FRANK: Trump is imploding, the congressman said!

THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 2026

We're not sure that's enough: In the last weeks of his remarkable life, Barney Frank, receiving hospice care in Ogunquit, appeared with Jake Tapper, on CNN, for a brief final interview. 

The interview itself was on videotape. The session started like this:

TAPPER (5/3/26): Welcome back to State of The Union. You will remember my next guest as a trailblazer for many things, including gay rights. He is the co-author of one of the most significant financial reforms since the New Deal.

But now, at age 86, 16-term former Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank, a Democrat who is battling congestive heart failure, just entered hospice care. And as he prepares for his goodbyes, he's directing his famously sharp wit not only at President Trump, but at his own party. 

[Videotape]

And joining me now is former Democratic Congressman Barney Frank. Congressman, how are you feeling today?

FRANK: OK. I have felt better. On the other hand, I anticipate feeling worse. I'm in no great pain, but my energy level is low. Essentially, after 86 years, my heart's just wearing out.  

God bless the late, unforgettable Barney Frank! You can watch the full interview by clicking here. For the transcript, just click this.

He said his heart was wearing out. But also, he said his party is doing some things which make the nation's recovery less likely.   

In the last year of his life, Rep. Frank wrote a book devoted to that very claim. The book will be published later this year. 

Whatever he actually says in the book, no one will pay it a lick of attention. But this is where his critique began in his short session with Tapper:    

TAPPER: Let's talk about your book. It's going to come out later this year. It's called The Hard Path to Unity: Why We Must Reform the Left to Rescue Democracy.

You are a progressive icon, but now you are expressing some reservations about where the progressive movement has gone. Tell us more. 

[...]  

FRANK: It's precisely because I have been on the left that I have undertaken this. 

I think we're in a situation where the mainstream, to my disappointment, for many years ignored inequality. And many of us fought to get inequality on the Democratic agenda

But the problem was, as we succeeded in bringing the mainstream of the left into a concern with inequality, we also enabled people who wanted to use that as a platform for a wide range of social and cultural changes, some of which the public isn't ready for. 

Even when I agree with them on the end, I think they make a mistake by taking the most controversial parts of the agenda and turning them into litmus tests.  

For the record:  From a pair of final print interviews, it seems that Rep. Frank was likely referring to economic inequality at the start of this brief capsule history. 

In this brief interview, what follows is his one example of the pursuit of changes, by some on the left, which "the public isn't ready for:" 

FRANK (continuing directly): My example is same-sex marriage. Obviously, I have been working for gay rights starting in 1972, when I filed the bill. And we in the movement to establish fairness for gay and lesbian and bisexual people, we picked to work on those issues which were more acceptable.

We didn't get to marriage until after these other things had been resolved. And that's what I'm suggesting that we do today. 

The analog is males and female transsexuals playing sports that are for women. I understand there's a lot of anger about that. And I think, in the interest of the transgender community, as well as others, it would be better to go at that in a more granular way, and not simply announce that, if you don't support it, you're a homophobe.  

According to Rep. Frank, some on the left have moved too fast with respect to "males and female transsexuals playing sports that are for women." He also seemed to say that there had been some unhelpful name-calling. 

Rep. Frank was hardly alone in this general perception. Rightly or wrongly, it's widely said that Candidate Harris was substantially harmed by an earlier position she had taken with respect to health care for undocumented transexual prisoners. 

Rightly or wrongly, the idea that progressives and Democrats moved too fast in this general area doesn't belong to Frank alone. There were, of course, many other ways in which Democrats and liberals helped the current sitting president make his way back to the White House.  

The ludicrous situation involving President Biden's late abandonment of his re-election campaign stands out as a giant example. Jill Biden is out there today, seeming perhaps to make this bad situation worse.

That said, many other examples exist, most of which go unmentioned in the "safe spaces" maintained for us Blue Americans in our own tribe's media warrens.  

What else has Rep. Frank said in his book? That remains to be seen. That said, we'd be inclined to disagree with what he told Tapper, a bit later on, about the sitting president.

The sitting president is imploding, the former congressman said:   

FRANK: Donald Trump, we originally thought was a joke. And then he turned out to be very good at one thing, exploiting voters' discontent.

And so he won an election based on that and, since then, has gone back to being a joke. The man is imploding. He has no program that he's seeking to adopt.

[...]

TAPPER: You said you think President Trump is imploding. And you told Politico that you regret that you're not going to see the continued implosion of President Trump because of your current health situation.

[...]

FRANK: I say in the book, early on, that the fate of liberal democracy versus authoritarian populism will depend in part on how Donald Trump does, and if he does badly, that discredits the whole operation. 

I am convinced that he does not have an appeal beside exploiting anger. But he's so angry, and his politics are so determined by this anger, that he doesn't see that. And so that's why I think he's imploding.   

The sitting president is imploding, the former congressman said. In our view, that seems to be true in the most obvious sense, but we think it miscasts the size and the shape of the problem.  

The president's approvals seem to be droppingalthough, given his endlessly erratic performance, it seems to us that they remain shockingly high. In our view, it's also true that we Blues engage in a wide array of behaviors which help him retain those numbers.  

Will the president's ongoing implosion lead to a Democratic takeover of the House (and possibly even the Senate) this year? Assuming he lets elections proceed, that seems like an obvious possibilitybut he would still be in the Oval Office for at least two additional years.  

Given his apparent unraveling, that undermines the significance of the "implosion" to which Frank refers. We see the situation this way:

The president can implode as much as we like. But what might he do after that? 

In our view, implosion isn't enough. After implosion, what's next?

Major heralded global world experts have begun to advance a simple proposition about our difficult situation. Their consensus goes like this: 

If people can't see that they're living in a failed state, that has no bearing on the reality of the situation

These international global top experts are offering several comparisons to our current situation:   

In the Oscar-nominated film, The Sixth Sense, the Bruce Willis character doesn't know that he's already dead. And in Camus' famous novel, La Peste, a plague has already entered Oran, but the citizens of the sun-splashed city are unable to see this.

So it goes, top experts say, in a nation in which The Five is aired each day, with no one commenting on the way it and its companion broadcasts affect the broader society.

We started this week's reports with a reference to the dim-witted clowning seen on The Five on Thursday and Friday of last week. (The garbage only piles harder as the evening hours wear on.)

