We Did Get Some Stuff Done

because we did the work.

It wasn’t all bad: Despite election defeat, progressives scored big wins in 2024

Organizers tell Salon how they pulled off major victories in a year marked by the rise of the far-right

By Tatyana Tandanpolie Staff Writer

Snippet:

For many on the political left, 2024 was disappointing.

Even as inflation ebbed, Americans still struggled with housing costs and necessary expenses. The U.S. role in enabling Israel’s war in Gaza sparked protests in the streets and on college campuses. The far-right continued to target marginalized groups, most notably immigrants, transgender people and women. To top it off, the mid-summer excitement at Vice President Kamala Harris’ entry into the presidential race following President Joe Biden’s eleventh-hour exit petered out with the election of President-elect Donald Trump — again.

But even as the political landscape appeared to grow bleaker, Americans still fended off at least some of the efforts to encroach upon their rights. At times, they even helped pass policies that not only protected core freedoms but could genuinely improve quality of life.

As they reflected on 2024 and looked ahead to 2025, when the Trump administration’s ultraconservative agenda is poised to make their work harder, advocates behind wins in LGBTQ+, labor and reproductive rights shared with Salon how they successfully organized against legislative efforts to roll their rights back and planted hope for a better future.

Abortion rights enshrined in seven states

Ballot measures seeking to establish or protect abortion rights were on 10 states’ ballots this year as organizers fought to protect access and reverse bans enacted in the wake of the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade. Seven of those states — Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nevada and New York — would indeed pass measures to enshrine a right to abortion access in their respective constitutions.

Proposition 139 in Arizona provided a legal means to upend the state’s 15-week abortion restriction and established state constitutional rights to abortion access until viability and afterward if a healthcare professional deems it necessary for the pregnant person’s physical or mental health. The proposition also barred the state from penalizing any individual or entity “for aiding or assisting a pregnant individual in exercising the individual’s right to abortion.”

Arizona for Abortion Access, a seven-group coalition of reproductive health, rights and justice organizations, including Reproductive Freedom for All and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, led the campaign supporting the proposed amendment, which took effect almost immediately on Nov. 25.

“The passing of Proposition 139 speaks to the broad support — across the entire state, across all political parties, and across voters of all different backgrounds — for reproductive freedom,” Erika Mach, Planned Parenthood Arizona’s chief external affairs officer, told Salon. “People want the freedom to make medical decisions with their doctor and family, without government involvement.”

To place a constitutional amendment on the state’s ballot, the coalition had to obtain signatures from 15% of registered voters in the state — just under 384,000 signatures — and file the petition by early July, according to the Arizona Secretary of State’s website. (snip-MORE)

If Congress Passes Terrific Law For Kids In The Forest, Does Anybody Hear?

by Rebecca Schoenkopf

It’s bipartisan and it’s good and nobody fought over it. So the answer is ‘no.’ Read on Substack

Here to warm your heart a little bit is a fable about a magical land called the US Congress, where in the midst of last week’s huge stupid fight about whether to actually have a government anymore, and about whether unelected weirdo billionaires should be able to destroy said government, the Senate passed a little-noticed bill that will update American child welfare laws for the first time in 15 years and help out kids in foster care.

As Gabe Fleisher at Wake Up To Politics points out, there weren’t any big culture war provisions in the bill, and somehow the flaky billionaire with an online propaganda factory didn’t catch wind of it, so the Supporting America’s Children and Families Act passed and was signed into law without getting much attention at all. In fact, when Fleischer wrote about it over the weekend, he noted that “as far as I can tell, not a single other article has been written about this legislation by any news outlet, anywhere.”

Fleischer included a google link so people could check, and I did. Even after his post, nope, nothing much, apart from several social media posts linking to Fleisher, plus the expected press releases from members of Congress who helped pass the bill. The only exception we found was a Yahoo reprint of a brief story from Native News Online, based on a press release from the National Indian Child Welfare Association (NICWA), which advocated for the law because it

increases funding for tribal child welfare programs and courts, reduces administrative burdens, closes a gap in data collection for Native children and families who are in state child welfare systems, and requires the Department of Health and Human Services with the assistance of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to provide needed technical assistance to states and tribal nations to improve implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act.

So there’s a second article, and now Yr Wonkette makes three. Maybe some bigger outlets should cover this, although that might run the risk of bringing it to the attention of some jerk who thinks kids in the system have it too easy and need to be working overnight shifts.

As Fleisher — who staunchly refuses to have a c in his name no matter how often I misspell it — points out, there are some excellent things in the bill beyond the increase of $75 million a year into the budget for “the federal program tasked with combatting child abuse/neglect and protecting children in the foster care system.”

