Voter fraud of any kind is rare, and there's every indication that recent history is free of fraudulent wins...until this year, that is. The culprit? One of the very traitors who've been driving our Republic to a divorce for years.
Conservatives have been complaining about supposed widespread voter fraud for years; yet now that a Republican in North Carolina's 9th district is actually committing coordinated voter fraud, we hear nothing but crickets.
It's no recent news that the conservative media and political elites have been fibbing to and bullying Americans with the myth of current voter fraud in order to push the onerous voter ID laws that suppress low-income and minority voters.
Just as insidious as the targeted suppression of American voters and the damage done to popular confidence in election results though, is the power to shroud crime and guilt that conservatives have created.
I call it malicious projection, and here's how it works. Conservatives project accusations of crimes and evils they're committing at anyone they're afraid of, and then when one of them gets caught they plead "both sides."
See, contrary to popular belief in some parts, conservatives aren't stupid; they know that sooner or later one of them will be caught red-handed, in this case it's Republican Mark Harris and his cronies committing voter fraud. All the whining about supposed voter fraud on the Democratic side serves to manipulate those who watch and listen to rightwing fake news; after years of lies, rightwing consumers have come away with an ethereal certainty that Democrats win by voter fraud. Remember, the truth doesn't matter -- they just have to repeat the lies often enough that it lodges in the brain. So now that Republican frauds are starting to get caught, Fake News, Hannity, and all the rest can use that ethereal certainty to claim the both-sides excuse. "Sure, Mark Harris is a bad apple, but both sides use voter fraud to win, see..."
Malicious projection is a perverse new twist on the boy who cried wolf fable -- the boy keeps crying wolf until one of his dogs gets caught killing someone, then he pleads "Well those wolves kill people all the time!"
Wednesday, December 5, 2018
Tuesday, July 3, 2018
Truth, Lies, and Family Values
First, the truth. A citizen group called Outlaw Dirty Money is gathering petitions for an amendment to the Arizona State Constitution, appropriately called the Stop Political Dirty Money Amendment. I would have called it something with a little more pop, but it does get the point across, and honestly at that. You can read the text of the proposed amendment yourself on the linked website, but in a nutshell here's what it does:
Now, the lies. The Arizona Legislative Council, an appointed body made up of ten Republicans and four Democrats, is pushing Proposition 306, a measure that would steal authority from the Constitutionally-endowed Citizens Clean Elections Commission and then sneak that stolen authority into Governor Ducey's Regulatory Review Council. Of course, Ducey and the Republican-domineered Council know that the Commission is wildly popular, and nobody in their right mind would support their effort to neuter it.
And so the so-called 'summary' that describes Prop 306 to the public is deliberately misleading:
And now we come to family values. We hear conservative elites bandy about the term all the time, but what do they mean? Well, in the conservative worldview, the family like all other things is hierarchical. Father knows best, mother exchanges deference and obedience for a patronizing kind of love, and the children are wanton amoral pets who must be distrusted and mercilessly overruled, manipulated, and disciplined. No really; if you don't believe me, go read Dare to Discipline. Now even most conservative families don't strictly adhere to this patriarchy, because despite what their elites would like us to believe, Feminism and our larger progressive culture has changed our society in ways both grand and subtle. But this strict family ideal does explain the ongoing machinations of conservative elites in Arizona and across the nation.
It's why the conservative elites of Arizona have been steadily chipping away, lying to and manipulating us, undermining our hard-earned rights since 1998 and before. We, the children of this great state and of the wider republic, are being abused by the so-called conservative movement. Because by their way of thinking, our limited ability to check their power via citizen initiative is too much; Daddy Ducey must rob us of that freedom. We are to be silent until spoken to. Hence, Prop 306 would strip us of our only check against the legislative overreach we experience daily.
We don't hear about progressive family values nearly as often, but they are both powerful and superior. In the progressive family, parents exist to love, respect, and compliment each others' abilities and contributions. Children are to be protected, nurtured, educated with fact, honestly guided to the full extent of their capacity, and ultimately treated like adults. In fact this is the only way that children become adults. Thus, the Stop Political Dirty Money Amendment is a shining example of progressive values at work: Its writers recognize us as both the sons and daughters of Arizona and as responsible adults, and their effort is to empower us with the facts that we need to be responsible voters, and to penalize irresponsible elites who hide the dark interests who have bought them.