The fun concerned the reported presence of maggots. Tomorrow, we'll return to that starting point. 

This involves a problem which has no name, given the failure of Blue America's slumbering elites to speak about what is occurring inside what deluded experts now see as an imploded failed state.

Tomorrow: "Who cares about maggots?" the messengers said. Here within our own Oran, things have slid downhill from there.

164 comments:

  1. Somerby makes it sound like Democrats have been pushing the trans issue when it is Republicans who have emphasized it. In my opinion, Democrats have taken the correct position on trans people. It is Republicans who have campaigned on that issue.

    Frank and Somerby can hardly expect Democrats to abandon what we know is right when it comes to any LGBTQ+ issues. To do so would be to abandon our party's principles. Beyond that, we did not prioritize those issues or bring them to the forefront. The right did that because they know it mobilizes their base.

    So this essay today makes no sense at all. Our core issues remain economic, despite Somerby's attempt to make it seem that is not the case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somerby claims that Harris’ trans stance did substantial harm, yet provides no evidence of this, primarily because there is no evidence for this.

      Somerby is out of touch and out to lunch.

      Delete
    2. Raising this issue now, long after the election is over and when Harris is not running for anything, strikes me as an attempted smear of the Democrats using the trans issue, not as a serious discussion of future Democratic Party strategy.

      Delete
    3. That's because you're an idiot. Or completely crazy. Or trolling. Or all three.

      Delete
    4. Says the obvious troll.

      Delete
  2. Barney Frank believed Democrats damaged themselves by pushing some social issues faster than the public would accept.

    Somerby thinks Democratic media spaces often avoid discussing these mistakes honestly.

    What an asshole.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know you think you’re being clever, but transgender people have been around forever. Renee Richards comes to mind, professional tennis player, from the 1970’s, just a random example. Sports orgs started testing trans people at least as early as 2003, for that tiny handful of trans athletes who wanted to compete. It was republicans who decided to lie and demonize about trans people. I never saw THAT discussion in the media.

      Delete
    2. I mean, Frank did eventually support gay marriage, but is touted for his “cautious” approach. MLK was particularly critical of liberals who urged HIM to take a more cautious approach, because that would have ensured further generations of black voters suffering from Jim Crow.

      Delete
    3. Somerby continues to repeat right-wing talking points, pretending to be concerned that both political tribes, and especially media institutions, are failing to recognize the depth of America's institutional and cultural problems.

      What an asshole.

      Delete
    4. Democrats damage themselves by not demanding that their party institution fails to adequately defend democratic principles in favor of corporate interests.

      Delete
    5. cake re-edit:

      Democrats damage themselves by allowing their party institution to fail to adequately defend democratic principles in favor of corporate interests.

      Delete
    6. Somerby repeats right wing talking points while ignoring any and every issue of substance.

      He’s an asshole because he feigns being a Dem, snickering at his own devious ploy, apparently unaware he’s fooling no one.

      Delete
    7. Corporate interests. OK. For what it’s worth, the Supreme Court has basically equated money with speech, so political parties almost have to raise money in order to get elected in this hell hole of a country. And that includes the Democrats. Even though some Democrats of late have tried to forgo corporate donations, it’s very difficult because there’s not a level playing field. And as of now, corporations are part of our economy and part of our country, you can’t act as though they don’t exist or don’t have legitimate interests. I don’t know what you do about all of this. The Democrats at least have always championed raising taxes on corporations, and rich people, and advocating for the poor and middle class, unlike the gop, who give that lip service, and Trump’s fake populism, but always end up favoring their rich donors.

      Delete
    8. To be clear, Frank was always a centrist liberal, not particularly progressive and certainly not on the left.

      Right wingers like Somerby are desperate to find any crumb of criticism from within Dem ranks and then make an appeal to authority because people like Somerby are incapable of making coherent credible arguments on any issue that people actually care about.

      Delete
    9. Barney Frank never said a congressman said Trump was imploding!! ;)

      Delete
    10. Yes, I was confused by Somerby's description of Frank as a progressive too. That was never my sense of him, especially not compared to people today such as AOC, Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, actual progressives.

      Delete
    11. He didn't describe Frank as progressive.

      Delete
    12. Somerby has tried in the past to frame Frank as a progressive, today he quotes Frank claiming to be "on the left", so yes, Somerby is working hard to give a false impression of Frank, which is weird because most of us are old enough to remember that Frank was in fact a centrist establishment Dem, similar to Moynihan - neither would get elected in today's climate.

      There are a number of progressive and leftist voices in our discourse, but notably Somerby generally only quotes from right wingers - Republicans or center/center right Dems.

      Delete
    13. Somerby, thumb, scale.

      Rinse and repeat.

      Delete
    14. Ignorance ain't gonna manufacture itself.

      Delete
    15. Democrats aren't Marxist and Socialist enough for the voters.
      The main thing they should be touting in their election campaigns is that they will break-up the corporations and give ownership to the workers.
      That is, if they want to win elections, and not just be also-rans against child rapists.

      Delete
    16. Democrats will never be able to rape more children than Republicans to win elections.
      The Republican Party has owned the child rape supporting voters since Reagan.

      Delete
  3. MAGA lawmaker calls to forcefully mass institutionalize trans people: ‘We have to get them off the streets!’

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ronny-jackson-newsmax-trans-people-b2828571.html?callback=in&code=NDI1NDUWODATZMZHYY0ZNMI5LTLMMJQTYWFHZDC3MZK2NJI5&state=88db8c7f455e44039214871c5cb98c84

    This is the kind of thing Republicans say nowadays. It is transphobia. It is evil. How does Somerby recommend Democrats respond? Silence? Agreement?

    When Andy Ogles tweets that homosexuals have no place in America, should we refrain from calling that homophobia?

    Maybe there’s some legitimate debate about transgender people in sports, but prior to republicans deciding to offer up trans people as sacrificial lambs to their rapacious hatred, sports organizations had a testing requirement for trans people and it had been in place for some time.

    And yet, it’s Democrats who get attacked, by fellow Democrats no less, as well as, of course, the right wing, for trying to support a tiny marginalized group of people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The congressman by the way is Ronny Jackson, Trump’s former White House doctor.

      Delete
    2. This is the republican strategy. They know the Democratic party will stand up for the defense of the human rights of trans people, and then they distort the dem position absurdly to the point where the fucking republican candidate for President in 2024 stated in a debate in front of the world that Dems want to transition your children when they go to school.