Among other things, the bill allows states to pass on federal child welfare funds directly to families that have hit an economic rough patch, to “prevent children from being separated from parents solely on the basis of poverty-related circumstances” — instead of declaring the parents “neglectful” and taking their kids away.

Other measures in the law will

expand mental health services for children in foster care; ease the transition out of foster care by offering assistance to former foster children until they reach the age of 26; increase funding for the 2.5 million grandparents and relatives raising children who would otherwise go into foster care; create a new requirement that states consult with affected children and parents when crafting their child welfare policies; seek to improve the relationships between incarcerated parents and their children in foster care; and reduce the administrative burden of child welfare caseworkers by 15%, so they can focus more on children and less on paperwork.

That’s a hell of a lot of good that literally got zero mention in the mainstream press, mostly because the bill was written and passed without any drama or denunciations that it would promote witchcraft, turn children into communists, or force Americans to live under the tyranny of the Metric System. And that, Fleisher says, is a damn shame, because “coverage of the country’s legislative output should not be dictated by how much squabbling went into the passage of the bill.” A media focus on dysfunction might be entertaining, but leads to cynicism and to people never hearing about genuinely worthwhile, honest-to-Crom “bipartisan achievements like the Supporting America’s Children and Families Act.”

We think Fleisher is right, though we’d also add that it would sure help a hell of a lot if our politicians, especially those on one side of the aisle, would actually try to legislate instead of trying to get their scowling faces on Fox News. Oh dear, that wasn’t bipartisan of me at all.

(snip-comments on the page)

Peace & Justice History for 12/26

https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistorydecember.htm#december26

Well, just how about this:

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Ever Wonder Why Your Never Trump Allies Are So Friendly and Deferential…

…to the same legacy media institutions that have fucked us over so badly?

Well, perhaps it’s because outfits like The Bulwark are sponsored by outfits like Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post.

Yeah, that Washington Post. From NPR:

Over 200,000 subscribers flee ‘Washington Post’ after Bezos blocks Harris endorsement

The Washington Post has been rocked by a tidal wave of cancellations from digital subscribers and a series of resignations from columnists, as the paper grapples with the fallout of owner Jeff Bezos’s decision to block an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris for president…

From the transcript of live ad read in the middle of the above-referenced podcast.

Tim Miller: Hey guys, if you listen to this podcast you care about what’s going on in the world. And you know we’re doing our best here at the Bulwark as we grow, to expand out, reporting, reported commentary no bullshit insight. But, like all of this stuff is based on people doing shoe leather reporting. People going out there and gathering sources and going around the world an… and educating us about what’s happening in the world. And… and one of the places that’s out there still doing that is the Washington Post. Uh, and this podcast is sp… sponsored by The Washington Post. When you go to Washington Post.com slash The Bulwark, our listeners can get an exclusive deal to subscribe for just 50 cents per week for your first year. Uh…if you listen to us you know the great work the Washington Post does on a bunch of topics…

It goes on. And on. And on. Bezos is definitely getting his money’s worth.

Because, as we have discussed on this blog several hundred times before…

(snip)

“Thank You, Pramila Jayapal”

After Building Progressive Power Among House Democrats, Jayapal Passes the Torch

By Jessica Corbett — December 21, 2024

After six years at the helm of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, dedicated to “building the infrastructure” necessary to effectively fight for key policies on Capitol Hill, term-limited Rep. Pramila Jayapal is determined to ensure that the CPC’s incoming leaders “are as successful as possible.”

Jayapal (D-Wash.) spoke with Common Dreams on Wednesday about her time leading the caucus of nearly 100 lawmakers whose legislative priorities include “comprehensive immigration reform, good-paying jobs, fair trade, universal healthcare, debt-free college, climate action, and a just foreign policy.”

She was elected first vice chair of the CPC in June 2017, just months into her freshman term in Congress. Explaining her foray into leadership, Jayapal affectionately said, “I blamed it all on Keith Ellison,” a Minnesota Democrat who was then a congressman and caucus leader and is now his state’s attorney general.

“He was very encouraging,” she said of Ellison. “He knew that the whole reason I was running, because he had heard me talk about it on the campaign trail… was because I wanted to strengthen the power of the progressive movement inside Congress and figure out how we could be more effective working on the inside and the outside, which I was coming from.”

Jayapal, who was born in India and came to the United States as a teenager for college, founded the immigrant advocacy group Hate Free Zone—which later became OneAmerica—after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Residents of the Seattle area elected her to Congress in 2016, during her first term in the Washington State Senate.