So this Novemeber, remember your family values and vote accordingly. When you see all those conservative elites on the ballot, when you see the SPDM Amendment, ask yourself: Do you want to be treated like a nuisance that can't be trusted with facts or responsibility? Or do you want to be treated like a valued family member and responsible adult who can hold corrupt politicians accountable?
And also keep an eye out for other important citizen ballot initiatives, including two separate Voters of Arizona initiatives to roll back last year's successful scheming by the conservative elites to infringe on our citizen ballot rights.
- All persons, businesses, and other organizations that spend $2,500+ to influence any election(s) must be publicly disclosed by said campaign. This is regardless of any middle-men who may pass dirty money from shady interests to corrupt campaigns -- if middlemen are involved, they must name the original shady interest who passed them the dirty money. The $2,500 figure resets with each 2-year election cycle.
- Both individual citizens and the Arizona Clean Elections Commission will have the authority to exact a civil fine from any dirty campaign, ranging from the undisclosed money that triggers the fine to three times that amount.
Now, the lies. The Arizona Legislative Council, an appointed body made up of ten Republicans and four Democrats, is pushing Proposition 306, a measure that would steal authority from the Constitutionally-endowed Citizens Clean Elections Commission and then sneak that stolen authority into Governor Ducey's Regulatory Review Council. Of course, Ducey and the Republican-domineered Council know that the Commission is wildly popular, and nobody in their right mind would support their effort to neuter it.
And so the so-called 'summary' that describes Prop 306 to the public is deliberately misleading:
- It omits the Clean Elections Commission's full purpose and scope -- to not only oversee the financing of political campaigns, but also to educate voters and to enforce the campaign finance laws that Arizona citizens voted into law in 1998.
- It omits the theft of the Commission's authority to make rules, instead giving the impression that the Commission would gain more rule-making authority.
- And it obscures the snookery of that authority to Ducey by failing to mention that the Regulatory Review Council isn't some impartial bipartisan entity -- it's a gaggle of biased bureaucrats hand-picked by the Governor.
And now we come to family values. We hear conservative elites bandy about the term all the time, but what do they mean? Well, in the conservative worldview, the family like all other things is hierarchical. Father knows best, mother exchanges deference and obedience for a patronizing kind of love, and the children are wanton amoral pets who must be distrusted and mercilessly overruled, manipulated, and disciplined. No really; if you don't believe me, go read Dare to Discipline. Now even most conservative families don't strictly adhere to this patriarchy, because despite what their elites would like us to believe, Feminism and our larger progressive culture has changed our society in ways both grand and subtle. But this strict family ideal does explain the ongoing machinations of conservative elites in Arizona and across the nation.
It's why the conservative elites of Arizona have been steadily chipping away, lying to and manipulating us, undermining our hard-earned rights since 1998 and before. We, the children of this great state and of the wider republic, are being abused by the so-called conservative movement. Because by their way of thinking, our limited ability to check their power via citizen initiative is too much; Daddy Ducey must rob us of that freedom. We are to be silent until spoken to. Hence, Prop 306 would strip us of our only check against the legislative overreach we experience daily.
We don't hear about progressive family values nearly as often, but they are both powerful and superior. In the progressive family, parents exist to love, respect, and compliment each others' abilities and contributions. Children are to be protected, nurtured, educated with fact, honestly guided to the full extent of their capacity, and ultimately treated like adults. In fact this is the only way that children become adults. Thus, the Stop Political Dirty Money Amendment is a shining example of progressive values at work: Its writers recognize us as both the sons and daughters of Arizona and as responsible adults, and their effort is to empower us with the facts that we need to be responsible voters, and to penalize irresponsible elites who hide the dark interests who have bought them.
So this Novemeber, remember your family values and vote accordingly. When you see all those conservative elites on the ballot, when you see the SPDM Amendment, ask yourself: Do you want to be treated like a nuisance that can't be trusted with facts or responsibility? Or do you want to be treated like a valued family member and responsible adult who can hold corrupt politicians accountable?
