Uncategorized

by

Right Wing discovers empathy

by Guest Blogger Peter David

I have to admit, it amuses me that the right wing has suddenly developed the one thing that they previously despised: empathy.

It’s just fascinating. When Trump sneered at Hillary’s pneumonia, they cheered. When Trump memorably lampooned a journalist who had a physical handicap, they roared with laughter. When Trump attacked the mourning parents of a fallen Gold Star warrior, they nodded in agreement.

But suddenly their noble leader is downed with Coronavirus, and their hackles are up. Granted, left wingers shouldn’t be chortling in delight over the fact that he’s down with the virus he dismissed as a Democratic hoax. They shouldn’t wish him dead. However, making the comment that this was inevitable–that when you ignore the advice of scientists, downplay the disease’s viciousness and have both yourself and your minions ignore the steps you should take to avoid contracting it–that’s a valid point to make. Commenting on the fact that Trump basically brought this on himself is a legitimate observation. Yet suddenly the right wing, who delighted in their leader’s bullying tactics, have melted as snowflakes typically do.

Joe Biden has wished Trump well. Does anyone think that if the situation were reversed, Trump would do likewise? Of course not. If Biden were downed with Covid, Trump would be the very first out the gate to deride him and hold him up as proof that scientists don’t know what they’re talking about. “So much for his masks!” he would declare. It would be held up as proof that Biden is weak, run down, susceptible to a disease that knew better than to try and tangle with Trump. Furthermore his campaign would produce “Biden is sick” ads that would run 24/7.

Currently the Biden campaign has pulled all its Trump attack ads. If Biden were down with it, Trump’s campaign would step up the attack ads. Indeed, they’re currently continuing with their attack ads even though Biden has backburnered his. And yet still the butt-hurt right wing howls over the mistreatment and lack of sympathy they’re receiving from the left. Where is the empathy that they, who have never extended it, are now not receiving in turn? They have repeatedly expressed their contempt for even the concept of the moral high ground; so why isn’t the left sticking to that now?

Why don’t we show them how people in a civilized society should behave, so that they can view it as a sign of weakness and continue to come up with plans to “own the libs” in their deeds and actions?

Even better: they continue to try and blame things on Biden. If Biden were a gentleman, declared one pundit, he would postpone the election. Even though no election has been postponed in the history of the country. Even though Biden has as much power to postpone an election as I do. Even though millions have already voted. Even though if Biden were ill instead, Trump would laugh at the idea. Instead we’re getting the sentiment of, “How unsympathetic to an illness can those lousy Democrats be?”

Exactly this unsympathetic: For months we’ve been worried about an October surprise. Well, we got it. And the surprise is, it isn’t remotely surprising. It was inevitable.

The right wing wants sympathy? Let’s give them as much sympathy as Trump gave John McCain, dying of brain cancer. Or Herman Cain, dying of misplaced faith. It’s one of the oldest sayings in the book, right wing: What goes around comes around.

Peter David is a writer whose novels include many of his own stories as well as novels in the world of Star Trek and Babylon 5 (and others).  Besides novels, Peter has written comic books (Incredible Hulk, Aquaman, Supergirl), television shows (Babylon 5, Space Cases, Ben 10), short stories, blogs, and more. Check out his web page and his wikipedia page and prepare to be overwhelmed.

by

Karma

Clay Bennett

by

The Antifa Flag

There are flags for Trump people and there’s the “don’t tread on me” flag and the Blue Lives Matter flag and the nazi flag and the Confederate flag…

We liberal antifa types have our own flag, too.

The right has grabbed the flag and has acted as if you have to agree with them to be “patriotic.” Many liberals are afraid to fly it because they don’t want people to think they’re in the “My Country, Love it or Leave It” crowd.

We need to reclaim it.

This is the flag that fought against the racist confederates who committed treason against our country. This is the flag that fought against fascists in Europe. Not a flag with a blue stripe. Not a flag with “Don’t Tread on Me” written across it.

This is our flag.

by

Life in Bizarro America

118280429_10158282367463500_5661980830514850298_n

Jesse Duquette

by

One nation except for you

“One nation, except Jews, with liberty and justice for all.”

What? That is insulting? It’s unconstitutional?

There are more Americans who consider themselves atheists or agnostics than there are American Jews. (And there’s probably a lot more in the closet, afraid to admit their beliefs because of the discrimination they’d face if they did.) But apparently non-believers don’t count and don’t matter to many Americans.

Because right now, what many of us hear when the pledge is read is “One nation, except you.”