In politics, Jayapal has shared stories from her own life with the world, publicly writing and speaking about her experiences as an immigrant woman of color, a woman who had an abortion, and a mother to her trans daughter. She has welcomed the mentorship of Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), the first woman of color to co-chair the CPC and, as Jayapal put it on Instagram earlier this week, “one of the most courageous and effective progressive leaders I have had the privilege to know.”

U.S. Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Cori Bush (D-Mo.) talk with reporters in Washington, D.C. on May 31, 2023. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

Backed by leaders like Ellison and Lee—who is leaving Congress after this session—Jayapal jumped into the CPC hoping to transform it into “a caucus that could really have the power to stand up for working people and deliver.” In 2018, she was elected co-chair with Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), and following 2020 caucus rule changes, she became a solo chair.

“What I realized when I came in is that we didn’t really have the infrastructure we needed to support us to be powerful as a bloc of votes,” said Jayapal, who utilized the skills and connections she developed as an organizer in the role she is now preparing to leave.

“I was able to come in and not only think about how you build power on the inside, but also how you coordinate with the outside,” she said. “And that inside-outside strategy, and the trust I had, and the relationships I had, were really critical to my success in building the infrastructure here in Congress and sort of coalescing the movement around a set of priorities that we were then able to fight for and stand up for.”

Jayapal recognized the need to hire staff and reform CPC rules to boost meeting attendance and caucus cohesion. She explained that “I felt very strongly about leadership transition to build the bench, and so I put in term limits for the CPC chair as well.”

Thanks to that policy, she will pass the torch to Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) early next month. Jayapal, who will be chair emeritus, told Common Dreams, “I’m just really proud to have built an infrastructure that I can pass on to the next chair that just wasn’t there before and will continue to get better, of course, with new leadership.”

The 35-year-old incoming chair will be joined by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) as deputy chair and Jesús “Chuy” García (D-Ill.) as whip. They will face a Republican-controlled Congress and the second administration of President-elect Donald Trump.

“I’m honored to build on the legacy of Chair Jayapal,” Casar said after the caucus election earlier this month. “I’ve fought back against extremist, egocentric autocrats in Texas for my entire adult life. The Democratic Party must directly take on Trump, and it’ll be CPC members boldly leading the way and putting working people first.”

Trump won his first presidential contest the same day Jayapal was initially elected to Congress. On that night in November 2016, before the White House race was called, Jayapal described her victory as “a light in the darkness” and told supporters that “if our worst fears are realized, we will be on the defense as of tomorrow,” according toThe Seattle Times.

After four years of fighting the first Trump administration, CPC members kicked off 2021 with a fresh opportunity to advance progressive policies: Although the Senate was divided, Democrats controlled the House of Representatives and President Joe Biden was sworn in—despite Trump contesting his 2020 loss and inciting an insurrection.

During Biden’s term, which ends next month, the Jayapal-led caucus has successfully encouraged the Democratic president to pursue various executive actions promoting access to contraception, climate action, corporate accountability, higher wages, lower costs for essentials, and relief for immigrants from countries in crisis, among other priorities.

The caucus also played a significant role in enacting major pieces of Democrats’ Build Back Better agenda. In the summer of 2021, Jayapal made clear to Congress and the president that House progressives would withhold votes from what became the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law—also known as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act—unless they also passed legislation on the climate emergency and social issues.

Biden signed the infrastructure bill in November 2021—followed by the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022. The delay was largely due to obstructionist then-Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), who ditched the party in the aftermath and are both leaving Congress at the end of this session.

Although Jayapal wishes the second bill would have passed sooner, and tackled the country’s childcare and housing crises, she said that she is still “particularly proud” of what the caucus was able to accomplish with that battle. As she told Common Dreams, “There would be no Inflation Reduction Act without Build Back Better, and there would’ve been no Build Back Better without the CPC.”

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) speaks at a “Go Bigger on Climate, Care, and Justice” rally on July 20, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Shannon Finney/Getty Images for Green New Deal Network)

Those two legislative packages were “about changing the way that we thought of government’s ability to fight for working people,” she continued. They “were about delivering results to people that would matter, whether it was in terms of great jobs, whether it was in terms of taking on climate change, whether it was in terms of driving down the cost of prescription drugs, [or] unrigging the tax system so that the wealthier began to pay their fair share.”

“All of those things were kind of fundamental and core to an economic agenda that worked for working people and poor people,” said Jayapal, who has personally championed legislation including the College for All Act, Dignity for Detained Immigrants Act, Housing Is a Human Right Act, Medicare for All Act, Transgender Bill of Rights, and Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act—partnering with Senate progressives such as Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the founding chair of the CPC.

While the Congressional Progressive Caucus will have new leadership next year, Jayapal plans to remain engaged by providing advice and support as chair emeritus and by co-chairing the CPC Political Action Committee with Casar and Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.). Under the PAC’s current heads—Jayapal, Pocan, and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.)—it “has grown from a $300,000 budget in the 2016 election cycle to raising $12 million over the past three election cycles,” the group said Wednesday.