And also keep an eye out for other important citizen ballot initiatives, including two separate Voters of Arizona initiatives to roll back last year's successful scheming by the conservative elites to infringe on our citizen ballot rights.
Saturday, February 3, 2018
Breastfeeding in Public
Every now and then this issue comes up: A woman is breastfeeding her baby in public, someone else sees breast-flesh and feels offended, and then some nasty words are said. Cue Facebook war.
Just last week, a notoriously conservative fast-food restaurant kicked a woman and her baby out for breastfeeding without a cover.
Before writing this, I had assumed that public breastfeeding had always been part of the traditional patriarchal strategy to keep women home, barefooted and pregnant. But after a bit of googling, it seems I was wrong -- at least in the western world. Sometime during or after the industrial revolution, breastfeeding acquired a stigma that notably ramped up and hasn’t much ramped down since. Before then, well, it’s hard to know just how accepted any given practice was in Ye Olden Tymes -- but there’s plenty of reason to think that plenty of people never had a problem with the practice.
In fact, there is a long history of Christian art depicting Mary proudly breastfeeding the baby Jesus. Most famously, this image appears in the Cathedral of Santa Maria. Also notable is the 11th-century Catholic monk, Bernard of Clairvaux, who claimed a vision of Mary breastfeeding him. (See the second image.) This breastfeeding was said to have worked a miracle on Bernard, and this myth was used throughout the Middle Ages to reinforce belief in miracles. Which puts the stigma that has grown up around breastfeeding in a rather un-Christian light, if such things matter to you.
When you get right down to it, this issue is all about family values. Babies need to be fed; that's what breast milk is for. And if a mother needs to feed her child in public, she deserves the freedom to do so -- without a cover, if her baby won’t eat in the dark. If seeing a mother breastfeeding her baby makes me uncomfortable, I can only imagine that her other options are ten times as uncomfortable or inconvenient for her than it is for me to simply look away.
As is often the case with these kind of issues, righteousness can be found in the empathetic weighing of harms:
As the saying goes, 'it takes a village to raise a child,' and while mothers don’t expect strangers to nurse their children, the least a stranger can do is let a mother nurse her own child in peace.
Just last week, a notoriously conservative fast-food restaurant kicked a woman and her baby out for breastfeeding without a cover.
Before writing this, I had assumed that public breastfeeding had always been part of the traditional patriarchal strategy to keep women home, barefooted and pregnant. But after a bit of googling, it seems I was wrong -- at least in the western world. Sometime during or after the industrial revolution, breastfeeding acquired a stigma that notably ramped up and hasn’t much ramped down since. Before then, well, it’s hard to know just how accepted any given practice was in Ye Olden Tymes -- but there’s plenty of reason to think that plenty of people never had a problem with the practice.
In fact, there is a long history of Christian art depicting Mary proudly breastfeeding the baby Jesus. Most famously, this image appears in the Cathedral of Santa Maria. Also notable is the 11th-century Catholic monk, Bernard of Clairvaux, who claimed a vision of Mary breastfeeding him. (See the second image.) This breastfeeding was said to have worked a miracle on Bernard, and this myth was used throughout the Middle Ages to reinforce belief in miracles. Which puts the stigma that has grown up around breastfeeding in a rather un-Christian light, if such things matter to you.
When you get right down to it, this issue is all about family values. Babies need to be fed; that's what breast milk is for. And if a mother needs to feed her child in public, she deserves the freedom to do so -- without a cover, if her baby won’t eat in the dark. If seeing a mother breastfeeding her baby makes me uncomfortable, I can only imagine that her other options are ten times as uncomfortable or inconvenient for her than it is for me to simply look away.
As is often the case with these kind of issues, righteousness can be found in the empathetic weighing of harms:
The harm of me being momentarily uncomfortable until I look away from a breastfeeding mother.
v.
The harm of a baby being hungry,
The harm of the inconvenience of a mother having to leave a meal with her family to find a private space to feed a baby who won’t eat under a cover,
And the harm of everyone nearby being uncomfortable due to the hungry crying baby while she does so.
As the saying goes, 'it takes a village to raise a child,' and while mothers don’t expect strangers to nurse their children, the least a stranger can do is let a mother nurse her own child in peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)