      Delete
    3. Yes, they go further and say your children are being forcibly transitioned by their schools. I can’t recall if Somerby ever examined the media response to that shit.

      Delete
    4. The media sat silent and smug watching the fucking republican candidate for president make that absurd claim.

      Delete
    5. It is no worse than Trump's claim that doctors are performing after-birth abortions. Why does the right get to say any of this putrid stuff?

      Delete
    6. If the corporate-owned media reported all the child raping done by Republican Party members, there would literally be no time to report anything else.
      Besides, how is Republican Party members raping children "news" to anyone, at this point?

      Delete
  4. a tiny marginalized group of (weird, deluded, icky, yucky, offensive) people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. There’s no one ickier than Trump and his cabinet.

      Delete
    2. Ironically, the Republican party is filled with folks who have transitioned more than an average transgender person, with all the fake hair, fake boobs, fake tans, men wearing caked on makeup, men wearing eyeliner, steroids, human growth hormones, ozempic, penile implants, lifts in their shoes, Botox, on and on.

      And a significant portion of Republican men are living on the down low, or unable to cope with their own latent homosexuality/bisexuality.

      And regardless of their orientation, Republicans suffer from an inordinate amount of sexual predators among their ranks.

      And this is to say nothing about how fundamental racism, sexism, and xenophobia are to the Republican Party.

      All of this goes a long way to explain why Republicans are so unpopular and Trump is now the least popular president in history.

      Delete
    3. Both Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were Republicans before Trump was convinced by his Russian handlers to run for president. Then Trump switched to Republican because he hated Obama and agreed to run. At that point, Epstein also changed to Republican in support of Trump's candidacy.

      Trump is a sexual predator and adjudicated rapist. Epstein thought of himself as a sex addict, requiring sex at least three times every day. Trump was open about wanting to "date" his own daughter. Epstein was never honest about being a pedophile. Both men referred to that as "liking them on the young side" which has now become a tenet of the Republican party -- incels claim that girls are past their prime by age 17.

      There is a whole lot of illegal and weird sex-related activity on the right, some described by Somerby's recent essay about masculinism. Ball tanning (Tucker Carlson), worrying about Jasmine Crockett's testosterone level, Kash Patel's dependence on his girlfriend to the point of including her in meetings, and Hegseth's domestic violence charges, all suggest that there is something very wrong about right wing sexuality (at least among the men Trump has appointed). I suppose these guys might make Trump feel less abnormal compared to himself.

      Now David is repeating some of the weird beliefs the right holds about transpeople, grounded in such things as trans being a fad, sterilization of teen girls (which is not required to become trans), who does what in a restroom or locker room, and "official sex IDS". This is what happens when you let right wingers make up their own facts about sex.

      Delete
    4. Hegseth also raped a Republican married woman at a Republican conference, she says he probably drugged her than raped her, after trying to hit on all the other women at the conference and failing to "score".

      Since Hegseth pulled out to ejaculate and since the woman was treated for sexual assault at a hospital shortly after the incident, Hegseth could not deny it, just wimply whimpered that it was consensual - yeah right.

      This was when Hegseth was getting a divorce from his second wife and simultaneously wooing his third wife who he had cheated with and she was pregnant at the time of the rape (similar to how Trump slept with a porn star shortly after his wife gave birth).

      Even Hegseth's mom was disgusted with her own son, writing a harsh letter to him scolding him for his behavior.

      So no wonder he is terrible at his job.

      Delete
  5. "This involves a problem which has no name, given the failure of Blue America's slumbering elites to speak about what is occurring inside what deluded experts now see as an imploded failed state."

    Blue America has done nothing but talk about what is occurring within our hi-jacked state. Calling our govt an imploded failed state is grossly unfair when the problem is that the right wing elected a criminal to office, aided by Russia. No implosion -- an invasion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "deluded experts"?

      What does Somerby mean by that? These phrases he uses are ridiculous. Which experts are deluded about what?

      Yes, I know that Somerby does not believe in any experts because he doesn't think it is possible to actually know anything, and knowledge is a basis for expertise. But why does he have to keep writing things that are vaguely dismissive in tone but say nothing whatsoever? Is he trying to demonstrate his own lack of expertise? He has succeeded.

      Delete
    2. Maybe he thinks Barney Frank is a deluded expert?

      Delete
    3. Barney's Beanery in West Hollywood used to be a fun place, have not been there in a while, it is mostly a tourist spot.

      Back in the day the owner was anti gay and put up a sign "FAGOTS - STAY OUT!", this was highlighted in a 1964 Life article titled "Homosexuality in America", but then West Hollywood became a center for gay culture and the mayor took the sign down in 1985.

      Delete
  6. Long ago, in the dark ages, in 1992, Bill Clinton promised to lift the military ban on gay service members. As soon as he took office, the Republicans made that their issue number one. Anyone remember “don’t ask don’t tell?” That was 34 years ago. I mean, the incremental approach may pay off in the long run, but I think of the generations and generations of gay people who had to stay in the closet or who couldn’t get married because it was illegal. The incremental approach was a burden and a harm to them.

    Gay people used to be banned from the military. Hegseth prior to his confirmation stated that he wanted to bar gay people from serving in the military. He later walked that back.Transgender people are currently banned from enlisting in the military, and Trump and hegseth want to remove currently serving transgender individuals who have served honorably. So that’s where we are currently.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hicseth is so gay he wants to ban woman, brown people, fatties, and has already bounced the trans folks. Hope they can sue to stop the nonsense. Maybe if the all drink heavily, punched out their partners, then raped them; Hicseth could relate to them.

      Delete
    2. Courts have overturned his ban on trans in the military.

      Delete
    3. True, @9:11. Some court did this. It's a terrible decision from a legal POV and a policy POV. Judges are simply equipped to figure out how best to run the military, and IMO they are not Constitutionally empowered to do so. Hopefully this ruling will be overturned.

      Delete
    4. “Some court”?

      Phooey! How dare “some court” contradict King Chickenshit!

      Delete
    5. I think David in Cal meant "Judges are simply not equipped to figure out how best to run the military, so we'll leave that up to a fascist alcoholic, who made his bones being an asshole on Fox News."

      Delete
    6. Right. All of a sudden DiC is a constitutional scholar

      Delete
    7. A Federal Judge Just Kicked Pete Hegseth’s Ass in an Immensely Satisfying Decision
      The Secretary of Talking About War’s pogrom against trans people in the military was rightfully smacked down.

