a seat on the nation’s highest court, no more than is any particular interviewee for a job entitled to be granted the job. It was a job interview, meaning that the job must be earned (what a concept!), and Brett the petulant frat boy did very poorly in it. We soon will find out if white male privilege is dead yet, or if Kavanaugh can manage to be one of its last beneficiaries, as are “President” Pussygrabber and too many others. In any event, the likes of “our” pussy-grabbing “president” and Brett Kavanaugh are, I believe, the pathetic but long overdue death throes of white male privilege.
Monthly Archives: September 2018
APF/Getty Images photo
Two pussy grabbers in a pod: Brett Kavanaugh and “President” Pussygrabber shake hands after the “president” announced Kavanaugh’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court in July.
I never would predict that the Democrats will win the U.S. Senate back in November as well as the U.S. House of Representatives. (Fivethirtyeight.com right now, as I type this sentence, gives the Dems an 81.3 percent chance of winning back the House, but only a 32.6 percent chance of winning back the Senate.)
Still, after our ongoing long national nightmare, I can dream.
I believe U.S. Supreme Court “justice” nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, that back in the early 1980s, when he was 17 years old and she was 15 years old, he drunkenly sexually assaulted her (gee, can we add under-aged drinking to the sexual assault?).
We already have one known sex fiend on the nation’s high court; we don’t need another. (Nor, for that matter, do we need yet another right-wing white man; the court has not been representative and reflective of the U.S. population forever.)
Because of the statute of limitations, it’s too late to prosecute Kavanaugh, but in most cases 17 years old is old enough for an act to be indicative of one’s character, I believe, and because I believe Kavanaugh’s accuser, I believe that he is unfit to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, his radical-right-wing views aside.
Anyone who can’t understand why a victim of sexual assault would remain silent for years (Ford did recount the sexual assault to her therapist in 2012) probably hasn’t been the victim of a sexual assault. Especially if the perpetrator has power and status, of course a victim easily could choose to remain silent, expecting (often if not usually correctly) to be even further victimized if she or he were to report the incident.
The Anita Hill debacle didn’t happen until 1991; she was treated atrociously, including by perennial presidential wannabe Joe Biden (a DINO) and by soulless mercenary David Brock, who went on to work for/with DINO Billary Clinton (because, you know, she’s a feminist).
If it was that bad for Anita Hill in the early 1990s, how much better do you think that it was for Christine Blasey Ford in the early 1980s? Her perpetrator went to prep school and then to Yale. He had a future, you see; hers, on the other hand, was disposable.
So this is what I’m hoping — dreaming — will happen: Brett Kavanaugh will go down in flames, as he deserves. There won’t be enough time before the November mid-term elections for the treasonous Repugnicans to try to ram through the installation of another Nazi on the U.S. Supreme Court with a simple majority Senate vote instead of the historically required 60 votes (as they did with Neil Gorsuch, whose seat on the Supreme Court is stolen property).
Then, the Dems will take back the Senate in November, and one of two things will happen:
(1) They won’t allow “President” Pussygrabber to put another wingnut on the high court — they will stick to the simple-majority Senate vote requirement that the Repugnicans have felt was just fine for Gorsuch and now for Kavanaugh. (Let the Repugnican traitors have a taste of their own bitter medicine; their “nuclear-option” change in the Senate rules should remain in place.)
The best that Pussygrabber would be able to do in this scenario is to put a moderate on the bench, as Obama was willing to do (with the Senate controlled by the opposing political party) with Merrick Garland.
Or (2) if they really find their spines (which is not nearly as likely as is scenario No. 1), the Senate Democrats will simply do what the Repugnicans did during President Obama’s last year in office: simply refuse to put anyone new on the bench until after the next presidential election. (Yertle McConnell proclaimed that democracy demanded that!)
If the Repugnicans did nothing wrong by depriving Obama of the presidential right to name a U.S. Supreme Court justice in the last year of his presidency, then they will have nothing to bitch about.