Jayapal told Common Dreams that she is “really proud of the fact that we’ve had an incredible record” for CPC PAC endorsements. Over the past decade, a majority of pre-primary backed candidates have won their general election races—often “pushing back on big money that came in, dark money that came in, sometimes in the millions,” she said, pointing to Reps. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) and Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) as examples.

Lee, Ramirez, and Jayapal were all reelected last month, but overall it was a devastating cycle for Democrats, who failed to win control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. The outgoing CPC chair is among those who have responded to the results by urging the Democratic Party to reject super PACs and uplift working-class voters going forward.

In a memo earlier this month, Jayapal, Casar, Frost and fellow CPC member Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) called on the next Democratic National Committee chair, whoever it is, to “create an authentic… brand that offers a clear alternative and inclusive vision for how we will make life better for the 90% who are struggling in this economy, take on the biggest corporations and wealthiest individuals who have rigged the system, expose Trump’s corporate favoritism, and create a clear contrast with Republicans.”

Noting Republicans’ aim to use their forthcoming federal trifecta to pass another round of tax cuts for the rich, Jayapal said that “when we fight against the tax cuts, the Trump tax scam 2.0, we should tie it to this: The Democratic Party is not beholden to corporate PACs and dark money. We are fighting for the people.”

“There’s a clear contrast between Trump and his billionaires… and Democrats who are fighting for the vast majority of Americans, the 99% of Americans who are out there struggling every day,” she added. “That’s the contrast we need to be able to draw.”

(snip-embedded tweet)

In her final days as CPC chair, Jayapal is highlighting that contrast by slamming Trump and the billionaires who have his ear, like Elon Musk, for risking a government shutdown—which could begin Saturday—by derailing a bipartisan spending bill this week.

“The past 24 hours is the clearest demonstration yet of what Trump 2.0 will entail: The president of the United States allowing his unelected billionaire friends to control the government and enrich themselves at the expense of working people,” she said in a Thursday statement. “We cannot succumb to a government by billionaires, for billionaires.”

Republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Topics: House Progressive Caucus, House Progressives, Pramilla

Another Cartoon

It’s been one heck of a week, both on the public front, and here on the home front. It’s Friday afternoon, though, so here’s a toon about the public front from Clay Jones.

Jerk In The Box by Clay Jones

Remember, MAGAts…you voted for this Read on Substack

I’m going to use a colleague’s cartoon to point something out. Right-wing gaslighting lying fucknut Steve Kelley has a cartoon of a reporter asking White House Spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre to clarify who she’s talking about when she says “the president,” Joe Biden or Donald Trump. In Steve’s defense, it’s hard to write even adequate cartoons when you’re a lying racist MAGAt.

Steve might be a little slow on his civics but the answer is President Joe Biden. How do I know this? Because for one thing, Jean-Pierre works for President Joe Biden so you would have be a real idiot to believe she’s referencing the other guy. Second, President Joe Biden is the current president. The third thing is, Donald Trump is NOT president right now no matter how hard he’s trying to destroy the nation before he’s sworn into office.

Other fucknut cartoonists may also believe Trump is the leader of our government. Look at this bullshit from Idiot One Gary Varvel and copied days later by Idiot Two Dana Summers. I don’t see how Trump sitting his fat ass at MAGA-Lardo grifting his Trump Bibles as Christmas gifts while trying to destroy the government he’ll inherit on January 20 is leadership, but whatevs.

Trump is pushing for a government shutdown, saying he’s OK with it either way. If there’s a shutdown, he’ll blame Biden even though he’s the one shitposting on Truth Social that Republicans shouldn’t cooperate with Democrats, but they should raise the debt ceiling so that he can give asshole billionaires such as himself and Elon Musk tax cuts in 2025.

Remember, Republicans hate raising the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is to cover expenses Congress has already legislated but Republicans think it’s authorizing future spending. Trump is looking at future spending and wants the ceiling raised or done away with altogether. For once, I agree with Trump and the debt ceiling should be scrapped. Republicans won’t go along with that because for them, it’s a tool to hold the nation hostage.

Elon wants a shutdown because he wants to destroy the government except for the parts of it that pay him billions of dollars in government contracts. But he’s howling for a shutdown and that’s when Trump changed his mind. Elon did invest $277 million to get Trump elected, so his stake in that orange fat ass may be higher than Putin’s. And how much does Elon expect to reap for his quarter-billion-dollar purchase?