      By Charles P. PiercePUBLISHED: JUN 02, 2026 12:26 PM EDT

      Delete
  7. Why does a supposed Democrat refer to a Democratic majority as a “takeover”?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Somerby keeps misrepresenting the positions of the Democratic party.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It’s weird, but every time I hear a Democrat speak, I really almost never hear him or her talk about transgender issues. On the other hand, Republicans mention it all day every day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Comment of the month. Sexual weirdos, ain't they?

      Delete
  10. Sarah McBride, an actual transgender person serving in the House, talks less about transgender issues than her colleague Nancy Mace, whose first and most important order of business apparently was to determine which bathroom McBride was allowed to use.

    ReplyDelete
  11. “Pulte is later awarded a novelty trophy, which featured the phrase "Bill Pulte F--ks" on one side and "Only the Young" on another.”

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/resurfaced-video-sparks-alarm-over-153050035.html

    Talk about icky, offensive people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The trophy is a dildo.

      Delete
    2. David in Cal's twin brotherJune 4, 2026 at 12:32 PM

      I think it is truly great that Der Fuhrer Herr Drumpf has put the winner of a sex toy award as the nation's DNI. No one else ever would have taken that chance. Sleepy Joe Biden would just appoint a well qualified experienceD candidate - BORING!

      Delete
  12. I recall when President Truman integrated the armed forces via executive order in 1948. (What, all of a sudden, just like that, with no incrementalism?) this prompted Strom Thurmond and a number of other southern Democrats to leave the Democratic Party and form the Dixiecrat party. Same as it ever was.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There was a kind of incrementalism to Truman's decision. Prior to that, black civil rights activists were trying to get Truman to introduce and pass an anti-lynching law at the federal level so that lynchings could be prosecuted outside the bigotry of the South.

      "President Harry S. Truman formally proposed an anti-lynching law in 1948 as part of a sweeping civil rights package. However, the legislation was blocked by Southern segregationist filibusters in Congress and never became law during his administration.Truman’s push for a federal anti-lynching framework was historic and led to significant friction within his own Democratic Party."

      Truman desegregated the Armed Forces after that because he had control over that decision and could implement it by executive order. LBJ's civil rights acts continued in that ongoing effort to legislate civil rights federally, to circumvent Jim Crow and attempts to keep black people in subordinate status in the South and elsewhere. Arguing about any part of this being "incremental" is just a matter of focus.

      The risks taken by Democrats in previous decades are why we SHOULD continue to be the party that supports civil rights for all. These fights don't resolve themselves if you ignore them. Progress depends on hard work, persistence despite defeats, and a commitment to sticking with it no matter how awful bigots and Republicans get.

      Either you care about civil rights or you don't. Barney Frank has the right to decide he doesn't care any more about that stuff, but suggesting that Denocrats will do better in elections by downplaying controversial issues such as civil rights (back then, for blacks, then for women, now for gays and trans). Whether it is more effective for campaign purposes is irrelevant when it is craven and shameful to give in to such considerations, sacrificing the needs of those who are being oppressed.

      I feel the same way about immigration issues.

      Delete
  13. IMO trans is homophobic. Trans hurts gay people. Here's why. Homosexuality is real. It can be measured fairly objectively. One symptom is attraction to people of the same sex.

    Trans can be objectively measured for people who have had medical sex change or for people with unusual genetic situations. But, there's no objective measure to say when a fully physically male is somehow really a woman.

    The only objective symptom would be attraction to people of the same sex. The same as homosexuals. If a teenage girl is sexually attracted by other girls, how can she tell whether she's gay or trans? (Set aside the possibility that she's straight and just going through a phase.) Because trans is trendy, she's apt to decide that she's trans and have major, life-altering medical treatment. Treatment that she didn't need.













    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you gay, dickhead, you pathetic nasty old man? Why don’t you just shut the fuck up!

      Delete
    2. You are not making sense, DiC.

      Delete
    3. Please try not to leave a bunch of empty space at the end of your comments.

      Delete
    4. Because there’s supposedly no way to “measure” transgender-ness, therefore it’s homophobic.

      I marvel at the complete illogic of this.

      Delete
    5. Dickhead has apparently missed his latest LGBTQ memorandum of hate. The “T” stands for transgender.

      Delete
    6. David is incorrect that there is no way to objectively measure gender identity.

      "The Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) is a classic 1970s psychological tool developed by Sandra Bem that evaluates how individuals identify with culturally defined masculine and feminine personality traits. It revolutionized gender studies by introducing the concept of psychological androgyny, proving people can possess high levels of both traits."

      In addition to identifying androgyny, it measures whether a person identifies more strongly with male or female gender expectations as a psychological trait.

      Delete
    7. David in Cal's twin brotherJune 4, 2026 at 1:06 PM

      We are only nasty transphobic old men because we support gay rights. duh!

      Delete
    8. There are also diagnostic criteria in the DSM to evaluate gender dysphoria, a psychiatric condition that may lead to depression and suicide. Doctors consider gender dysphoria as an indicator of whether someone needs gender-affirming care to transition.

      David callously presents a case where an attention-seeking teen decides to be trans and ruins her life. The reality is that trans people feel they are in the wrong body and being forced into a gender that doesn't fit them. These feelings go back to early childhood and are not a "fad" or of recent origin. The rejection of one's existing body is visceral and distressing to the point of self-harm and great unhappiness (which is what dysphoria means). Psychologists evaluate a person's psychological state. David suggests that trained professionals are easily fooled by teens, but that is not the case and doctors do not perform surgeries without an evaluation.

      Too many of the objections raised by people like David and by the right in general are based on ignorance, this one included.

      Delete
    9. “Gay” used to be trendy too, when all those icky gays started coming out of the closet. Remember that?

      Delete
    10. Puberty often triggers gender dysphoria, as does gradual awareness of why a person feels unable to adapt to gender expectations in their teens -- when sexual identity comes to the forefront,. Dismissing teens as conforming to trendiness is unfair when all teens go through the transition to adulthood and must grapple with sexuality (even asexual people). Mocking a teenager who is trying to figure out how to be a woman when she is female would be equally cruel to denying a girl the ability to know whether she feels female at all, or feels male insteaed of female and has always felt that way.