I tell you what: If the Democrats actually recapture the Senate in November, a feat in and of itself given the electoral map, and then actually refuse to allow Pussygrabber to put another “justice” on the Supreme Court — finally showing that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander — I probably will switch my voter registration back from independent to Democrat.*
The Repugnican traitors shamelessly play hardball while the Democrats cluelessly try to sing “Kumbaya.” Until and unless the Democrats’ spines finally calcify, they don’t deserve our full support.
*I had changed from Green to Democrat to be able to vote for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 presidential primary, but after the anti-Bernie Democratic National Committee e-mails were released in July 2016, I changed to independent (“no party preference” here in California) out of rage and disgust.
The Democratic Party would have to impress the hell out of me for me to ever join it again.
A woman takes a hit at an effigial piñata of Pussygrabber during a protest in Mexico City in October 2016, before our long national nightmare officially began in January 2017.
For better or for worse — now, for worse — the United States presidency was built to be durable. The president, whether actually elected by the majority of the voters or not (tellingly, neither of our last two Repugnican “presidents” were), gets a fairly long term of four years, plenty of time with which to do plenty of damage, and it’s incredibly difficult to remove a sitting president.
Unless the president obviously, unarguably is incapacitated, such as through coma or death, he gets to remain in office, and sure, you can impeach him with a simple majority vote of the U.S. House of Representatives, but to actually remove him from office then would take at least 67 votes in the U.S. Senate. That’s never happened in our nation’s history. (I generally am against super-majorities, especially super-majorities of two-thirds. If we must have a super-majority, to me it shouldn’t have to be higher than 60 percent.*)
When we have a shitty president, our options aren’t many. Ensuring that his party doesn’t control both houses of Congress helps, and I am confident that the Democrats will take back the House in November. (Fivethirtyeight.com right now gives them a 78.2 percent chance of doing so.) That will be yet another significant blow to the Pussygrabber piñata, which has taken many hits so far.
Not that Pussygrabber would flinch all that much (at least publicly) after losing the House; he’s never understood or respected the U.S. Constitution, so he’ll still try to be a dictator. He’ll try; he’ll be slapped down by the checks and balances that the nation’s founders wisely and presciently built into our system of governance.
But, as I have noted before, Pussygrabber does make the cockroach jealous in terms of his ability to survive what should have killed him.
The pussy-grabbing tape publicly revealed in October 2016, for fuck’s sake, should have ended him.
And it’s been nothing but a parade of books about the Pussygrabber White House, first Michael Wolff’s best-selling Fire and Fury, then White House insider Omarosa Manigalt Newman’s Unhinged (which, whatever we think of her, still sits at No. 60 on Amazon.com’s top-100 selling books list as I type this sentence), and now, Bob Woodward’s Fear: Trump in the White House — which because of pre-orders right now is No. 1 on Amazon.com’s best-seller list (it officially come outs on Tuesday, which is September 11…).
When people independently are reporting the same things, um, yeah…
There have been plenty of other whacks on the Pussygrabber piñata, of course, including the indictments and convictions and guilty pleas of Pussygrabber associates, most notably of former Pussygrabber “presidential” campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former Pussygrabber personal attorney Michael Cohen (which didn’t happen even a full month ago), and plenty of wholly self-inflicted hits, such as Pussygrabber’s disastrous meeting with Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin in Finland in July, during which he surreally casually treasonously threw the United States of America under the bus.
Old-school Repugnican John McCain got in a postmortem dig by barring Pussygrabber from attending his recent funeral, which was attended by Barack Obama and George W. Bush, as well as by Joe Biden and former U.S. Sens. Russ Feingold and Gary Hart and current U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, all Democrats.
The New York Times last week released that interesting, anonymously-penned op-ed titled “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration” and tag-lined “I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.”
The op-ed didn’t tell us much that we didn’t already know, wasn’t much new, except that it purportedly was written by someone still working within the Pussygrabber regime (my best guess is that it was lodestar-loving Mike Pence, who would personally benefit immediately upon Pussygrabber’s exit), and of course Pussygrabber made the situation even worse by tweeting:
Does the so-called “Senior Administration Official” really exist, or is it just the Failing New York Times with another phony source? If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!
Wow. Let’s unpack that: Saying or reporting anything that “President” Pussygrabber doesn’t want you to is tantamount to threatening “National Security.” Wow. No First-Amendment or whistle-blowing protections for us peasants where it comes to Mad King George!
