HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Hekate » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 20 Next »

Hekate

Profile Information

Gender: Female
Home country: USA
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 71,206

Journal Archives

I caught that, too, and it floored me. "Rootless cosmopolite" goes back way before Stalin, iirc...

It is an anti-Semitic insult rooted in the old "blood and soil" identity that plagued Europe for untold centuries, and was a backhanded way of pointing out that Jews, who were not legally allowed to own land, congregated in cities.

When people start waxing poetic and misty-eyed about the Fatherland and the Motherland, they are talking about who "really" belongs and who, by Heaven, does not. It's only a short step from that sweet sentimentality to a vodka-fueled pogrom.

I was furious when Dubya introduced "the Homeland" into the American lexicon, because while the earliest line of my family got here about 1620, we've been well-endowed by later immigrants all along the way. This is America, land of immigrants. My family is proud of that -- I used to believe my country was too.

Who handed "Homeland" to Dubya? I really don't think he has that kind of malice in him. I don't think he knows the company it keeps. The term "Homeland Security" makes my flesh crawl.

But I know who does have that kind of knowing malice: Steve Bannon and the alt-right, and now that self-hating Jew, Stephen Miller.



You're really sure of all this? Is the 2016 Platform still in effect? Not abrogated?

It's just odd to me that the choice issue has just now arisen at DU -- just in the past few days -- in the most inflammatory terms imaginable, and that rather than considering the source of the rumors or doing due diligence in their research, people are jumping all over it like it's settled fact and threatening to leave the party that has so egregiously betrayed them.

Really?

The litmus test should not be: "Do you personally find abortion distasteful?" That's nobody's business.

The litmus test should be: "Will you defend Roe vs Wade and uphold the secular law of the land protecting the rights of women to the full range of health care, which includes both contraception and abortion?" Because, that, my friends, is everybody's business.

Two separate topics in point at DU: Kamala Harris & abortion rights. Presented as "concerns"...

Yeah, sure. Presented as concerns.

Kamala Harris is being anointed for 2020 and the Dem Party gonna support anti-choice candidates

And they're off! My fellow DUers are drooling and barking like Pavlov's Dogs! Running in circles! Screaming at each other!

Bejayzus, people.

The fact that we are having this fight at DU just now means someone is stirring the pot...

If I understand the explorations of the Party honchos, the issue is not whether an individual candidate is willing to have an abortion themselves, but whether or not they will support the continuation of Roe vs Wade and whether or not they will protect the legality of abortion across the US.

Seriously, where was Senator Ted Kennedy on the issue of abortion? He was a practicing, if flawed, Roman Catholic. As a Senator, he upheld the laws of secular society as he had sworn to do, and worked to expand those laws in the direction of compassion for all. I never heard him say a word against Roe. He was one of our best Democrats -- and a member of a Church that is against abortion.

Should we have shunned him? Primaried him? What?

I thought this issue had been settled by my Party. Individual conscience is an important thing, yet from the beginning our country has striven to balance that with the upholding of our system of secular and not religious laws.

Haele, thank you so much for this cogent explanation of competing political philosophies...

....across the Democratic Coalition spectrum. I wish your post could be pinned. I wish it could be required reading.

Hekate

Someone here is really looking for the Pity Party, Assimilated White Ethnicity Chapter

And I don't mean Name Removed.

Every group that came in large numbers had a hard time, sometimes viciously hard. Irish, Italians, Jews, and many more -- all of us have an ancestral story, and I am not going to belabor mine.

The big difference between those of European descent and what's loosely called POC these days is that within 2 generations nearly all European-Americans are assimilated and considered White by default. I don't know where that one poster gets his "Italians were not considered white until 1978" shtick. In 1953 my husband and his family left Europe with their religion stamped on their papers; in 1964 they moved from NY to California, and as he told me with amusement in later years, he left New York a Jew and arrived in California an Anglo.

A sense of humor and a sense of proportion help.

For a lot of us, based on unfortunate personal experience or just good instincts, these photos...

...as background to his publicly visible relationship with his daughter as the favored child, are really...disturbing.

Trump boasts. Look at those early underage photos of Ivanka, which were published in magazines at his behest. She's gorgeous, and he possesses her. In bed? Lap dancing? Sure, she's his property. And his repeated remarks (boasts) to that shock-jock whoever-he-was, that underage Ivanka's body was so desirable that if she were not his daughter he would shtup (oh, sorry, he said date) her himself. Because she is his property; she's a thing.

Not being an East Coaster, I never paid attention to this moron until last year -- I only knew him as a running gag from Doonesbury, who has been following him for 30 years. But when all this with Ivanka surfaced I about gagged when it sank in.

Remember PNAC? The signers expected the 21st Century to be the New American Century...

While I vigorously disagreed with their goals and methods, I didn't question their underlying assumption about America's pivotal role in the world. After all, the 20th Century was the American Century already. Our greatness was in our leadership.

Who could have imagined that fringe isolationists would now be ascendant? And that they could destroy our standing in the world so swiftly and rapaciously?

Voter suppression is definitely THE issue. As for "wealthy supporters"....

...we actually have them, and gods bless them.

What I find hilarious (well, maddening, really) is the knee-jerk hostile reactions of some to any reference whatsoever to a "donor class" of Democrats. Kamala Harris was reported to have recently participated in a meeting of Democrats of the donor class, and the buzz is she might be garnering support for a presidential run. Amid the flutter of excitement here at that prospect of her candidacy were the usual gripes that amount to "REAL Democrats wear sackcloth and carry a begging bowl, and the rich can go to hell."

sigh

As far as I can tell, we are lucky to have some millionaire/billionaire Democrats. They are Democrats, for gods' sake. There are not as many of them as there are conservatives, and we should kind of cherish and nurture them, not lump them in with the Kochs. We need them on our side.

People like the Kochs, DeVoses, et al. are powerfully driven by their ideology, often religious. When you believe you have The One And Only God on your side, you can do amazing things. Jihads and Crusades, the slaughter of millions, that kind of thing.

~~~~~~~



Hm. I remember the continuous screeching here that Obama was "spelunking" (caving in)...

...that he was throwing (pick a constituency) "under the bus," that he "promised" single payer (he did not) and reneged, and on and on ad nauseum. The perfidy of the man knew no bounds, apparently. Those of us who understood his patient strategy and defended it were driven into the BOG for the duration of his presidency. I mean, really, eight damn years.

See, I don't forget these things.

Worse, because Obama was never one to toot his own horn excessively (or even very much at all) his name got attached to the stereotypes about the plan by low-information voters and every bump in the road was magnified to a gaping chasm and attributed to him as a failure. Leftish voters who should have known better participated in this game, too.

The few red state governors who adopted the ACA and helped it succeed attached their state's name to it (KYnect, for instance) which was fine, but allowed the vilification of that "damn Obamacare" to proceed apace. Other red state governors went out of their way to be unhelpful.

When Barack Obama left office he was asked about the future of his landmark legislation, given how much the GOP wanted to destroy it. He opined that it was not going to be easy to get rid of, now that people actually had something so essential. And he was right about that. It's possible, because the GOP has devolved into something malicious. But it is not going to be easy.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 20 Next »