      Aside from the reality in a specific case, there is a larger principle about whether people can and do have the right to assert their own way of being happy in the world, their own sense of themselves, their own identity in the many forms it takes (train enthusiasts, people persons, sports addicts, do-gooders, animal lovers). Supporting transpeople is about whether we support the pursuit of happiness in terms of autonomy over one's body and behavior within the law.

      Delete
    11. Trans is not trendy, it’s a category that is about the tiniest slice of people out of any category.

      Republicans are just grasping at straws with their anti trans nonsense, as they gasp for life, their party failing miserably by ignoring issues that people actually care about.

      Delete
    12. Playing minorities off against each other is a divide and conquer tactic that is used by anyone in a position of authority. David used this idea yesterday to say that needs of black kids were being sacrificed to those of immigrants (esp undocumented) in LA schools.

      Delete
    13. Thank you @1:02. That's interesting. From what I gather, the Bem Sex-Role Inventory isn't exactly objective, but at least it's a standardization of subjective feelings. That seems like a step forward. My impression is that the BSRI may not always be used to determine someone's official sex. Am I right that if someone declares a certain gender, then s/he will be treated as that gender in certain circumstances. Do you know whether the BSRI is generally used when physical prisoner asks to be in women's ward or when a physical male chooses to go to an all female school or dress in a girls' locker room?

      @1:12 - I get it that you and I have different views of reality. You might be right. But, I object to the word "callously". From my POV you are the one who cruelly supports the needless sterilization of a number confused teenagers.

      The point is, I might be wrong. But, my view is no more callous than yours.

      Delete
    14. @1:49 - I think it's the other way round. I think minorities are sometimes grouped together, for political purposes. The creation of acronyms like LGBTQ and LGBTQIA+ are brilliant political strokes.

      But, is there really an LGBTQIA+ community? Are gay men and gay women even in the same community? What they most have in common is that they're discriminated against. I don't know that my gay male friends are more apt to socialize with gay women than with anyone else.

      Delete
    15. David, your ignorance just astounds me. Gay people, men and women, trans, etc, have always sought each other out for support and protection. I belong to multiple groups that welcome every person on that LGBTQ spectrum and they’re always welcoming. Why don’t you check out your local pride day or pride organization, instead of pontificating about stuff you know nothing about?

      Delete
    16. Ignoring both the needs of others and their right to pursue their needs is indeed very callous. Republicans are the party of callousness, lack of empathy.

      I wish it were mandatory for students to take a psychology course so that they would understand how subjective experience can be scientifically measured, where knowledge about mind, brain and behavior comes from, and why psychology is no more bogus than medicine or botany or physics.

      Delete
    17. David is the most trans person here.

      His persona has shifted this way and that over the years.

      He clearly is uncomfortable in his own skin, typical of Republicans.

      This is because David is a troll, nothing he says is genuine or accurate.

      Delete
    18. I am David in Cal's one gay friend. He likes when I jam a thick twelve inch black dildo up his ass without lubricant. He is a very well behaved little Nazi bitch.

      Delete
  14. There is no excuse for saying "rightly or wrongly" as Somerby does several times, when it is easy enough to verify whether Harris actually took a position on gender-affirming healthcare for undocumented immigrants. Candidate positions are available online and can be easily researched now using AI.

    If you look such things up, you find out that courts have ruled that gender-affirming care must be provided in prisons under the 8th Amendment. Harris said she supported that as Attorney General of CA and believed the same considerations applied to detainees such as undocumented immigrants.

    Is fulfilling a legal obligation the same as advocating for a controversial position? Somerby ignores that aspect of this issue. We all have seen that Trump has no hesitation about break laws and failing in his oath to uphold the constitution.

    But look how Somerby presents this issue! It is not about law or civil rights or even about "rightly or wrongly" but about advancing right wing talking points during an election in which we are trying to elect Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "There is no excuse for saying 'rightly or wrongly' as Somerby does several times, when it is easy enough to verify whether Harris actually took a position on gender-affirming healthcare for undocumented immigrants."

      You misread what Somerby wrote. He did not equivocate about whether Harris took this position; what he wrote was that some people said -- and they may be right and they may be wrong -- that her taking this position hurt her electoral results.

      Delete
    2. Um, DG, her position, as explained by the commenter above, was in support of court rulings. It wasn’t as if she loudly and perpetually and exclusively discussed and championed trans rights. If it hurt her chances, what should she have done, according to BOB, rightly or wrongly? Disavow her support?

      “Democrat support for civil rights in the 1960s hurt their election chances going forward, rightly wrongly”

      What the fuck do you think rightly or wrongly means in such a statement?

      Delete
    3. Expecting trolls like DG and DiC to make sense is foolhardy.

      They are only here to muddy the waters.

      Label them as trolls if you must respond, otherwise ignore them.

      Delete
    4. He says both. He says rightly or wrongly several times, once about what Harris actually said and later about whether it was a good idea to say that.

      Some things are matters of empirical fact that can be checked. I think Somerby should check such things and present the reality, not wonder about them and whether the claim is rightly or wrongly made about what she said. The decision about whether her truthful statements about the requirements of her office and her prior behavior as AG of CA hurt her campaign may be a complex judgment, which can be considered rightly or wrongly made. Given that Harris took an oath of office and was constrained by judicial decision, I don't think that can be thought of as wrongly done either. Somerby's view is more muddled because he doesn't understand that the court mandated gender affirming care for those in detention.

      ACLU is part of Democratic candidates constituency. If she failed to answer an ACLU questionnaire for candidates, that would be more damaging than her answer to this single question. The tendency of Republicans to distort candidate positions on the left is well-established. But Somerby likes to blame Harris for doing things that are taken for granted when other candidates do them. It is part of the double standard many female candidates for high office face. Her smile was also evaluated -- did she do it too much, did it make her look weak instead of husky and strong?

      Delete
    5. Let me give you a clue DG. “Rightly or wrongly” is Somerby‘s mealy mouthed way of saying he wishes she had shut up about it or disavowed it. Why the fuck do you think he presents this in the context of Frank’s criticism?

      Delete
    6. That’s also Somerby’s main goal: to muddy the waters.

      Delete
    7. “'Rightly or wrongly' is Somerby‘s mealy mouthed way of saying he wishes she had shut up about it or disavowed it."

      Wrong. It's his way of reporting a statement made by someone else when he doesn't personally vouch for the truth of the statement, one way or the other.

