Impeachment The Wayward Daughter Way

If you’re anything like me, you’ve been watching the ongoing saga that is the impeachment trial of President Donald John Trump. I watch it on my Firestick using the NBC app because I find the commentary from Ari Melber, Chris Hayes, and Rachel Maddow, and their accompanying panels to be the best and shadiest in the land.

Today, is the first day that the president’s counsel gets to present their defense. If you were expecting a random, largely untrue, nonsensical, so ironic it’s funny defense, you will not be disappointed.

But, that’s not what I want to talk about today. If you’ve tuned in from the beginning, you know that the GOP is closing ranks around not allowing documents and witnesses to be presented during the trial. This is stupid because what trial is ever successfully executed without documents and witnesses? Even Judge Judy requires paperwork.

mitch

In my mind, I feel like the impeachment process needs to be changed to accommodate the ever-increasing partisanship and lack of principle of these politicians. So, here’s my proposal:

The jury in the impeachment trial needs to be the citizens. American citizens are called upon every day to sit on juries across the country. Most of these people have no legal or criminal justice background but they are entrusted by a judge, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and defendants to decide the fate of cases that range from small misdemeanors to 3rd degree felonies.

There is no reason that when the leader of the country is taken to trial, American citizens, who are most directly affected by bad political behavior, shouldn’t get to directly participate in deciding his/her fate.

I believe that the same process should be undertaken to choose a jury. Have voire dire and eliminate until the judge, lawyers, and defendant are comfortable with the final selection. Start the trial and may the odds be ever in the sitting POTUS’s favor.

The reason I feel this way, as I said before, is that politicians are now so unprincipled and corrupt themselves that they can’t really be trusted to do the right thing. I am not a Democrat, nor am I a Republican. During the Obama era, I found the Republicans to be so infected with racism that they were willing to hurt their own constituents to stick it to the n*gger in the Oval Office. Now, I find the Republicans to be such cowards that they are willing to make themselves look like utter fools by saying that a trial for “high crimes and misdemeanors” doesn’t need documents and witnesses.

Not only does this demonstrate that they are unprofessional, but it shows that they are likely as unscrupulous as the POTUS most of them didn’t even like yet keep trying to defend for no reason at all.

I’m not an expert but I think we are getting more and more to a place where a group of people whose income is supplemented by lobbyist dollars and doing backroom deals, can hardly be trusted to make (legislative), enforce (executive), or interpret (judicial) the laws and policies that affect this country’s citizens.

Flea Market Pt. 3: Which Democrat Will Make It?

This morning, I awoke to the news that Corey Booker has decided to end his (ill-fated) campaign for the 2020 Democratic nomination. I honestly wasn’t surprised because if any of you have been keeping up, his numbers were dismal. His hopefulness was…encouraging though. Back in December, when asked on either CNN or MSNBC (can’t remember which), why he was staying in when his numbers were so low, he reminded me of a teenager resolutely expressing her plans to marry her boyfriend who had been in and out of juvie 6 times and was prone to disappear for 72-hour chunks of time.

booker.gif

Anywho, Booker must have had his electoral Demascus Road experience sometime over the weekend and decided that his campaign was indeed a no-go.

So where do we stand? If you read my Flea Market Pt. 1 and Flea Market Pt. 2 posts, you’ll know we started with a mess that became a bigger mess and slowly, but surely, the mess is being cleaned up (if it could ever be).

Big hitters Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders are still in the race (duh). Notorious white man who doesn’t get it but thinks being gay means otherwise Pete Buttigieg is still in it. Then, you have Amy Klobuchar holding on like a woman at a 48-hour Pentacostal revival on her knees with a prayer cloth waiting for Jesus to zap the diabetes out of her. Tulsi Gabbard is somewhere still in there even though Dems were quite nonplussed by her “Present” declaration at the impeachment vote. Andrew Yang is surprisingly doing well and still in the race. Latecoming billionaires Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer are also running to the extent that I can’t watch Hulu or my trash TV on TLC without seeing a commercial for one or both of them.

