21 Comments
User's avatar
chaosbuni's avatar

Honestly, I expect no support any longer in the next 4 years at least, likely until after climate change dismantles the USA entirely. I trust nobody anymore. Trans rights are human rights, and I will die fighting for those rights.

Expand full comment
Teddy Partridge's avatar

85-14 appears to be the USSenate's margin for acceptable anti-LGBT discrimination: NDAA yesterday, DOMA in 1996. Remember the bigots' cry in California? "Think of the children!" Not trans kids, apparently....

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

Well, so trans soldiers lose some rights … better for the greater good. So women lise so rights, better … So, African-Americans … So,

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

So, the Jews … So, people of color … So, re-segregation …

Expand full comment
Jos1463's avatar

Slippery slope indeed

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

But to MAGA, happy days on the ski slope.

Expand full comment
Nadia Yvette Chambers's avatar

Under the aegis of revoking the doctrine of substantive due process, the Roberts Court, esp. Clarence Thomas in his Dobbs concurrence, has very strongly signalled its intentions to overturn all USA court decisions against racial segregation & furthermore strike down all USA Black Civil Rights -related laws. In like fashion, they’ve also signalled similar intentions to overturn all pro-LGBT USA court decisions & strike down all USA laws protecting LGBT rights or otherwise favouring LGBT people. While the approaches are from different angles from those against racial minorities & LGBT people, the impending tactics to be deployed against women as a whole appear to have a Kissingerian „The illegal we do immediately & the unconstitutional only takes the littlest bit longer” flavour to the „family vote,” stringent voter ID laws disqualifying all married women who undergo surname changes not also carried out on their birth certificates, suspected trans-ness or pregnancy recognised as sufficient legal grounds for radically invasive body searches & I’ve yet to encounter any limitations whatsoever on how severely the Right intends to restrict women’s freedom of movement. There are even noises about reimposing coverture, only more radically this time so that all persons deemed female are subject to coverture under male barons (guardians) at all times i.e. are femes covert, furthermore at all times sub potestate viri akin to below-age-of-majority children, where the historical schemata had femes sole. But there are also sickening weird hints that they might newly contrive statuses in lieu of gender-neutral minority to regulate girl children being married off at super young ages.

Expand full comment
Slack System's avatar

Is this quoting something?

Expand full comment
Nadia Yvette Chambers's avatar

I quoted Henry Kissinger at one point.

Expand full comment
Cindy's avatar

This is nothing more than Musk threatening people because he can’t handle the fact that he has a transgender offspring! Shame on Democrats who caved and once again let the American people down!

Expand full comment
Doug Tarnopol's avatar

His choice will be to send a gift basket to Trump and beg to take another selfie with him.

Expand full comment
D Kitterman's avatar

With Republicans, the cruelty is ALWAYS the point.

Expand full comment
Fuzz's avatar

Is the line-item veto still a thing? Could Biden sign the bill into law, but veto the anti-trans portion of the bill?

Expand full comment
Chris Geidner's avatar

No. The line-item veto was ruled unconstitutional: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1997/97-1374

Expand full comment
janinsanfran's avatar

probably a good thing.

Expand full comment
Jos1463's avatar

Darn

Expand full comment
defineandredefine's avatar

Too bad the line-item veto isn't a thing anymore.

Expand full comment
Eileen G's avatar

“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”

German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984).

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Dec 19
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Jos1463's avatar

I’m listening to his interview with Ben Meiselas. There’s nothing wrong with President Bidens cognition

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Dec 19
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Jos1463's avatar

He changed his mind on pardoning Hunter. Call it a flip flop after circumstances changed, eg Kash Patel being named as the new FBI director. Sadly, both Joe and Kamala went quiet on transgender rights during the election. So wish that the deplorable bloody Rethuglicans wouldn't weaponize people who just want to live in peace. Like trans people. And immigrants.

Expand full comment
Slack System's avatar

Yeah Biden also categorically that he'd Veto any bill containing anti-trans legislation that came to his desk. Because, yaknow, as many of his empty speeches said, he "has our backs." I suppose when he said he has our backs he was trying to say "I have your backs... Ready for this knife I'm going to stick in them"

Expand full comment