      Delete
    8. Wrong DG. If Barney Frank had written a book saying the opposite, that Democrats needs to return to basics and lean into support for civil rights for all (including trans), Somerby would not be talking about Frank at all today (or yesterday).

      Today is another attack on Democrats for going too far with issues Somerby does not support, including trans rights. Also on Somerby's list are #metoo, Epstein's victims, women's health issues and rights such as equal pay, and all racism-related concerns (redistricting, segregation of schools, over-policing, and the extremism on the right such as White Supremacism). Somerby never supports any of that stuff, which is why I first suspected he was a right winger pretending to be liberal. These are core issues for Democrats that have always been pursued regardless of the fury on the right over them. We should not back off now, because someone like Somerby thinks it will rock the boat to behave like actual Democrats.

      Don't forget that Somerby is not a liberal.

      Delete
    9. "Don't forget that Somerby is not a liberal."

      How can I forget when you and your ilk have told us that maybe 10-20 times every day, six days a week, 52 weeks a year, for a decade or more?

      Delete
    10. I mean, spreading that message is your mission in life.

      Delete
    11. I am not 1:57, but , Well, DG, whether or not you think Somerby is a liberal or not, or Democrat, he very clearly wants Democrats to shut up about all of those issues the commenter above listed. And that is undeniable. I fervently disagree with his stance. it continues to remind me of the white liberals that MLK complained about who privately said they supported the civil rights marches, but asked MLK not to rock the boat because it might offend the racists. Who knows? Maybe Somerby disapproved of the Democrats adopting support for civil rights because it lost them elections. Has he ever stated the opposite of that view?

      Delete
    12. Somerby and Frank are asking Democrats to throw trans people under the bus, DG. And I resent that stance.

      Delete
    13. My only point here was that 12:55 misread Somerby. Somerby did not question whether Harris had taken a certain position, as 12:55 suggested. That was 12:55's error. Instead, Somerby reported that some people thought that Harris' position hurt her electorally. He further said that what these people thought may have been correct and it may have been incorrect.

      Delete
    14. “Some people.”
      Oh, DG, give it up, for the love of God. SOMERBY thinks that’s why Harris lost.

      Delete
    15. "Somerby and Frank are asking Democrats to throw trans people under the bus"

      Let's make the next election all about whether trans boys should be allowed to play on girls' volleyball teams and see how that works out for us, OK?

      Or perhaps we should concentrate on Trump corruption, Trump warmongering, and the Trump economy. I'm betting the latter might turn out better for us electorally.

      Delete
    16. It doesn't fucking matter what we decide the next election should be all about, republicans will tell their meathead cult what they want anyway. What the fuck is wrong with you, did Kamala make the 2024 election about that false policy goal?

      Delete
    17. DG, no Democrat made the election about trans athletes. Republicans did, and Democrats responded with statements of support for trans people. But in your mind, that’s “making the election about trans athletes.” You and Somerby just want Democrats to oppose this, because you think it wins them more votes.

      And have you checked out Ossoff’s campaign in Georgia? Trump’s corruption is front and center. I’ve never heard him discuss transgender issues. You’re such a fool.

      Delete
    18. And DG, are you unmoved when Ronny Jackson wants to forcibly institutionalize all trans people? What the fuck should the Dem response be to that? Are you ok with it? Or if a Dem pushes back, would you characterize that as “Dems making the election all about trans people?” You’re almost a DiC head level commenter.

      Delete
    19. For all the second grade commenters:

      "Harris was substantially harmed by an earlier position she had taken with respect to health care for undocumented transexual prisoners."

      That was one way Democrats damaged themselves by pushing some social issues faster than the public would accept.

      Somerby thinks Democratic media often avoids discussing these mistakes honestly.

      Delete
    20. In this case, Democratic supporters are choosing to completely twist what he has said in order to further avoid discussing those mistakes honestly.

      Delete
    21. Or they are trolling.

      Delete
    22. Or they are clinically insane.

      Delete
    23. 3:02: you’re just reiterating the point: that has already been made, that Somerby wishes Harris had not taken this position, and DG pretends that her taking this position means her campaign was “all about” healthcare for transsexual prisoners. You’re the ones who need remedial education, not the commenters that are objecting to this.

      Delete
    24. You could pretend that you wish Harris had taken that position. But that she did hurt Democrats significantly because it was used as a political weapon that had major consequences. Major!

      I'm sorry you don't understand that. Maybe you should just go back to your show and tell or go play kickball.

      Delete
    25. I supported her decision. She never campaigned on it.

      Delete
    26. The issue is neither. The issue is that it was used in a tremendously effective way by the Trump campaign. That's the issue. It's not fair, is it? But life's not fair. Democrats need to look at how that was used against them and prevent that from happening in the future.

      But I'm afraid all of this is really, really way above your head. It's something you're not really equipped to understand yet at this point in your life.

      Delete
    27. 3:21: you’re still affirming what the other commenters have been saying. That Somerby thinks democrats should not support trans people, what you call “A mistake.” We’ve established that’s what he thinks.

      Delete
    28. 3:06 - "DG pretends that her taking this position means her campaign was 'all about' healthcare for transsexual prisoners"

      I never said anything even slightly resembling this ridiculous statement.

      Delete
    29. It's weird: Everywhere you look you see some conservative who is pretending to be a liberal.

      Delete
    30. True it is weird how trolls try to deny that Somerby is right wing and that they themselves are not right wing (just happen to hold right wing views) when it is obvious that they are right wing which is the consensus; everywhere you look you see actual liberals/progressives/leftists who no longer will be fooled by right wing trolls.

      womp womp

      Delete
    31. If you weren't aware of right wing trolling by 1998, you are either young or not paying attention. They actually have offered nothing of value other than monetizing the trolls since 1980.

      Delete
    32. Gas the fucking degenerates 2:51, gas 'em all dead before they chop off your boys pecker in the coat room I tells ya! They are coming for your son's pecker and daughter's participation trophy.

      Delete
    33. Harris's support of having taxpayers pay for prisoner's gender affirming care during her presidential campaign in 2019, was an enormous political mistake with vast consequences.

      How can Democrats make sure they don't repeat these same types of mistakes? How can they better respond to effective political attacks on them for having floated such bizarre ideas in a presidential campaign? Why did Harris even bring that up in the first place? To whom was she appealing and why?