I haven’t decided who I’m voting for (or if I’m voting but we’ll talk about that later). But, here’s my take on each of the remaining candidates:

biden

Joe Biden: Frankly, I think Biden missed his shot. I think there are certain grand things in life where timing is everything. I think Biden would have easily slid into the POTUS chair had he run in 2016. He didn’t use that opportunity though and I think that door has closed. Boomers and Blacks love him but with a new crop of younger voters coming in and ideas such as Medicare for all, reparations, and student loan forgiveness seriously on the table, unless Biden does an abrupt about face, I don’t see it for him. Plus, his history in politics will ALWAYS follow him. Here’s his platform.

warren

Elizabeth Warren: I’m willing to forgive her for pretending to be Native American. I mean…she wouldn’t be white if she didn’t. A lot of people like her Medicare for all idea. I think it’s a good idea, too. I mean, dying or having to go bankrupt because you need a surgery or expensive medication is ridiculous in a developed country. I also like that she wants to address the maternal mortality rate for Black women that is largely driven by racism in the medical industry. What I think is an issue is that her student loan forgiveness plan doesn’t go far enough. $50k is a pretty penny but from what I’ve gathered is on the low end of what A WHOLE LOT of borrowers owe. However, visit her campaign “Plans” page here to get a peek of everything she wants to do.

bernie

Bernie Sanders: If I had to vote today, he’d likely be my choice. I was reading his platform page and in addition to the forgiveness of all student loan debt, he also wants to forgive medical debt and replace for-profit credit bureaus. I’m still mad at Equifax for promising us $125 for their fuckup and then figuring out they couldn’t pay their bill and deciding to not pay us (oh the irony) so putting them out of business sounds great to me. Several Black people have expressed concerns about certain comments that Sanders have made that sound less than progressive. I, however, never expect to get anything racially progressive from white people; especially not a white man his age. I still think that he’s the best choice of the field at this point. Let’s just hope the DNC doesn’t….nevermind. Here’s his platform page.

nah

Pete Buttigieg: No.

yang.gif

Andrew Yang: His page has a plethora of things that he either wants to do or “explore.” For example, one of his big three issues is “human-centered capitalism” which aims to put people before money (ie. instead of the health of the economy being measured by the stock market, it would be measured by how well people are actually doing). But, perhaps, his biggest claim to fame is his desire to give each American (over 18) “universal basic income.” This entails each American getting $1,000/mo free and clear. In theory, this extra $1,000 would allow people to have a little more breathing room each month. Every single person I know who supports Yang cites this $1,000/mo as their reason. Do I think he’ll win? Neaux. But, he may be forcing the eventual winner to step up their game a little. You can find the rest of his platform here.

chapelle

Amy Klobuchar: I Googled her website to see her platform. My only option was to sign up as a supporter or visit her store. So…..moving on….

skeptical.gif

Tulsi Gabbard: Let me just start out by saying that I don’t think she’s serious. It’s like when you do an internship in a field you’re not really passionate about just to be able to put it on your resume in case you need it one day.  I looked at her website and she  seems to care a lot about war and war-adjacent topics (makes sense since she’s a veteran). What got me was the following line under her healthcare section:

“I will also incentivize good health choices and lifestyles for a healthier, wealthier nation!”

Whew, girl! Have you met 2016, yet? That’s the perfect steak for the people ready to accuse someone of -shaming to latch onto but you know…

mb.gif

Michael Bloomberg: Yes, I know MB is the source of “Stop and Frisk.” But, Judge Judy is endorsing him so he must be alright, no? I’m just kidding. I have looked at his page though and I’ll have to admit that a Jewish candidate addressing redlining and other past racial injustices is interesting. He’s also addressing Black maternal mortality rates as well. Many people have wondered why he entered so late and suspect him of trying to buy the election. I don’t think that’s the case. Frankly, I feel like the fun part of elections is people who likely won’t win to make issues big enough so that the people who might win are under pressure to take those issues seriously. Click here for more.

