Jump to content

Bozo_Casanova

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    15647
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Bozo_Casanova

  1. Well, there you have it. Nothing ventured and predictably, nothing gained. The problem in a nutshell. It depends on the person- there are a lot of populations involved here but I wouldn’t use labels at all when talking to a person. I’ll ask how long they’ve “been outside,” or “where do you stay.” Hurt and wounded isn’t a bad sign, though- it’s a sign of life. The more comfortable a person is with their homelessness the less likely they are to get out. You know, this is a funny one. Giving people money is a dilemma because a most of them do use it in irresponsible ways, very often to hurt themselves. They will buy food and necessities, but even those choices are often bad. I don’t want to help pay for the fentanyl that kills someone. On the other hand- giving them money gives them some agency back, and also shows that they are cared for and therefore worthy of attention. They feel visible . It’s tough. My problem is that I don’t like just walking by. So what I try to do is carry around $2 bills and give those away, because they don’t see many of those, and they think about it before spending it. They see it as a possession.
  2. So… this is an incredibly good example of the distance between the academia, policy think tanks, and ideology that powers the progressive movement and the people the movement seeks to serve. I understand you are coming from a good place, but it really doesn’t. Im not picking on you. This is a PSA: “Unhoused” does not provide more dignity and less stigma. It obscures reality and confers the moral license to look away. I spent years actively volunteering with the homeless. I’ve cooked for them, cried with them, washed their feet, raised money for programs, spent the night with them at the cold weather shelter and so on. My wife volunteers with a homeless support program. My mother was homeless, and died as a result of her homelessness. So that’s my bona fides on this. People who actually spend years with the homeless mostly hate the term “unhoused.” It reduces an extraordinarily complex and devastating syndrome to a real estate problem. They are not just ‘unhoused’ people. They are homeless people, which is to say they are trapped in a self-reinforcing process of slow dehumanization, spiritual/psychological decay and isolation. To call them “unhoused” implies that the problem can be solved by providing housing only, or housing first, and that simply isn’t true. In some ways that’s as bad as sending them back to the jungle or to jail, or perhaps worse than jail, since jail offers the remote but occasional possibility of stabilization and rehab. Anyway, sorry to go off- but I speak for a lot of people on this one. Just say homeless.
  3. What David French doesn’t understand yet is that the law can’t protect what people in power won’t protect. One side is doing politics. The other is doing politics by other means.
  4. Skinny women can do this for you:
  5. About a year ago at some kind of community forum in Austin I saw a (white) TravCo Democrat put a question to a woman like this: “as a member of the east side LatinX community, what do you think of this proposal?” And this lady looks confused and says “as a member of what?”
  6. Good. Do you then understand why it might be a problem to call people LatinX if they don’t like that term?
  7. Are you saying that it’s fine to call a trans woman “he” or “him?” Everybody loves big titty white women
  8. I understand your point (and I think you get mine) but: if people have preferred pronouns I want to know and will use them. I also don’t want to misgender people, or deadname them, or for that matter even mispronounce people’s names. Or call people by a married name if they either didn’t take it or got rid of it. It’s important that we don’t disrespect people by assigning them an identity they don’t accept. It’s not the same as gender, clearly, but the problem with “LatinX” is that it disrespected many Hispanics who didn’t and don’t see themselves as LatinX. At best, it presented progressives and Democrats as hopelessly out of touch, but for some it is offensive.
  9. Well, that and Democrats campaign like they are trying to win a high school debate when they should be trying to win a popularity contest or sell a product.
  10. CSB: many years ago some local politicos thought I was considering a run for something. One of the local Republicans met with me, and when I reminded them I had a long and public history of voting and supporting Democratic stuff essentially the message was - we don’t care what you’ve done in the past and aren’t going to dictate any positions in the campaign. We only thing we ask is that you not criticize President Bush or the Governor. If you can handle that, we’ll help you with whatever you need to win. Then the local Democratic people came to see me. Their message was - you’re trying to skip the line, and that *may* be OK but you need to meet with this list of groups and clubs, and you better get your check book out and contribute to these people and these causes. Once you do that, we can revisit the topic. And that was for an office that had been held by a Republican! And the Republican who ended up running won.
  11. The nature of the Republican voting coalition is completely different. Yes of course. There was even a Texas Young Democrats LatinX Caucus focused on getting the vote out in the RGV plus big cities. Meanwhile in the real world.