      Delete
    34. It wasn’t up to Harris who was complying with the law.

      Delete
    35. The right brought it up. Harris told the truth on an ACLU candidate questionnaire, that’s all.

      Delete
    36. This is just like the attacks on Elizabeth Warren who didn’t claim to be Cherokee. She once checked a box on a form rightly signifying some Cherokee heritage, a right winger dug it up and made a big fuss about it. This is what the right does because it cannot win on the issues, such as detention conditions in NJ.

      Delete
    37. That's not all. When she was attorney general in California, she worked behind the scenes to change the California prison's policy that prevented prisoners from gender affirming surgery. That's what she said publicly on the campaign trail in 2019. She paid a huge political price for these views later. And a lot of that price was due to the response or lack of response from her campaign to now famous Trump ad that slimed her.

      Democratic media spaces often avoid discussing these mistakes honestly. As I know you need to.

      I would try to show a little more guts and be a little bit more honest about shortcomings and mistakes that all people and all political parties have and make.

      Delete
    38. You keep repeating yourself, 7:38. For you, it’s not a question of whether her campaign was focused on these issues, which it was not. For you, it was simply a mistake for her to hold this view. I believe this is also Somerby’s view, but DG disputes that.

      Delete
    39. Politically, it was a huge mistake. But she did hold that view and she stated it publicly. She didn't have to do that in that way. If she's concerned about prisoners who want to transition, that's fine. That's her business. If Democrats are concerned about criminals in prison who want to transition, that's great. But politically, it's not great. It's a complete turd. A majority of the people don't care about that issue. They are not concerned at all about people who have been thrown in prison transitioning. A deft politician would have given a non-answer. At the time the progressive movement had gone a little bit insane with issues surrounding transgender. They took it a little too far. Politically speaking. I'm not talking about morals or morality. Everyone knows that you are more moral than everyone else in the world.

      The next mistake was she wasn't ready to react when it was used against her in a sleazy way. She basically didn't react to it at all. And that was part of why she had to pay a huge political price . It was a total political fuck up from start to finish. Liberal media shies away from confronting this issue honestly. As do you. I don't understand why.

      Delete
    40. It was the law in CA that prisoners were entitled to gender affirming care if necessary, along with other medical care. She did her job because it was the law and AGs follow the law not their own beliefs. She was ethical, which is why I admire her and voted for her. Republicans are dishonest.

      Delete
    41. Courts upheld the trans right to gender care while in prison, including for undocumented prisoners. Harris did her job as she should have.

      Delete
    42. No, California had not made that a law. Harris denied the prisoners the right to transition because that was the law. She ethically followed the law as you say. Because, strangely, trans rights had become such a hot button issue and kind of a litmus test for a certain set of liberals and Democrats, when asked about it, she said she worked behind the scenes so prisoners could transition. Prisoners! Her answer and the ridiculous focus on the issue itself is an example of Democrats damaging themselves by pushing some social issues faster than the public would accept. Democrats and Democratic aligned media avoids discussing these mistakes honestly. Are you starting to understand? No?

      Delete
    43. (Political mistakes. Everyone knows that Democrats in general are far smarter and far more moral than everyone else in the world.)

      Delete
    44. Like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were against gay marriage in 2008 when they were running for president. To say they were for it would have been a political mistake. The public was not ready for that yet. By 2016, somehow, I think Twitter and low IQ Democratic aligned blogs had a lot to do with it, Democrats and the left went crazy and began to loudly advocate for issues that the public were not ready for. And it would actually be condescending to the people who were not ready for it. It was a gigantic, weird mistake. Trump used that against them and just mopped the floor with them. They still haven't recovered from it.

      Delete
    45. Trump jail, Trump jail, Trump jail, doesn't work.
      Perhaps it's time for Republicans pedophiles, Republicans pedophiles, Republicans pedophiles.
      It can't hurt.

      Delete
    46. Dogface George,
      In your opinion, how many children should Democrats be raping, to win over the electorate, and sway the swing voters?

      Delete
    47. Gavin Newsom legalized gay marriage while he was mayor of San Francisco. That encouraged the State of California to put it on the ballot as an initiative and legalize gay marriage for the whole state. When nothing terrible happened as a result, the Supreme Court was encouraged to strike down laws banning gay marriage as violations of the 14th Amendment.

      This courage is why I will vote for Gavin Newsom if he runs for president. Similarly, those Democrats who supported Drag Queen Story Hours (to encourage tolerance of diversity among children and their parents in a safe environment while engaging in the wholesome activity of reading picture books) took a political risk in order to support LGBTQ+. I will reward them and show my approval by voting for them whenever possible.

      Republicans who engage in intolerant and cruel behavior toward other people, regardless of context, will go on my shit list and will never receive my vote. When Trump snaps at a female journalist and pretends she has done something wrong by not smiling at him, that would put him on my shit list, even if he were not already there for so many other reasons.

      I would never vote for Somerby for any office. His attitudes are rancid and he has a mean side that peeks through his deliberate incoherence from time to time. I wouldn't trust him to make important decisions because he is not a very nice person. Take that crack he made and then repeated about Rachel Maddow stuffing money down her pants, simply because she was paid a lot of money (although not nearly as much as Tucker Carlson at the time). Women deserve equal pay for equal work, but Somerby goes out of his way to mock the idea that women can do equal work. So, no votes for Somerby.

      Delete
    48. 8:03,
      Are you the same Anonymous who posts the following on TDH?
      "Anyone who isn't a bigot, or isn't perfectly fine with bigotry, left the Republican Party over a quarter of a century ago."

      Asking, because you're saying the same thing with different words.

      Delete
  15. Somerby doesn't claim to be a 'liberal'. He is a centrist who votes Democratic and seems to think Trump is nuts.

    Could we move on to something else?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somerby has frequently described himself as liberal. If he were to stop doing that, I would stop comparing him to actual liberals in order to show he is advancing right wing talking points and displaying Republican attitudes.

      Delete
    2. I am not convinced Somerby votes Democratic.

      Delete
    3. “Could we move on to something else? “

      As long as he keeps suggesting that democrats throw trans people under the bus, then no.

      Delete
    4. They are trolling. Can you imagine that? Can you imagine what kind of losers they are? Trolling with that shit every day.

      Delete
    5. (if they're not trolling, obviously they are completely nuts.)