Farallon-our-people.jpg

Tom Steyer: All I know is the company that he founded and worked for only has like 3 non-white people on their site and I can’t imagine it was much better when he was there so….

evil eye

The cynical conspiracy theorist in me feels like Biden has already been chosen. I don’t know that for a fact but there’s a reason Trump presumed he’d be his political rival.

Anyway, I still think Trump is going to win in 2020.

 

 

Cabbage Soup Diet & Politics: I Agree With Obama

 

giphy (19).gif

This week, several publications reported on statements that former President Barack Obama made at a private dinner geared towards Liberals who were rich enough to attend (ok, I added that last part). Here’s what he said to the donors at the Democracy Alliance gathering:

“This is still a country that is less revolutionary than it is interested in improvement,” he said at the annual meeting of the Democracy Alliance. “The average American doesn’t think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it.”

Of course, liberals (particularly of the SJW type), jumped all over that comment and Obama in general. They viewed it as weak and proof (retroactive, of course) that Obama was and is every bit the “puppet” that they claim all politicians are. These people swear fo’ gawd that they indeed want to tear the system down, and some even assert that this is proof that Obama is really more of a less right-leaning Republican.

Well, this will probably get me #cancelled but I actually agree with Obama. Why? Let’s look at what he said. He said this is still a country that is less revolutionary than it is interested in improvement. I see no lie. If America were interested in revolution, it’d have already happened by now.

The dictionary defines “revolution” as the forcible overthrow of the government. By that definition, Black folks alone would have burned this place to the ground long before any of us were born and if not, they’d (we’d) have done it by now.

200w

Even in the midst of the severe income inequality that everyone claims to be pissed about, the most physical demonstration of that anger was Occupy Wall St. where a bunch of mostly white kids agreed to sit on the sidewalk in NY’s financial district holding signs, chanting, playing lutes, and not showering. And if I had to guess, because of white privilege, most of those kids are just fine now and their participation is now something they can tell their children and grandchildren they did to seem cool.

Some revolution!

Obama went further to advise current candidates to watch the policies they are pushing. He verbalized immigration as one of these policy hot buttons. For example, Julian Castro, once an Obama official, has proposed decriminalizing illegal entry (which I find funny because as much as progressives tout the more liberal policies of other countries, they forget that most countries view illegal entry as a crime and will send you back…but anywho…).

giphy (20).gif

But here’s the best part of what Obama said:

“Voters, including Democrats, are not driven by the same views that are reflected on certain left-leaning Twitter feeds, or the activist wing of our party,” he said. “And that’s not a criticism to the activist wing. Their job is to poke and prod and text and inspire and motivate. But the candidate’s job, whoever that ends up being, is to get elected.

200 (1).gif

I think that last line is the closer. My personal opinion is that to be successful in politics, you have to find the public sweet spot. Many of the people criticizing Obama forget that he won two presidential elections and in his other political positions, he only lost once. It’s obvious that his statements at this dinner, along with statements he made back in October about cancel culture, are really his advice against trying to run on unsustainable or sensational platforms. I’ve said before that a candidate who has never held a position can promise the moon and stars but when they get in the office and see what’s what, they may realize that what they promised is not feasible.

Voters like myself are not listening for buzzwords and looking for shiny objects and moving parts. We want to hear realistic and actionable platforms that make sense and don’t sound like something picked up from watching a Barney marathon while high on LSD.

giphy (21).gif

A lot of progressives want to see a cabbage soup diet platform but since the consensus seems to be just defeating Trump (or in his absence the GOP challenger), that strategy where you treat the constituents like 6 year-olds let loose in the Lego Store, is not going to work.

I do believe that people have high expectations for the 2020 campaign season and election, but the Dems (should have) learned in 2016 that the opposing candidate being an unqualified buffoon is not enough to win. So I think it’s worth paying attention to Obama’s advice.