The pledge of Allegiance didn’t used to have those words “Under God.” Those were added in the 50s, during the McCarthy era, to show that we weren’t like those godless commies. But what it did was immediately exclude Americans. The irony of excluding Americans and then immediately saying “indivisible” is lost on them.

So be kind. Refuse to say “Under God,” explain why to other Americans, and be inclusive instead of exclusive.

by

Cold dead hands

Zygls

Adam Zyglis

by

Hydroxychloroquine madness

If hydroxychloroquine worked, we liberals would be thrilled. We’d be the most pro-hydroxychloroquine pushers out there, because we actually like healing people (hence our drive to pass national health care for the past 100 years).

We like facts. And if we are proven wrong by a fact, we generally change our views to fit the facts instead of just ignoring or denying the facts.hydroxIf the most Trump-supporting scientist* discovers a cure, we will cheer. And if suddenly it is discovered that whoops, hydroxychloroquine really does work, we’ll be lined up to take it and will encourage everyone else to do so as well.

Whenever I say this, I get people sending me links to articles about how this trial or that trial looked promising, and then they say “therefore, we should all be using it.”  No. No, that’s not how it works.

To reiterate: When and if the medical community as a whole recommends it, then I will be thrilled. Why shouldn’t I be? Don’t we all want a cure?

But that hasn’t happened yet and for anyone to recommend taking something that the FDA has not approved for the virus is irresponsible and reckless.

And it certainly doesn’t help when the people most recommending this are Donald Trump and crazy people who claim that viruses are spread by demon sperm and there is some vast conspiracy to keep this from the public.

If there is some vast conspiracy to keep it from everyone, then why? What reason? I don’t get it. Why wouldn’t (a) we want everyone to get better and thus save lives and the economy and (b) the companies want it approved so they can make money?

If there is a conspiracy, who does it benefit? The argument that Big Pharma is keeping this from being used makes absolutely no sense, especially since much research is done in the rest of the world and in universities where medicine isn’t about profit. In the rest of the civilized world, finding a cure will save governments lots of money, so there is absolutely no reason to hide a cure if one existed.

If it is approved and accepted, obviously we will all cheer and say good. It’s not like we’re going to ignore science like Trump supporters.

*if there is one

by

Owned

owned

Matt Wuerker

by

You can be against police brutality while still supporting police

I’m shocked I have to say this, but obviously: Not all police.

If I say I am against police brutality, it doesn’t mean I am against police any more than saying I am against sexual assault means I am against sex.

I would think that most police would also be against police brutality, right? Just like most of the lawyers I know are against dishonest lawyers.

But whenever I say something like “Gee, those police sure are attacking peaceful protesters” I get “Why are you against police?”  I’m not. Why is that so hard to understand?

Maybe people don’t want to understand. Maybe they just can’t figure out a way to defend these secret cops who confront peaceful protesters with rubber bullets and tear gas while dressed as if they’re going into a combat zone.

police brutalityI deal with police every day. I’m a criminal defense attorney. And the vast majority of police are decent, good people that I have no problem working with.

But not all of them.

I see police as falling into two categories, really. There are the “Boy Scouts” who are doing their very best to be good guys and help people. And then there are the “bullies” who became officers because they like the power and like pushing people around. Anyone who denies that the second group exists is not paying attention.

Speaking out against the bullies is something we should all be doing. It’s something the “Boy Scouts” should be doing too, but too often, they remain silent and support their fellow officers when they should be speaking up.

And this is nothing new. History is full of stories of police, guards, and others with authority who abuse their authority — especially in totalitarian regimes of the kind Trump apparently wishes he ran.

So when I post something like the cartoon above, I am not attacking all police — I am pointing out the hypocrisy of a protest movement against police brutality being met with police brutality, thus proving the point. Nowhere in there is the statement that all police do this.

The sad thing is that this police action has led to more violence. The mostly peaceful protests have been met with officers in riot gear tear-gassing mayors and teachers and mothers who are armed with nothing more than leaf blowers, and now some people are saying, “Fine, you want violence? We’ll give you violence.”  This doesn’t help. Meeting violence with violence is exactly what they want, because then Trump can go on TV and say “See? Re-elect me to protect you against these protesters who are protesting me and my policies and who will most likely go away if I do.” (There’s not a lot of logic on the Trump side.)

But back to the main point: Shouldn’t we all be against police brutality? Isn’t that something everyone should say is not the kind of thing we want in a democratic society?

 

by

The hypocritic oath

110179110_10213548404784474_7395935668961758247_n

Tommy Siegel