To equate yourself with the nation (and your ego with the nation’s security) itself is beyond insane. Pussygrabber is not the United States of America; he is an aberration and an abomination. We know this now; indeed, we have known this for some time now, and we don’t need to wait for the historians inevitably to record his “presidency” as such.
And The New York Times is not “failing.” In fact, this never has been true during Pussygrabber’s “presidency,” and Pussygrabber will lie pathologically about anything, will spew even lies that easily are thoroughly debunked.
Forbes reported back in July 2017 of the Times that “the paper enjoys 2.3 million paid digital subscriptions, up 63.4 percent from a year earlier. Its stock is currently trading at a nine-year high, hovering around $20 per share and giving the company a market capitalization of about $3.2 billion.”**
Forbes added: “Like most traditional media organizations, the Times has weathered setbacks thank to falling print subscriptions and ad revenues. But Trump’s presidency appears to have breathed new life into the organization. Since the election, the Times has made itself a must-read, trading political scoops with The Washington Post on an almost daily basis.”
The Times reported 2.9 million online subscriptions last month and published this graphic:
Indeed, I renewed my online subscription to the Times after years of dormancy because I value the Times’ and The Washington Post’s fairly relentless coverage of “our” illegitimate, dangerous “president” (I subscribe to both online, and yes, their current success has a lot to do with the unelected maniac in the Oval Office).
But back to that “presidential” tweet: Most chilling about it, of course, is Pussygrabber’s dictatorial assertion that “the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her [the writer of the anonymous op-ed] over to government at once!”
Who the fuck does Pussygrabber think he is — Vladimir Putin? (That was [mostly] rhetorical, but feel free to answer it literally.) Although Pussygrabber has done his best to be a human wrecking ball of our republic, in the end, although sometimes slow, such as the Mueller investigation, in the United States of America the rule of law still applies.***
The Times legally does not have to divulge its sources, and the specious “National Security” argument won’t work. Further, at least one federal former prosecutor says that the author of the anonymous op-ed has broken no law at all, either by having provided the piece for publication or by having admitted to any illegal activity within the piece itself.
Another whack to the Pussygrabber piñata is planned to come later this month, when Michael Moore releases his new film on the unelected Pussygrabber regime, “Fahrenheit 11/9,” a twist on the title of his 2004 film about the unelected Bush regime, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” which remains the highest-grossing documentary of all time.
Here is the poster for “Fahrenheit 11/9”:
Pussygrabber’s “win” of the White House was announced on November 9, 2016, and thus “Fahrenheit 11/9.”
True, “Fahrenheit 9/11” was meant to help to deny “President” Bush a second term in the 2004 presidential election and failed to do so, but I’ll take just about any new movie by Moore, and, again, it should be yet another whack on the Pussygrabber piñata, followed by the Repugnicans’ loss of the U.S. House of Representatives later this fall.
And, of course, Pussygrabber’s approval ratings remain stubbornly stuck around the low 40s, which not only doesn’t bode well for the mid-term elections in November — widely considered to be a referendum on Pussygrabber — but doesn’t bode well for his “re”-“election.”
Pussygrabber’s average approval ratings have been historically low, which is like a constant hitting of the Pussygrabber piñata, weakening it even further and further, if only slowly.
Will there be a final, spectacular, perhaps inevitable blow to the Pussygrabber piñata? And who will strike it? Robert Mueller at any time? The Democratic-controlled House finding its spine and impeaching him? Bernie Sanders beating him in November 2020?
We’ll see, but in the meantime, this will, methinks, remain a fairly slow-moving train wreck.
We’ll probably finally see that piñata spew its contents all over the ground one day, but by the time that comes, we might be too exhausted from our long national nightmare to be able to derive all that much pleasure from it.
*On that note, the threshold for a new U.S. Supreme Court “justice” to be put on the bench used to be a vote of 60 or more in the U.S. Senate, until Yertle McConnell changed the Senate rules in 2017 to require only a simple-majority vote for Supreme Court “justices” in order to get Pussygrabber’s picks seated on the court.