 

Stop Whining: The Wayward Daughter’s Thoughts On Spoilers

Power, Grey’s Anatomy, HTGAWM, American Horror Story…

These are a few of the shows I luuuurve. Although I have access to cable, I hate commercials so I end up streaming them the day (or two or three) after they air. I’m good with that.

I’m also good with people sharing their thoughts on the episodes on social media even though I haven’t seen the episode.

Why?

Cause I’m not a big baby.

giphy (17)

Granted, I’m clearly a creative. It’s impossible to spoil a television show for me because I have to experience it myself for it to matter. So, you can tell me the ending of every television show that’s hot right now. I’m still going to watch it because the creative journey is everything for me.

 

But, you crybabies who get on social media and demand that everyone take a vow of television silence until YOU see an episode are annoying. It’s nobody’s fault that you had to work, or cook the Shabbat brisket, or go to choir practice when a lot of people’s favorite shows are broadcast.

“If YoU tAlK aBoUt PoWer, I wIlL bLoCk Yeeeeew.”

giphy (18).gif

 

Sitcho’ ass down somewhere! Who are you? Princess of TV? Queen of networks?

I picture your puerile asses standing on your couch with a blanket tied around your shoulders like Superman holding your remote control like a sceptre and crying while you tell everyone else whose credit card information was current on their Hulu account to not talk about an episode that’s two days old or to wait until you decide to watch it.

204371c3eb3e3cf8f24b954965601c48

You have a choice. You can unplug from social media within the 24-48 hours of the programming so you won’t know anything until you watch. But apparently, that’s too hard for many of you and I don’t understand why.

Either way, stop trying to boss the rest of the people around because you had shit to do the night your show came on and are running behind. You’re the same people who show up late to a dinner party and get mad because everybody else started eating without you.

Seek help!

 

Can We NOT? Rules For Election 2020

We’re about a year out from the 2020 presidential election. Having lived through the 2016 election and the myriad e-slap fights between the people who voted for Bernie Sanders or abstained and the Hillary supporters, I feel like it’s not too early to express my desires for next year’s campaign and election cycle. 

I was hoping to wait until the Democrats had decided on a sole candidate but something deep inside me feels that we need to address this now and probably have a couple of review sessions in 2020. With that said, I present to you the top 3 things that I DO NOT want to witness during the 2020 campaign season.

giphy (16).gif

  1. Using living or dead ancestors to berate people who have decided to abstain or vote for the candidate you don’t personally care for.

Listen. We ALL know that our foreparents fought wars, died, starved, bled, etc. for our right to vote. African-Americans especially know because some of those people who went through all of white people’s bullshit to gain basic rights are still alive and kicking and have told us the stories. There’s really no need to finger-wag adults and try to use the fact that our grandparents had to sit at the back of the bus to guilt someone into voting. 

Although we may not agree with someone’s decision to not vote, it is THEIR decision, just like it’s OUR decision to exercise our vote. We can bust out 9837573 reasons to vote, and they can likely bust out the same number of reasons to abstain. And even if they cannot, it remains their option. 

And just to be petty for a minute, we do a whole lot of shit that our ancestors would frown upon but we’re grown people who deserve to have our agency respected regardless. It’s okay to be not okay with people abstaining. It’s not okay to be not okay with people exercising their choice.

yLceXci.gif

  1. Arguing with people about what they SHOULD care about when selecting their choice of candidate.

Just because you think free universal pre-k and all-genitals welcome restrooms is important doesn’t mean that everyone else does.

Trust that people can prioritize their concerns just like you did. I’ll be open and say that I don’t plan on voting for anybody who is too far left or too far right. I think that because of the climate on social media, there are candidates who are publicly applauding shit they don’t actually support (which is a huge part of politics, I get it). 

Those candidates may not get my vote. 