House Speaker Mike Johnson filed a stopgap spending bill Tuesday night which went to shit after Elon went into a tweet(X) frenzy consisting of over 100 posts in one night against a deal negotiated with Democrats. The bill would have provided $100 billion in disaster aid funding, billions in farm assistance, and other assorted projects like fighting cancer in children and kept the government running.

Among Elon’s tweets were lies that the bill included a 40 percent increase in congressional pay, $3 billion for a new stadium for the Washington Commanders, funding for bioweapon labs, and protecting the Jan. 6 Committee from being investigated. Why didn’t he also tweet it would fund Critical Race Theory, Drag Queen Story Time, trans men in women’s sports and restrooms, and buffets of cats and dogs to be eaten by illegal Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio?

Here’s the thing: If you have to lie your tiny South African balls off, you’re on the wrong side of the issue. The reason creepy goons and idiots like Elon and Trump have to lie is that the truth doesn’t help them. They also know they’re lying because Google’s search engine works for Republicans too.

As of this writing, there are only about eight hours left to pass a funding bill to prevent a shutdown. Trump says the shutdown will be Biden’s problem, but the idiot doesn’t realize he’s inheriting this problem in January. Or maybe, he thinks Elon will inherit it. Just go play golf, Tiny. Elon’s got this (sic).

During his last administration (sic), Trump told Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi he’d be glad to take the blame for a shutdown. When that shutdown happened, he blamed Schumer and Pelosi and eventually negotiated a deal where he lost funding for his stupid racist wall.

Trump is as good of a negotiator as George Constanza who negotiated his and Jerry’s salary for their NBC TV pilot down from $13,000 to $8,000.

The leader of this nation until January 20, 2025, is President Joe Biden, but the leader of the Republican Party is not Donald Trump or even Mike Johnson. It’s unelected Elon Musk.

This is a preview of the next four years. Republicans are in a rush to destroy this nation and they’re starting early.

Music note: I listened to Audioslave.

Drawn in 30 seconds: (snip-click through to help him out, and watch him draw!)

In Yesterday’s Democracy Docket

(I tried all day yesterday to post this, but didn’t get it done, so here it is this morning.)

Democracy Docket’s 2023 Litigation Report

Since 2020, Democracy Docket has extensively covered and tracked important litigation related to voting rights, elections and redistricting and now has a database of over 660 cases. As in previous years, we are providing a comprehensive year-end report on all the democracy-related cases filed and decided in 2023 that directly impacted voters.

Considering it was not a federal election year, 2023 was quite busy for democracy in the courts. While there were not as many new lawsuits filed this past year relative to 2022, there was a notable influx of consequential outcomes stemming from democracy-related cases that directly impacted voters.

Between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31, 2023, we tracked:

73 new democracy-related lawsuits filed across 31 states.
146 court orders that impacted voters across 34 states.
83 victories for voters across 26 states.

The statistics in this report are based on the lawsuits in our case database as of Dec. 31, 2023. For the purposes of this report, we excluded the 57 active redistricting lawsuits and the small number of criminal cases we are tracking.

Despite not being a federal election year, 2023 nevertheless saw over 70 democracy-related lawsuits spanning dozens of states. By comparison, in 2021 — another off-cycle year — Democracy Docket tracked 57 new democracy-related lawsuits across 18 states.

As expected, the number of new lawsuits filed in 2023 was lower than the 175 new democracy-related lawsuits filed in 2022 both before and after the midterm elections. In anticipation of the upcoming 2024 presidential election, we expect the number of new lawsuits to once again drastically increase this year.

In 2023, we tracked more pro-voting than anti-voting lawsuits and saw a nearly even split amongst lawsuits filed in federal and state courts. Lawsuits that centered around election administration — especially relating to direct democracy and the ballot initiative process — were most prominent among democracy-related litigation filed this past year. We observed how Republicans are doubling down on their anti-voting efforts in court, with GOP litigants bringing 68% of anti-voting lawsuits in 2023. Meanwhile, lawsuits filed by nonpartisan organizations — such as the NAACP or League of Women Voters — accounted for the vast majority of pro-voting litigation.

Below, we break down our comprehensive database of lawsuits that were filed in 2023 and provide analysis of the broader trends that characterized the past year’s litigation landscape.

Unlike in 2022, there were more pro-voting than anti-voting lawsuits filed in 2023.

Democracy Docket categorized the 73 new lawsuits filed in 2023 as either “pro-voting” or “anti-voting.” In total, we tracked 51 pro-voting lawsuits and 22 anti-voting lawsuits filed in 2023.

While this past year’s breakdown is a departure from the trend we saw in 2022 — in which there were more anti-voting lawsuits (93) than pro-voting lawsuits (82) — it is more in line with what we saw in 2021, when there were 49 pro-voting lawsuits and 8 anti-voting lawsuits.

