#LetLizSpeak
 |
| Donna, my other love |
As the old song said, "I fall in love too easily". I'm hopelessly in love with five cashiers who work at various establishments in the small town in which I live. I'm head-over-heals smitten with four actresses (two of whom were named "Hepburn", all of whom are deceased). I'm in love with every woman that I consider a close friend. These are not intense, amorous obsessions, mind you, merely harmless, schoolboy crushes. There are only two politicians that I've ever fallen in love with. One is the congresswoman from Maryland, Donna Edwards; the other is the distinguished senator from the great state of Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren.
When Liz Warren first came into my consciousness a little over a decade ago, it was all over as far as I was concerned. We're talkin' love at first sight here, folks. She had me at "hello". This is why I went into a blind rage a few nights ago when Liz was censored on the floor of the senate by uber-bastard, Mitch McConnell, for reading a letter written by the late Coretta Scott King into the record. He said that Ms. King's words, committed to the congressional record over thirty years ago, were a violation of "Rule Number Nineteen", a "slander" upon the character of Jeff Sessions, the avowed White Supremacist who is now our attorney general.
When Liz Warren first came into my consciousness a little over a decade ago, it was all over as far as I was concerned. We're talkin' love at first sight here, folks. She had me at "hello". This is why I went into a blind rage a few nights ago when Liz was censored on the floor of the senate by uber-bastard, Mitch McConnell, for reading a letter written by the late Coretta Scott King into the record. He said that Ms. King's words, committed to the congressional record over thirty years ago, were a violation of "Rule Number Nineteen", a "slander" upon the character of Jeff Sessions, the avowed White Supremacist who is now our attorney general.
 |
| Martin and Coretta |
Weep no more, my lady
O weep no more today
We will sing a song for my old Kentucky home
For my old Kentucky home far away
I won't rehash my feelings regarding old Mitch at this time. When commenting on him I tend to get a little out-of-control with my feelings. I have fantasized on this site about confronting him in some decrepit, back alley somewhere in the District-of-You-Know-Where and pounding the corrupt little freak to the very edge of eternity. My maternal forbears all hailed from the Blue Grass State and Indiana (Mike Pence's home turf). These two ancestral connections, at one time anyway, made me proud. I am profoundly ashamed and embarrassed by the connection today. I'm also distantly related to Roger Brook Taney - the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court whom, in 1857, wrote the Dred Scott decision - the worst ruling in the history of this diseased republic. The older I get, the more painfully obvious it is becoming to me that my heritage sucks. One of my ancestors evicted the family of a very young Abraham Lincoln from the land on which he was born. Another of my relatives was Dr. Samuel Mudd, the man who patched-up the broken ankle of John Wilkes Booth in the hours after he murdered the great emancipator. You can only imagine my embarrassment. I'm descended from a long line of perfect rascals.
Hang down your head, Tom Degan.
The following day, other senators (all of them male) read Coretta's words into the record. None of them were prevented from completing their remarks. That is not to imply that Mitch's actions the previous evening were sexist (although he is, indeed, a shameless sexual bigot) it is merely that, by the following day, he had come to understand the gravity of the mistake he had made. By the time the sun rose the next morning, Elizabeth Warren was America's newest political superstar. As was once observed: There is no such thing as bad publicity.
Did Mitch censor Elizabeth Warren because he a sexist It's really hard to say. Of this I have no doubt: He censored her because he's a fool. That is no state secret.
Did Mitch censor Elizabeth Warren because he a sexist It's really hard to say. Of this I have no doubt: He censored her because he's a fool. That is no state secret.
Elizabeth Warren is a godsend for many reasons - and one of those reasons is the fact that she drives the right wing in this country completely nuts. She was, in fact, my choice to be the Dem's nominee in 2016. Not to my surprise, that idiotic party blew it - yet again. Had she or Bernie Sanders been nominated last summer, either one of them would have destroyed Donald Trump at the polls on Election Day. Instead, they chose to cast their lot with Hillary Clinton, a candidate so inherently flawed, she was unable to defeat a common pervert like Donald Trump. On second thought, weep, my lady....
Idiot Nation.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
SUGGESTED LISTENING:
Here is a YouTube link to listen to Martin Luther King's speech in New York City, delivered on April 4,1967, one year before he died, at Riverside Church in New York City.
`
He spoke to us then. He speaks to us still.
AFTERTHOUGHT, 2/13/17. 2:05 PM:
I received this message a week ago from someone I've known for forty years. I'll be merciful here and keep the name anonymous:
"I will get used to living in a nation that's not a laughing stock where we can be proud again and not be slaves to other nations. I will be happy to be self sufficient and have others respect us again. How quickly we forget 911 and how these people went to our schools and were our neighbors then murdered all people in walks of life. My grandparents were immigrants and came to this country with pride and love for America learned the language and worked hard through criticism and being spit on. You Tom Deagan were raised with a silver spoon in your mouth. If you don't like the president or respect him get out.