On top of that, arguing with someone about what should be important to them seems like more of a waste of time than contacting PayPal customer service. You can argue with me until you’re blue in the face, I don’t give a fuck about you wanting to smoke weed legally. While I think it’s stupid that weed is considered a Schedule I drug and it’s wasteful that people are doing major time for it, I don’t require a promise of legalization of it from a candidate to support him/her. 

In short, you chose your hot buttons; let others choose theirs. 

3o7TKQV9L46v1ZZR2E.gif

  1. (If your chosen candidate doesn’t win) Arguing why it’s everybody else’s fault for not voting for your candidate of choice.

We saw a lot of this after Hillary lost to Donald Trump for several months after he was inaugurated. 

Hillary supporters blamed Sanders supporters for either not voting for Hillary, voting for Trump as punishment, or abstaining altogether. 

It was one of the most entertaining displays of crying over spilled milk I’d ever seen. 

But it didn’t change the outcome and here we are, three years later. 

I have no issue if you want to be known for your advocacy of a certain candidate or like to engage in intellectual chow-chow with your friends (or foes) about political strategy. But, the hostile back-and-forth with the opposing teams after the race has been decided? Let’s not. 

I understand that politics is a hot topic but if the 2016 outcome taught me anything, it’s that some of you need a triple latte, a colonic, and a reality check – severely.

Let’s try to be and do better this time around regardless of what party with which you affiliate yourself. 

Plot Twist: The Internet Isn’t Just For Arguing

Mucous. Feces. Urine. Flatulence. Purulent.

All of these words are the technical names for words that we use in our everyday speech in a colloquial way.

Most of us know this. Most of us know that the colloquialisms we use in place of these words aren’t the actual or technical terms for these things. Most of know that if we were in a classroom or seminar where any of these things were broached (another word for brought up), they’d likely not be referred to by their colloquial names, but by their technical names.

So, you can imagine my befuddlement (that’s another word for confusion) when I came across the following graphic (that’s another word for picture) on my Facebook timeline.

Screenshot_20190929-234423_Facebook

I clawed (another word for scratch) my tegument (another word for scalp) and wondered if we are really at the point now where academic language in an academic textbook used in an academic setting is “pretentious” and “inaccessible.”

Let’s start with pretentious. No. It’s an ACADEMIC textbook. Those of us who know about code-switching understand that you don’t present yourself the same way in all settings. When you go in for an interview, you shake the interviewer’s hand, you don’t hug them or fist bump them.

JealousSophisticatedGander-small.gif

In a book on language arts, you aren’t going to get, “Timmy was chillaxin’ on the block with his homies when his mama told him to bring his narrow behind inside.”

Sure, that may be how the writer of the textbook speaks when he or she is at home around their friends and family but since the purpose of a language arts textbook is to apprise (another word for inform) the reader of standard English grammar, the writer instead offers, “Timmy was relaxing with his friends outside of his house, when his mother angrily demanded that he come back inside.”

tenor (1)

Pretentious would be me talking to my friend and telling her that I was clawing my tegument.

Inaccessible? Well, I don’t think it’s an unfair assumption that if you end up in college-level physiology, you have an above-average reading and comprehension level. Further, we live in an era that has thesaurus.com and dictionary.com and both are accessible, literally at your fingertips.

tenor (2)

We are fortunate enough to live in an era where you can Google almost anything and before you can blink your eyes twice, 92387877499937489 results of varying degrees on the topic you Googled will populate before your eyes.

Does that makeup for systemic inequalities in education? No. But let’s not overplay this thing either. If you need information, you can find it for free these days.

giphy (8).gif

Now, here’s the part that I’m known for: shade.

I will never not laugh at this generation who will engage in days-long debates with strangers over -ist, -phobic, gender, agender, sex, asexual, demisexual, pre-sexual, post-sexual, he, she, ze, thee, thou, fat-shaming, skinny-shaming, tall privilege, short privilege, etc…

but want to boo-hoo and tee-hee because an ACADEMIC textbook uses ACADEMIC words to explain ACADEMIC concepts (another word for thought or idea).