Between 2022 and 2023, we noticed a distinct shift in who was behind new democracy-related litigation, with pro-voting parties bringing the bulk of all new lawsuits in 2023. While anti-voting parties brought 53% of the total lawsuits filed in 2022, they only brought 30% of new lawsuits filed in 2023. Inversely, pro-voting parties brought 47% of the total lawsuits filed in 2022, but nearly 70% of new lawsuits filed in 2023.

This is likely explained by the fact that most off-year election litigation focuses on pro-voting challenges to new voter suppression laws. In both 2021 and 2023, we saw waves of new anti-voting laws enacted by Republican-controlled legislatures. On the other hand, in even-numbered years, litigation tends to focus on how elections are administered and votes are counted — two areas where the anti-voting parties are particularly litigious. (snip-graphics and much More Info on the page)

Exactly.

Wed-nezday’s Bumper Sticker

Trump Tributes

by Clay Jones

New Jersey drones and some MAGA ass-kissing. Read on Substack

I’ve felt sick and disgusted since November, and those feelings only increased after I read about what ABC News did. If Donald Trump sues me for doing my job, I will not cave like ABC News, and I’ll tell him to go suck a lemon (replace lemon with something else).

Trump has villainized the media and has tried to take away the credibility of the press. Trumpers believe legitimate news outlets are “fake news” while they share “news” from YouTube and repeat Trump’s lies. Back when I freelanced for CNN and I’d try to discuss an issue with a MAGAt, they’d say, “Oh, you’re with CNN. That explains a lot,” without ever telling me exactly what it explained.

Anytime a Trumper tells you a news outlet lies, they can’t cite one example. Yet, these same idiots are in a cult that worships a man who told over 30,000 in a span of four years.

And it’s not just the cultists who are kissing Trump’s ass.

Jeff Bezos is donating $1 million to Donald Trump’s inauguration. He also pulled an endorsement from The Washington Post which was for Kamala Harris. When Bezos purchased the Post, he promised he would never meddle with editorial decisions. Bezos said he’s “very optimistic” about a second Trump administration (sic) and will be meeting with the orange goon this week. What’s Bezos’ deal with kissing Trump’s ass after years of criticizing him? It’s Elon Musk.

Bezos has government contracts such as with the Post Office delivering Amazon shipments (which is why you see angry mailmen on Sundays) and through Blue Origins, his rock company (it’s the one that looks like a giant penis). Bezos has lost government contracts to Elon and his rocket company (it’s the one owned by a giant penis). How can Bezos compete when his competition is firmly entrenched up Trump’s ass. It’s why you can’t see Trump anymore without Elon by his side. He’s afraid if he goes to the toilet for one minute, he’ll find Bezos up Trump’s butt when he returns despite the fact he called dibs.

Mark Zuckerberg, who banned Trump from Facebook for a minute (along with Russian trolls until they started paying to post), is also pledging $1 million to Trump’s inauguration and said Trump’s “fight fight fight” after being nipped in the ear was “badass.” Zuck probably also thinks My Little Pony is badass. Zuck is also donating his hydrofoiling board along with his CD that contains Country Roads.

Sam Altman, the owner of OpenAI, is also pledging a million bucks to the grift and said Trump will “lead our country in the age of AI.” That’s great news actually because I hate AI and if Trump is leading it, it’s doomed. But the thing is, Sam knows this and is only saying stupid shit to kiss Trump’s ass.

There’s no word yet on all the donors but former contributors to inaugurations are keeping mum, such as Google, Walmart, Home Depot, Target, etc, but nobody seems concerned about how their money is spent and they’re probably all resigned to the fact their donations will probably be grifted.

Trump raised $107 million for his inauguration in 2017 and a lot of that money disappeared. Sure, they paid for Three Doors Down (opening shot makes me think of what Trump must look like first thing in the morning) to sing Kryptonite and there was a very fine parade of tractors (look at the crowd size), but that didn’t cost $107 million. At least $1 million of it was spent for a ball at what was then Trump’s Washington hotel, but how many more millions landed in Trump’s bank account?

Trump has refused government funding for his inauguration in order to accept private donations. He says he’s saving taxpayer’s money when the truth is, he just wants to be bribed.

The donors didn’t care what happened to the money just so long as they won Trump’s favor, but what’s even more disgusting is when the media kisses the royal rump.

Bezos kissing Trump’s ass and using the Post to do it is one disgusting thing, but then there’s ABC News giving Trump $15 million for his stupid library.