      Delete
    6. Well, Somerby writes his shit every day.

      Delete
    7. Being excessively literal, taking things at face value - these are traits of trolls trying to push an agenda, in this case a right wing agenda.

      The consensus is that Somerby is not a liberal and is right wing (so maybe classically liberal) because it has become painfully obvious from his writing.

      Delete
  16. New York passes legislation to replace the word “mother” with “gestating parent”

    A good start but I would have preferred "Incubators for our progeny, who will be looked after by a third domesticated female whose body is not ravaged by childbirth."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you feel that “mother” and “gestating parent” mean the same thing?

      Delete
    2. This is a harmless standardization of language for official purposes that ensures people will be treated consistently across govt contexts.

      Does anyone in real life call anyone else "the party of the first part"? Legalisms are useful but pretending this is anything else (everyday language) is fatuous.

      Is it a good idea to allow surrogates or adoptive parents, for example, to fall through cracks in legal situations because people won't define what they mean by "mother". It was good enough for Norman Rockwell and Doctor Spock, so why tamper with language that has served us well for years? Hmmmm?

      Delete
    3. A pregnant woman is not the same thing is a mother, although she may be a mother to other children -- or a pregnant nun. Their standardization is not particularly good either.

      Delete
    4. What standardization would you suggest, Ilya? You know the right wing will use this to mock democrats

      Delete
    5. This will fix the Democrat popularity problem.

      Delete
    6. What will fix Trump being the least popular president in history?

      Delete
    7. 3:15 fuck the fucking dysfunctional cult weirdos. They are small and we are mighty (if we just make sure our votes are being counted).

      Delete
    8. Replacing "Mother" with "gestating parent" is a sop to those who think using "Mother" is identity politics.

      Delete
  17. Transgender sports is the least consequential issue of our time. How it managed to become the defining issue of our times is a great puzzlement. It would be a puzzlement, if we didn't know how things operate in our political realm. Since GOP has nothing to offer to improve people's lives, they latch on to artificially-created non-issues to stir up anger and resentment.
    Everyone's lives would be so much better if only we didn't have transgender athletes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The point is politics, young child. It's a discussion about politics and the politics of the issue. When we look at the issue politically and how it was used to motivate potential voters, it becomes rather consequential.

      But maybe you should get back to your juice box and story time. These issues are a little above your head.

      Delete
    2. Republicans consistently lied and misinformed voters about this issue, 3:08, inciting hatred. The media didn’t push back. It was almost the centerpiece of their campaign. Democrats disavowing trans people would have changed nothing, because some liberal somewhere wouid still have the temerity to support trans people.

      Of course, the Nazis inciting people against Jews? Yeah, just the way politics works, I guess, genius.

      Delete
    3. The issue is not the fairness of the criticisms, the issue is their political effectiveness and the way Democratic media has avoided discussing the political success Republicans had with it.

      Now maybe it's time to lay down for a nice little nap. We can read you a story first.

      Delete
    4. Well sure, lying with no repercussion often works. Doesn’t make it right. And it doesn’t mean democrats should have changed their position.

      Delete
    5. Nobody is asking anybody to "change their position" on any transgender issue, but we have an election to win. We can highlight one, two, maybe three issues. Do you want to highlight some issue of trans rights that affects maybe 100 people in the whole country? And that many people, rightly or wrongly, think will harm our electoral prospects?

      Delete
    6. DG, for the last fucking time, no Democrat is highlighting trans issues. They were responding when I asked about it, that’s it. Why do you keep persisting in this foolishness?

      Delete
    7. * They were responding when they were asked about it. Why do you persist in calling this highlighting an issue? It’s the Republicans that highlighted the issue over and over again every single fucking day. Not the Democrats. stop saying this shit.

      Delete
    8. Agree this is a nonissue. No one watches women's sports. It doesn't matter if women worked years to make it to the top of their sport so that males can declare themselves women and dominate the sport. Males don't have this problem because women can't beat them even if they join men's sports.

      Delete
    9. Ilya: "How it managed to become the defining issue of our times"

      Oof, hopefully you are being sarcastic.

      Republicans gained nothing from their anti trans stance, and they are pissed because they are running out of fake issues to run on.

      Yawn.

      Delete
    10. Here's what you said at 1:57: "Today is another attack on Democrats for going too far with issues Somerby does not support, including trans rights."

      I'm not sure what you see as the difference between "going too far" and "highlighting." But fine: In the next election, do you want to "go too far" in promoting trans issues or do you want to "go too far" in promoting Trump's corruption, war, and stagnant economy?

      Delete
    11. DG, Sarah McBride is an actual trans person who got elected to the House. She didn’t talk about transgender issues. She talked about healthcare, economy, etc. why you think democrats highlight trans issues is bizarre. Republicans object to McBride’s very existence.

      Delete
    12. Transgenderism is not an electorally significant issue.

      Supporting trans rights will not win you an election nor lose you any support.

      Anti trans people do not really care about the issue, they care about muddying the waters and spreading chaos.

      Trolls (like DG, DiC) want you to think that it is significant because that would serve their right wing agenda.

      Delete
    13. "Supporting trans rights will not . . . lose you any support."

      It's funny, then, that Republicans spend all that money on attack ads asserting that Dems support trans in bathrooms and sports teams. Why do you think these campaign professionals waste money like that?

      Delete
    14. DFG - cause they know how nasty people like you fall for their nasty shit all the time.

      Delete
    15. Obs. the only final solution is to round up all them nasty transvestites into camps and eliminate them. Then we work our way up the degenerate food chain from there! Who's with me?

      Delete
    16. The idiocy is that DG isn’t paying attention to how the current set of democratic candidates are going after Trump’s corruption big time. But then, he reads Somerby, so he thinks all they’re talking about is transgender issues. Did I say that DG is a fool?

      Delete
  18. Someone recently tried to kill a DOGE whistleblower.

    Hmmm, who might that someone be associated with?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Many of the J6ers that were pardoned by trump went on to commit further crimes, several of them related to sexually assaulting minors.

    Republicans are not just weird, are not just gross, they are a danger to our citizens and our children.

    ReplyDelete
  20. It is weird that Katie Miller defends her husband against being called ugly, considering she went on Fox News and joked with Watters about how unappealing and uncharismatic her husband is just a few months ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He also is an Intel who won't ever have sex with her, just for himself. Weirdos.

      Delete