How sway? Just like you found a resource to convince you that men can have periods and babies, you can figure out what that word you’re not familiar with means.

giphy (9)

Matter of fact, in the time it took you to read and (somehow) agree with that pitiful tweet, you could have looked up what you didn’t understand in your textbook…or, you know, asked someone.

Priorities.

What’s It Worth? The Colorado Baker is Being Sued Again and I Honestly Don’t Know Why

By now, we’ve all heard of the Colorado bakery that was sued for declining to make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding. If you haven’t (you really should read more), Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop was sued by Charlie Craig and David Mullins for refusing to make a cake for their wedding citing his (Phillip’s) Christian faith. This happened in the summer of 2012.

Of course, the couple sued and after various wins and appeals, a Christian organization (Alliance Defending Freedom) took up the case on Phillips’ behalf and got the case to the Supreme Court. In July of 2018, the bakery owner won with the SCOTUS ruling 7-2 in his favor. It was determined that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission did not apply the Constitution with religious neutrality in its evaluation of the case.

Jack Phillips

Fast forward to July of 2019. This cakeshop owner was again sued by a transgender individual, Autumn Scardina, for declining to make a cake celebrating a gender transition. This will be the 2nd time Scardina has sued him, first through the same Colorado commission and now, with Scardina’s own legal team.

That makes three times that this bakery owner has been sued; basically, for the same thing.

This time, the Supreme Court has declined to hear the case (I don’t blame them) and Phillips’ position is that Scardina is trying to rehash something that has already been settled.

Autumn-scardina

It should be noted that Autumn Scardina is an attorney, called in to order the cake, volunteered that this birthday cake was to celebrate gender transition and after the employee informed Scardina that they did not do gender transition cakes, Scardina called back more than once to the point where the bakery allegedly hung up on Scardina.

There is no final outcome on this current case yet.

Now, regardless of how you feel about any of the players in the aforementioned rundown, if you’re anything like me, you have to be wondering if any of this is worth it?

I am not defending the bakery (I mean, I’d make a cake to celebrate a worm if it pays…and I HATE worms). With that said, once the SCOTUS ruled in his favor over a same-sex wedding cake, it seems like that’d be a loud and clear message to other individuals in certain demographics that they may have an issue getting a cake celebrating something that goes against what we all know is evangelical Christian philosophy. I mean if gay marriage was too much, surely saying that you’re a man who feels like a woman on the inside is a non-starter.

At first, I thought the ploy was to try to sue this bakery owner into the poorhouse just to make a point. Then, I thought that it was a “get money” scheme. You know, walk into the bakery you know is discriminatory, have them discriminate against you, sue, become social media famous, win and buy the Range Rover of your dreams.

davemoney.gif

But why? Lawsuits are a headache. They take time and money; no matter which side you’re on. Who would purposely place that type of stress upon themselves; especially with a Supreme Court precedent in place?

A bigger question I have is, what’s with this zeal to give people who you feel are discriminatory or hateful your money? If the bus boycott taught us anything, it’s that when businesses LOSE money, they are more likely to change. If money talks and bullshit walks, what’s up with being so desperate to make a “point” by wanting to… pay? I won’t even mention the free publicity that this bakery owner has received due to being sued twice by someone who likely doesn’t have snowball’s chance in hell of getting anything out of it.

200.gif

This newest cake is being called a birthday cake…for the birth of Scardina’s new gender. Scardina’s lawyers are trying to claim that when Phillips said in the SCOTUS case that he would sell any of his items to the LGBTQ community but that the religious symbolism of a wedding was what caused him to decline, he was lying to the public. Considering what the “birthday cake” is for, that sounds like a reach. However, I’m neither a lawyer nor a judge (judgmental, yes).

Without accusing of Scardina of anything, this seems…suspicious. I plan to be on the lookout for the resolution of this case.