The only way for loser Pussygrabber to “win,” once again, was to cheat.
**Forbes does note that maybe Pussygrabber, who is no wordsmith, means that The New York Times is “failing” in its coverage of him and his “presidency,” but most often when Pussygrabber criticizes a company, his criticism is that it is not doing well financially, even though he’s had six bankruptcies.
***It is because there are so many competing different interests within the United States, I surmise, that no one group of people can have power indefinitely, as it is the case in the thugocracy of Russia, which Pussygrabber wants to replicate here in the U.S.
(In March, Pussygrabber remarked that it’s great that China now has a president for life, and that maybe the U.S. will have that too someday. Maybe Pussygrabber was joking, but “jokes” like that aren’t funny. It wasn’t funny when George W. Bush “quipped” in December 2000, “If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.”)
Three African-American candidates will appear on the ballot for governor in November, only the second time that that has happened in U.S. history since 2006*. The Associated Press notes that “[Stacey] Abrams [in Georgia, pictured in the middle] and [Ben] Jealous [in Maryland, pictured at right] face uphill battles in November, while [Andrew] Gillum’s [pictured at left] contest [in Florida] is expected to be close. They will have to figure out how to translate the enthusiasm among primary voters to the general election, and will have to win over moderate Democrats, independents and probably some Republicans.”
By Wikipedia’s count, there have been only four African-American governors in U.S. history. Three of them (Douglas Wilder of Virginia, Deval Patrick of Massachusetts and David Paterson of New York) served during my lifetime (that is, within the past 50 years).
One of those three, Paterson, was not elected as governor but became governor after Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned in the wake of a prostitution scandal (Patrick had been the lieutenant governor at the time of Spitzer’s resignation).
Way back in the 1870s, a Pinckney Benton Stewart Pinchback was governor of Louisiana for a bit over a year. He had been the acting lieutenant governor, and he became governor after the elected governor was impeached and suspended from office in the last year of his term.
Both Wilder and Pinchback could pass for white or for another light-skinned race or ethnicity, from what I can tell from their photos on Wikipedia. (Don’t call me a racist. Whether or not one can pass for white has sociological implications, of course; where it comes to whiteness or perceived whiteness, membership has its privileges, as any good sociologist will tell you.)
So, of the four African-American governors that we’ve had, only one of them, Deval Patrick, was elected as governor outright and definitely appears to be African American. (It strikes me that this is in no tiny way related to the fact that he has been mentioned as a possible 2020 Democratic Party presidential contender.)
So it’s a positive development that right now we have a record three progressive African-American candidates for governor: Andrew Gillum for Florida, Stacey Abrams for Georgia and Ben Jealous for Maryland. All three of them won their Democratic Party gubernatorial primary elections. (And all three of them, I’ll add, had been endorsed by Bernie Sanders.**)
I hope that all three candidates win, but even two out of the three would be great. (Hell, in today’s environment, I’d take even one win; PredictIt right now has the Repugnican gubernatorial candidates leading significantly in all three races, with Gillum doing the best of the three African-American candidates.)
I am most familiar with Ben Jealous, who was the youngest head of the NAACP and who endorsed Bernie Sanders before Bernie really caught fire. You know, that’s when an endorsement really counts: when you don’t endorse the apparent eventual winner, but endorse the most progressive candidate who is running (yes, if that candidate also appears to be the apparent eventual winner, that’s fine, too).
Unfortunately, Jealous has attracted some controversy lately with his distancing of himself from democratic socialism. (He cringeworthily has declared, for instance, “Go ahead, call me a socialist. That doesn’t change the fact I’m a venture capitalist.”)
Reminds me a bit of the denial of Peter… (No, not that Bernie is Jesus, of course, but the same principle — distancing oneself from something that he perceives to be sociopolitically disadvantageous — applies, methinks. [Of the three African-American gubernatorial candidates, PredictIt right now has Jealous as the least likely to win his race, by the way.])
The American people deserve to see people like themselves in elected office, and in a truly representative democracy, there is diversity, because the American people are diverse. For at least a few years now, for example, white children and youths in our public elementary and secondary schools have not been the majority, but non-white children and youths have been, and of non-white children and youths, Latinos and African Americans are the largest two groups, respectively.