ABC News agreed to pay $15 million to settle a defamation lawsuit filed by Trump. He was miffed by the way George Stephanopoulos used the term “liable for rape” to characterize a 2023 civil case in Manhattan, the one where a jury ruled that Trump, the rapist, was liable for sexual abusing and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll, who won $83 million from Rapey Trump. The judge noted that the jury’s verdict didn’t mean Carroll failed to prove Trump, the rapist, raped her.

The bar is high for libeling a public figure and Mr. McRapey is the most public of them all. News organizations usually don’t settle these bullshit lawsuits as they have the First Amendment on their side. When they do settle, it’s usually because it’s cheaper than paying their lawyers through a long tedious lawsuit, and not for something like $15.

Fox News had to settle with Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million but they were guilty as fuck and they’re not a real news organization. So why did ABC settle with a guy liable for rape?

ABC News, which is owned by Disney, settled to kiss Trump’s ass but all they did was give him more encouragement to file bullshit lawsuits. What ABC selfishly did was hurt the entire news industry, which Trump, the rapist, has called the “enemy of the American people.”

Disney should understand that they shouldn’t kiss the ring of Darth Sidious. They own Star Wars. At least Palpatine never had over two dozen women accuse him of rape and sexual assault, not even a female gundark.

Today, Trump scolded the government for not giving out more information about drones in New Jersey, but if the government knows what’s going on with Jersey drones, then Trump probably does too. Sorry to scare you like this but since he’s president-elect (sic), he’s getting daily briefings which means Vladimir Putin is getting daily briefings. Maybe the drones are delivering Big Macs to Bedminster.

Creative note: Proofer Laura asked if I intended to make a Hunger Games parallel with this cartoon. Since I’m the only person in the nation who’s never watched Hunger Games despite there being abundant nudity with dragons (I’ve been told and I hope it’s not just naked dragons), I did not intentionally make that reference, but it sounds cool the way Laura described it.

Laura told me, “In the Hunger Games the “tributes” are the people forced to fight to the death, and drones are used to deliver gifts from audience members to help the tributes survive.” What kind of drones? Dragon drones? What if they smoked the tributes? Can you say a dragon ate my homework?

Laura also said, “In the Hunger Games the gifts sent to competitors are hugely expensive and only very wealthy sponsors can afford to send them, Bezos and Musk types.” That sounds about right. The only people who won’t be eaten by a dragon over the next four years will be people like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk.

I wish I could send Trump a dragon. (snip)

“Are We Being Punished For A Feminist Utopia That Never Even Happened?”

And how long is this ‘masculinity crisis’ going to last? Read on Substack

by Rebecca Schoenkopf

Last week, I watched Girls Gone Wild: The Untold Story on Peacock, which, unsurprisingly, was fairly disturbing on a number of levels, starting with the fact that most people at the time thought “getting young women extremely drunk and then convincing them to take their tops off on camera” was a fairly normal, “boys will be boys!” thing to do.

The thing that really struck me, though, was the fact that it remained “normal” until about 2011, when creator Joe Francis was arrested for false imprisonment and assault, after he brought three women home after a night out and refused to let them leave, ultimately attacking one of them and bashing her head into the floor. Francis had long been Public Enemy #1 for feminists (along with, on the other end of the spectrum, the Christian patriarchs who fake-married their daughters at Purity Balls), but at that point, no one was really paying any attention to us.

The reason I bring this up, the reason it struck me, is because I don’t think I really realized until just then what an incredibly short time period it was between the end of that era — this era where bro culture was celebrated, where rape culture was celebrated, where women’s sexuality was a thing within their control whichever way they chose to control it, in which beautiful female celebrities were excoriated for being a size four in public — and the era we are now in.

Because we hear a lot about it from their end, right? The story, as they tell it, is that there were all these ostensibly “liberal” men who “voted for Obama,” but then the Left “just went too far” and drove them into the loving, misogynistic arms of Andrew Tate and Donald Trump. And now they’re lonely and they don’t know how to be men and it is a full-on crisis! A crisis I tell you! And an epidemic!

The way they talk, you would think that they had been forced to live in this horrible matriarchal world for years, during where they weren’t allowed any free speech, were constantly accused of rapes they didn’t commit, were told constantly by everyone that they were garbage and that they had to apologize for being born male.

But let’s piece together this timeline, shall we?

2011: Joe Francis arrested, “Entourage” ends.

2012: During a stand-up set, comedian Daniel Tosh starts talking about how rape jokes are “always” funny — causing a woman in the audience to yell, “Actually, rape jokes are never funny!”, to which he responds, “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, five guys right now? Like right now? What if a bunch of guys just raped her?”

— Also, Tucker Max, who was celebrated for having written a book called I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell, in which he tells multiple stories of having sex with extremely intoxicated women, “retires” from being Tucker Max.