See the rest of the world and how it lives."
See the rest of the world and how it lives."
I deal with this stuff every day. It would have been nice if, after all this time, she might have learned how to spell my name.
posted by Tom Degan @ 2:33 PM
10 comments
10 Comments:
Warren was my choice also. Or, even a "Sanders - Warren" ticket. And, as of Thursday, not my president Trump referred to Warren as “Pocahontas” several times during a lunch with some senators. Real dignified. What a dick.
Funny Tom that you should pick this subject while not allowing me to respond to posts referencing me ( Woodsman and JG in your last thread).
More liberal "Do as I mandate, not as I do"?
The sooner the Democratic Party understands and supports the message from Sanders and Warren, the sooner they will regain their majority. As long as they wimp out and go "Republican Lite" they will continue as the minority.
I see we have a crybaby, whining again about something having nothing to do with the OP.
Thin-skinned reactions are now the new PC, amirite?
Tom,
Since Barry drove the Democrat Party car over the cliff leaving the Dems at their lowest Federal and State representation in 100 years, do you think Elizabeth Warren is now the leader of the Democrat Party?
Also, do you think Liz is part Cherokee? She does have high cheekbones.
Well I agree with you, Tom, that if the Democrats had nominated Bernie or any other viable candidate, then we would likely not have a president Trump right now.
That said, we do have him and we need to hold him accountable. -- Not to the whims and wants of a crybaby antagonistic progressive agenda per se, but rather to the Constitution of the United States of America. This is what should have been done for Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama too. We didn't though and that is a big part of the reason why the people got pissed and wanted a non-politician that could shake things up in Washington D.C. and the nation in the first place. Fine. We got that. Now we have to hold President Trump accountable for his actions when they stray from a lawful constitutional course.
Thus far, he has done more good than bad and has already surpassed eight years of "achievements" under President Obama, but there are some areas where I am greatly concerned too, particularly when it comes to some of his environmental policies. We shall see, sir.
T.Paine, I would like to get your reaction to this article about Trump I recently read.
So far I like that he canned the TPP and wants to friendly with Russia, the rest of what he has done, not so much.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-president-reportedly-doesnt-read-memos-thats-a-huge-problem_us_589f1b6de4b094a129eb6ed6?ipmsw25uz0duc8fr&
Woodenman, considering the source of the Huffington Post, I read the article and gave it appropriate consideration. If the assertion of the author is true, and I suspect to a certain degree that it is indeed, then that is absolutely a huge reason of concern. That said, I wonder at the objectivity and the desire to cast (perhaps) untruthful aspersions towards the new chief executive of our nation that he simply refers to as "Mr. Trump" instead of President Trump throughout his article.
I am happy that President Trump scrapped TPP. I am happy in principle over the temporary immigration ban, although there are aspects of it that were very poorly rolled out and executed. If our gracious host will allow, you can see more specifics of this at my blog, if you so care: http://savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2017/02/trumps-temporary-immigration-ban.html
All of this said, I am concerned about his seeming lack of focus on important issues over trivial matters like crowd sizes etc., and his seeming lack of intellectual curiosity on vitally important matters. This is why it is of critical importance that his cabinet be sharp and knowledgeable about the departments they head. Some of them I believe are up to the task in spades. Others... not so much, in my opinion.
While I share some of the misgivings of my leftist friends and family members regarding President Trump, I do not hold to the position that our excessively worried host does regarding the imminent demise of America because of Trump's leadership or lack thereof.
I could be wrong, but I think the nation will survive another poor president. We already have done so considering the last three we had.
T. Paine: "I could be wrong, but I think the nation will survive another poor president. We already have done so considering the last three we had."
I'd like to offer that your specificity should be increased, and your statement to read, "the last five we had." It cannot be ignored that it was during the Reagan years that the slow-motion corporate coup d'état began in earnest. Our democratic processes have been in an unending process of unraveling, and usurped since those heady days.
The next, and final phase, fervently and purposely began on January 20th. The ultimate outcome will be totally unrecognizable or conceivable to the far-reaching majority of Americans -- assuming we make it through these times whole.
JG is correct. Since Reagan let the foxes in the hen house, government of, by and for the people has been slowly replaced by government of, by, and for the banks, corporations, and economic elites.
Trump's cabinet could not more represent government of Exxon/mobile, by Wall Street, and for the Kochs. Throw in a few generals to further benefit the military industrial complex war machine, and we have our New Order.
Democracy has been Trumped. The former Republic serves the few over the many.
Nice! I didn't vote for trumpf, i didn't vote for HRC, even though I was told by a new yawker in her house that "... any vote for anyone else is a vote against HRC... " we could overlook her criminality. i didn't vote for Sanders and i didn't vote for Jill Stein either. I wrote it in! They still allow write-ins in my state even though they still have (so we're told) voter fraud. Watch out! Can I see your driver's license? Elizabeth Warren should be the POTUS.
Post a Comment
<< Home