Don’t get me wrong; I still believe in electing the most progressive candidate possible, regardless of that candidate’s race, biological sex or sexual orientation. I don’t care about a candidate’s religion as long as he or she would govern in a secular manner (although yes, I’d prefer an atheist or at least an agnostic; I cringe at the thought of those at the top still believing in fairy tales…). Nor am I concerned about a candidate’s age, as long as he or she is not too immature and/or inexperienced for the job or having advanced-age-related problems functioning mentally.
So no, I don’t believe in supporting a candidate primarily or even only because of his or her race. That seems to me to just be the flip-side of not supporting a candidate primarily or even only because of his or her race, and both are, in my book, racist approaches. So no, I don’t see myself supporting the mediocre Kamala Harris or Cory Booker for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential nomination (or Deval Patrick, who, like Harris and Booker, but especially like Booker, has been too cozy with corporations).
But we need more progressive (emphasis on “progressive”!) people of color in elected office, and it would be a great step forward if Abrams, Gillum and Jealous — or at least one or two of them — win their races in November.
*The Associated Press notes that also in 2006 there were three African-American gubernatorial candidates on the ballot, two of them actually Repugnican (I’ll never understand…), but that only one of them, Democrat Deval Patrick, won.
**Which is not to give Sanders credit for their wins, but which is to demonstrate that he’s on the right side of history and that yes, some of the progressive insurgents whom he supports do go on to win their elections!
The late U.S. Sen. John McCain has been lionized over the past week — when you die, you become a saint, even though everyone dies, just as everyone shits and pisses and farts — and I’ve yet to say anything about it. I don’t want to say all that much; he has received too much postmortem attention as it is.
John McCain, who was “my” senator (when I lived in the God-awful state of Arizona) from 1987 to 1998 (when I finally left Arizona), was not a great guy. He staunchly believed in American exceptionalism and imperialism and militarism and white-collar gangster capitalism. While perhaps McCain was not overtly racist, as American exceptionalism and imperialism and militarism and white-collar gangster capitalism always have vastly disproportionately benefited white Americans, there you go.
When I lived in Arizona I remember McCain’s television campaign ads. He used the Vietnam POW story endlessly. What’s the good in being a POW if you can’t exploit it for personal and political gain later? (He did ease off on the POW thing in his failed 2008 presidential run, but then again, the POW thing had gotten him that far.)
McCain left his first wife of about 15 years, Carol (she’s now 80), with whom he had a daughter (and he adopted her two existing children), to marry the younger, apparently much more attractive, and, perhaps most of all, quite rich Cindy (who now is 64), who had been a blonde cheerleader. According to Wikipedia, McCain’s first marriage “falter[ed] due to [McCain’s] partying away from home and extra-marital affairs.” (That link is to the reliable Arizona Republic, by the way.)
In his very first term in the U.S. Senate, McCain survived the savings and loan scandal (he was one of “the Keating Five”), which should have been the end of his political career. But: Arizona.
McCain was not a moderate. McCain was not bipartisan, even if that were a good thing. He was a Dr.-Strangelove-level fucking wingnut, replete with his chilling refrain of “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.”
McCain only pretended to be above it all. That made him only a sanctimonious prick, because what he actually stood for was quite dark. He knew that he himself, being an over-privileged white man whose lifelong opportunism had served him quite well, never would have to suffer the consequences of his own horrible actions and decisions. He ensured that he himself always would be quite safe and much more than comfortable.
No brand of Repugnican is good for the United States of America, be it the smug, Goldwater-style Repugnican that largely if not wholly died with McCain, or be it the openly craven, Pussygrabber-style of Repugnican that we see today. The two types differ only in style, not in substance.
I have two words for John McCain: Good riddance.
P.S. It always has struck me that McCain’s opposition to Pussygrabber was more out of sour grapes than out of anything like principle. McCain had wanted to be president for years, and lost in 2000 and in 2008, and then here comes the likes of Pussygrabber — not a Vietnam POW but a Vietnam draft dodger — to become “president.”
That drove McCain insane, methinks. He viewed it as a colossal injustice, I am confident.