  12. You silly thing I didn’t even imply that. Here’s what I said Hope that helps. Pancho said it didn’t happen and I’m saying I saw it happen. Sure, but Chainsaw implies above that they aren’t on the internet, so they don’t know about it. Latinx is our little secret! Because The Groups influence politicians to talk a certain way and promote certain things, and then they get out in the real world and the distance becomes apparent. That’s how it works. That’s why Democrats go around chanting litanies of magic words instead of addressing their potential constituents in a way that connects. By the way, I love it when people who don’t know if a thing happened or not argue with me about whether it matters. Sure, but this is not about what Republicans say about Democrats. This is about how Democrats present themselves.
  13. I saw it in person with my eyes, but OK
  14. That’s unknowable, but it’s representative of how distant the progressive political class is from actual people and how they see themselves. And if you think they people don’t hear progressive class discourse you’re wrong. I third-hand know a guy in the RGV who volunteered for Bill Clinton back in the day and was the involved in the farm workers movement. in 2024 he had two bumper stickers on his truck: 1) “My Pronouns are Mexi/Can” 2) MAGA Republicans didn’t take that guy. Democrats lost him. And if your reaction is “good riddance,” then get used to losing and living with the consequences. Yep. You’re a member of a marginalized group, but you’re not a representative of “The Groups,” meaning the complex of political non-profits that presume to speak for you and assert the power to withdraw or apply your vote and support. And look, some of The Groups are great! But some are just grifters. Then you need to step out of your bubble. Are you saying it wasn’t part of the progressive discourse, or that people in South Texas aren’t aware of national political language? Truly one of the silliest things I’ve ever read. Bravo.
  15. Fucking terrible. Although, and not to fall back on an old-standby her, Lieberman was a cosponsor of Wyden-Bennett, and that would have delivered true universal coverage. Obama killed that one, because big employers and the USCOC got in his ear.
  16. Ezra Klein makes my ears bleed so any amount is too much, but he’s right about the way the various Washington and NY based groups in the Nonprofit/Think Tank Industrial complex have FAR too much influence on the thinking of staffers and politicians than they should based on the false premise that they actually represent the people they claim to, and a lot of them are just straight up grifters. That how you wind up with Democratic politicians in South Texas calling people “LatinX,” among so many other things.
  17. What about him? And how does that reflect on what the American people want? Joe Lieberman was protecting the insurance companies who supported him at the expense of the human beings who elected him to the senate. The my point above about The Groups
  18. Wordle 1,523 4/6 🟩🟨⬜⬜⬜ 🟩⬜⬜🟨🟨 🟩⬜🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
  19. Well in Clinton’s case, the plan was clunky and they put the most inept and tone-deaf person in the administration in charge of running it through the system, and then they lost their nerve. In Obama’s case, they stupidly tried to pass cap and trade first, then allowed the Senate to come up with their own plan, then Max Baucus got okey-doked by Charles Grassley, they lost legislative momentum, and then they lost their nerve when the bullets started flying and backed off. A majority of the American people have been supportive of Universal Healthcare for decades. Republicans have just brainfucked progressives into thinking otherwise.
  20. That’s false. I support Mamdani because he’s the best of the bad options. I’m just not excited about him, and I expect more of the same when he’s mayor. He’s DeBlasio Light. I think being anti-genocide is a majoritarian, centrist position, not to mention a moral imperative. I think being “Anti-Israel” is politically marginal and costly. That’s categorically false. That said, social equality is NOT a substitute for class solidarity when it comes to holding the Democratic voting coalition together. Thats why I asked you if you knew what I was referring to with “The Groups.”
  21. The name is Dumas. And the American people want Universal Healthcare to the tune of 60-65% and have voted for it twice when it was at the center of Presidential campaigns.
  22. No, don’t be silly. It’s not like they were ever offered that choice. They wanted a public option. When they were sold one they bought it. Twice. It was just never delivered. STOP INTERNALIZING REPUBLICAN FRAMING. Don’t be silly- the majority chose rejection of the status quo. Just as they did in 1976, 1980, 1992, 1994, 2000, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022 & 2024 STOP INTERNALIZING REPUBLICAN FRAMING.
  23. Fuck that. No. Those are *moderate* politicians. Universal healthcare IS the goddamn center, and if they won’t fight for stuff that 60+ percent of the voting population wants, they aren’t *centrist* politicians in 2025. STOP INTERNALIZING REPUBLICAN LINGUISTIC FRAMES
  24. Sure, it's terrible. But the phrase that should chill you to the bone, the one that is actually crucial and will not get much attention, is "my attorneys."
×
×
  • Create New...