2013: We have the rape joke discourse, led by then-Jezebel writer Lindy West. On the one hand, you have feminists saying “This shit isn’t actually funny,” and on the other, approximately 87 million op-eds about how we must protect the sanctity of rape jokes.

— The campus rape discourse begins. Women who have been raped on campus discuss both the problem of rape on campus and the tendency of school officials to do nothing about it, asking people to take it more seriously and criticizing men who have sex with women when they are too intoxicated to consent. This is followed by years of people complaining that we can’t take these women seriously, because what if they are just having day-after regrets because the man didn’t send them flowers or call them back or something?

2014: In May, incel Elliot Rodger kills six people because he is angry that women won’t have sex with him.

— In August, Gamergate begins — starting out as a rage against progressive videogame developer Zoë Quinn from gamers who believe that she only got good reviews for a game she made that they didn’t like because she had a sexual relationship with a video game reviewer (who never actually reviewed her game). It turns into unfettered rage and harassment against women who dare to criticize games for being misogynistic, and then against all “Social Justice Warriors” in general.

— We have the street harassment discourse, started by Black women on social media, in which women publicly discussed the general unpleasantness of not being able to walk to the grocery store without some guy yelling “Nice tits!” at us. This is quickly followed by approximately 87 million “How are men even supposed to talk to women if they can’t yell at them while they walk down the street?” and “But it’s a compliment!” and “I’m a woman and it makes me feel pretty when men I don’t know compliment my ass!” op-eds.

— The height of the affirmative consent discourse, in which people discuss why it’s important to have affirmative and enthusiastic consent at each stage of sexual activity. Some states implement “Yes Means Yes” laws — so that, instead of asking campus rape victims whether they were clear enough that they did not want to have sex with someone, accused rapists will be asked how they obtained consent, This was, naturally, followed by lots of complaining that it will ruin sex.

2015: Donald Trump begins his presidential campaign, ultimately winning in part due to a backlash to “social justice” activism — feminist activism and rape culture discourse in particular.

So let’s just stop there for now. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, because I know we had a few more discourses and we certainly had a lot more incel mass murders. But it doesn’t need to be, because the main thing I want to point out is that, at the very most, we had a few years of public discussions of things women had grown real fucking sick of, each of which was swiftly followed by an inevitable “Has feminism gone too far?!?” backlash from those who thought everything was fine the way it was and had been — mostly from those with bigger platforms and more power than we ever had.

This, frankly, has been the case for all social justice movements that have occurred over the last few years — not just feminism and rape culture, but also racism, police brutality and trans rights. You see a groundswell of actual people talking about their experiences and how best to change things so that other people don’t have to go through them, and a swift and terrible backlash from those who say they would like those other people to shut up, please.

Donald Trump was elected again this year, and again we were all told “This is all because you all just went too far! They just couldn’t take it anymore!”

But like, in the end, what did they have to take? People talking publicly on social media? People making art, movies, television shows, music, video games, etc. that they don’t like? Or publicly criticizing things they do like or behavior they enjoy engaging in?

That’s nothing. Especially when compared to everything that everyone else was expected to go through and shut up about. I’d like to point out that, quite notably, taking rape more seriously did not lead to any epidemic of men being sent to prison for not sending flowers or calling the day after.

One of the most jarring points of the “Girls Gone Wild” documentary is one in which a girl recounts how she ended up in a video when she was 17 years old (making it, legally, child pornography), and one of the male teachers at her high school responded by asking her to autograph a copy for him. That’s just one moment, one small snapshot of what was meant to be acceptable back then.

And, you know, at no point did anyone back then publicly wonder or wring their hands about “Is the patriarchy going too far?” Rather, then, as now, most public discussion was about what was wrong with the girls who were doing this, not the men who produced it.

It’s not at all surprising to me that men living in that social environment felt “safe” voting for Barack Obama, or felt like they were totally liberal because they wanted to legalize weed and didn’t care if people were gay or not. Because they could vote for Obama and feel like a good liberal while chanting “Iron my shirt!” at Hillary Clinton. Everything was going really well for them and no one was really challenging the status quo, at least not anyone they were paying any attention to. This is part of what they mean when they say “the Left left me!”

(And, again, that’s just the feminist side of it. They were also “totally fine” with Black people until Black people started bringing up police brutality and racism, and fine with LGBTQ+ people when they thought that civil rights push would end with marriage.)

We’re being punished right now for a feminist utopia we never even had. We went straight from the Girls Gone Wild Era to the Gamergate/Incel mass murder era to the the Trump era. And while a whole lot has changed in terms of what we are willing to put up with or be quiet about, the only thing that has actually changed about the patriarchy has been the flavor it takes on.