Jump to content

Bozo_Casanova

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    14615
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Bozo_Casanova

  1. Et tu, Texags?
  2. It’s like we’ve talked about. What I always say is that I’m not a Christian but I hope to be one someday.
  3. I know there have been articles along these lines, but pastors are really struggling with this. They try to teach from the bible or preach a sermon about the gospel and their congregants will tell them that they are wrong, or when pressed that Christ's direct instruction "doesn't apply anymore" because of some pretzel of Leviticus and a few snippets of letters from Paul. It's not just the protestants, either. Recently I was interacting with an old friend, one of my high school teachers who was also our neighbor across the street through my entire childhood. He is a devout catholic. I sent him the Pope's excellent letter to American bishops that essentially rebuked and rejected the interpretation of the principal of Ordo Amoris advanced by some American Catholics including JD Vance in a recent interview. My friend's response was that the Pope is not infallible, and and he would need his parish priest to weigh in, but that in any case we can't just "surrender our national sovereignty." In other words, on a matter of doctrine, he's taking JD Vance and the parish priest over the Bishop of Rome and St. Augustine himself.
  4. Fucking A man. It’s the dismal tide.
  5. I have been a regular reader of the New Yorker for most of my adult life, going back to high school, and I did not ever imagine the Dallas Mavericks would do something so stupid that the “The Sporting Scene” would take notice.
  6. Personally I was much more appalled that trans people were blamed for these things, but I also think forcing this horrific crime into that framework is at best premature and also dehumanizing to the victim, because those thoughts are not mutually exclusive.
  7. That counts, considering how much of the Reagan coalition he peeled out, especially in 96.
  8. Meanwhile on Twitter
  9. Some were, but working class people in high crime neighborhoods were broadly in favor of it. The bill was a disaster, but that and DADT were more in line with legacy Democrat coalition social politics than NAFTA or the repeal of Glass Steagall.
  10. I agree with the impact of the policy, but thats completely different from how he was perceived at the time. Second, however, I think we agree fundamentally that Bill (and Hillary) Clinton were fundamentally oriented to serve corporate interests and affluent college grads, and to the extent that they were interested in the middle class non-college graduate skilled labor force, it was in the form of expanded government services and job training.
  11. Relative to the coalition that elected him? Absolutely. And his wife even more so. and for what it’s worth- you’re looking at the crime bill from the perspective of a white progressive in 2025, not the resident of a high crime neighborhood in 1994.
  12. I generally agree with you, save 3 points: 1) first, I realize I’m in a minority here, but Im very skeptical about the salience of ideologies as a motivator for voting behaviors. 2) I don’t see Clinton era “triangulation”in terms of ideological shift but a reordering of who was important to the Democratic Party. College graduates and professionals became more important, and non-college skilled labor became much less important. 3) College graduates and professionals are generally progressive on social issues, as were the Clintons by 1992 standards, and gradually that posture became the center of the party. But that’s my whole point about the progressive reordering of Democratic Party priorities. The Democratic Party was successful when it was a coalition built around protecting the class interests of middle class and working class families, and included a majority of those who also wanted to advance various social justice causes. But the social issues weren’t litmus tests or at the center of coalition building. From 1992 to the present moment, that order gradually reversed- the Democratic Party is now a coalition orbiting around a grab bag of required social issue positions, and also includes the class interests of working people as long as they aren’t problematic and don’t try to run for office or go to the wrong college or work in the wrong industry or …
  13. What on earth? I didn’t say anything about the *white* working class or BLM. They abandoned the entire American working class, which is to say that Democrats have abandoned the class interests of minorities disproportionately. That’s quite a projection, though- curious how to got there. Anyway, do you disagree with the point that progressives have essentially substituted social issues for the working class economic interests that used to be at the center of the party coalition?
  14. Really? I thought it was it was because progressives sacrificed the well being of 2 generations of working class families for the benefit of affluent boomers in thriving cities, and used representational issues and language policing to acquire the moral license to do it.
  15. It’s 2025 and Progressives still think they can be picky
  16. Exactly. Speaking as the rare example of a middle aged white man with the quads to pull off short gym/running shorts and swimsuits, I'm happy to see them come back.
  17. Father Coughlin has entered the chat
  18. First, I’m not acting like it has nothing to do with it, I said I can’t tell “what role, if any” it played. HOWEVER, the reason why I’m making that point is because I think it dehumanizes the victim of a crime to turn them into a symbol of an issue, and is even more dehumanizing and ghoulish when we don’t know yet that the issue was involved. If the facts of the crime or the perpetrators indicated some nexus to the general environment of anti-trans violence, that would be one thing. If the facts emerge that there is a nexus, the dialogue will make sense. But right now it doesn’t. I mean fuck it, if the facts don’t matter, why not just use pick things at random? Old person gets hit by a car? Anti-trans political rhetoric. You stepped in dogshit at the park? Stochastic terrorism. It’s just this war and that lying son of a bitch Johnson. When, not if, but when right-wing political rhetoric gets people killed I’m ready to assign blame. But it’s very telling that the name of the victim, Sam Nordquist, hasn’t been mentioned since the first post on this thread, and he deserves to have his story told, not just get relegated to the role of “victim” in the story of the Trump era.
  19. 1) I don’t have enough details about this horrific crime to know what role, if any, anti-trans political rhetoric played. 2) Of course that rhetoric diffuses into all of society, but a cursory examination of the social media profiles of the accused only don’t indicate any sort of political awareness 3) what those profiles do indicate is that they are a mix of lesbian women and male sex criminals who live on the margins of society. Until we know more, this case doesn’t seem like the right vehicle for a dialogue about how our politics are causing anti-trans violence.
  20. It’s a very weird story. These five are … quite a group. Doesn’t feel political.
  21. New levels of pettiness - Grant Afseth is the Mavs blogger who Tim McMahon called a “wannabe reporter” on ESPN when actually checked with the Dallas police about McMahon’s “death threats” story.
  22. Yep, and that’s assuming Cornyn even stays in the race once Paxton announces. I have heard that Cornyn tells people privately he has no intention of retiring if Paxton challenges him, which tells me he has every intention of retiring if Paxton challenges him.
  23. Speaking of Mitch McConnell, the face that’s about to get eaten in Texas is John Cornyn’s because Ken Paxton is going to primary him and I’m going to laugh and laugh.
×
×
  • Create New...