Now Is NOT The Time To Tune Out!

It's astonishing. Ratings for CNN and MSNBC have tanked, while ratings for Fox News has stayed roughly the same, or ticked up slightly.

According to Forbes Magazine, MSNBC and CNN both had their ratings drop by half in the weeks post-election, a steep decline given that MSNBC was the #2 rated news service behind Fox News leading up to the election.

So what's going on?

I think for the most part, people who really know what's going on, namely those who follow balanced and legacy media, see the upcoming disaster, and can't watch. It's much the same as when someone sees a kid dash into the street before an oncoming car. One has to turn one's head and cover one's eyes so as to avoid seeing the bloody, tragic aftermath.

I'm certain there's also a fatigue factor. Those who hate Trump are just plain sick and damned tired of hearing about him. So it's easier to turn the television off and just peek at the headlines a little bit later.

I get it.

Or, there's this factor: people would just rather tune out. They know the situation is shit, they can't do anything about it, and so watching Wrongway-Peachfuzz-Trump select his clown-college Cabinet is simply too depressing.

Oh yeah, depression. That's certainly also a factor. I mean, Michael Moore (for example) hasn't done a single podcast since November 12th, when he did nothing for almost an hour except weep and play old-time records from his collection.

But now is NOT the time to tune out! Now is the time to be alert and at our best!

Hear me, Michael? Get up off your ass! Break time is over! Back to work! We need you!

We need to be alert and vigilant for the same reason one needs to be alert when one is trapped in a speeding bus that's out of control. Maybe the steering is broken, or some malevolent jackass has taken the wheel, but in that situation, the last thing you need to do is curl up into a fetal position and moan. You need to have eyes forward! Maybe you can't wrangle the steering wheel back in time, but you can sure as hell see when it's time to jump off, tuck & roll, and hopefully land safely!

Tuning out is not an option. Checking out might need to be, but we're nowhere near that point, yet!

In a previous blog post, I gave five reasons one could be hopeful. I've since thought of a sixth: As we can still see, Trump is in cognitive decline. There's a better-than-fair chance that he will be too bad-addled to do much damage to our nation's systems as he slowly loses his marbles. So long as he gets his little foibles, he won't bother with the big ones.

Let his Chief of Staff run things. That doesn't sound so bad. IF we pay attention, IF we are vigilant, we might just get through this only slightly singed.

So on your feet, people! Eyes front! The election was lost precisely because too few people knew what was going on.

No need to add yourself to that number!

Eric

**

On The Shooting Of Brian Thompson

There's no shortage of people commenting upon the shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Liberal media outlets are correctly pointing out how much this emphasizes the many injustices caused by having an insurance-based healthcare system. Conservative media outlets are emphasizing how senseless this heinous act is, and that murder is not justifiable, no matter the motivation.

Oddly enough, both sides are correct for once. Also, not so oddly, both sides miss the main point.

Which means, of course, I have to say it. And I'll get to that main point in a minute. (Or you could just scroll down to the bold-print section. But I think you'll like what I have to say as a preamble.)

I won't attempt to justify the vigilante who shot Thompson. Murder is murder. I won't cheer the fact that (finally!) a corporate insurance bigwig paid the true cost of healthcare theft. But I can certainly understand the temptation. We've all been screwed over by the insurance industry one way or another. We all have friends or family who have suffered greatly trying to pay premiums and out-of-pocket expenses - and that's just the medical aspect of insurance. I, myself, recently saw a coworker get denied short-term disability after a major operation because his condition had been diagnosed more than three months earlier, thus making the condition "pre-existing." After his vacation and sick time expired, the poor man had to do without pay while he recovered, all because he missed the fine print.

In Thompson's mild defense, I highly doubt he even fully comprehended what his policies have been doing at ground-level. Corporate executives seldom do. They see charts and graphs, not people. They hire thousands of others to handle the individual injustices, and even those people never have to deal with those they screw over face-to-face. On an intellectual level, Thompson probably knew what he was doing, but the lives he affected weren't real for him.  The denied claims aren't allowed to be personal. They are merely claim #005797432, or #050776484. Not human beings, just numbers on a computer screen, and ones he didn't even see. One mouse click by an underling - done.

But it was certainly personal for the shooter.

Like most CEO's, Thompson was probably a conservative; probably in favor of gun rights; and almost certainly opposed to government assistance of any kind - all while playing golf with a handicap (because it's not welfare when it's golf, right?). We don't really know for sure at this point. But nobody is talking about the lax gun laws which made it possible. I kind of wish more people were. But if we can't even get outraged over classrooms full of kids getting gunned down, seemingly year after year, why should we be surprised if no one gets outraged when a major Republican party campaign donor gets shot and killed?

And here, finally, is the main point: For generations, we have been living with a healthcare system, even post-Obamacare, in which one major illness could potentially wipe out 1) one's life-savings, 2) inheritance, and 3) kids' college tuition fund, all in one blow! If we lived in a sane world, we would be rioting to change that every day; to stop being the one developed nation on the goddamned planet to not have a nationalized healthcare system for everyone! And not just those over the age of 65!

But the Right Wing Media Machine is so widespread, the institutionalized disinformation so prevalent, that we cannot even think our way out of this wet paper bag.

Yeah, yeah, I know, government screws up everything. I won't deny it. In fact, government screws up so badly that the only thing which screws up worse is a goddamned insurance company!

And yet here we are, trusting that one, even worse, totally evil thing. Because we're so scared of the word, "socialism," we would rather watch one's entire family go broke while lying on the gurney.

Nothing, nothing will snap us out of our mass delusion on this! If we haven't woken up by now, no mere shooting of a CEO will make any difference. We will all get shafted for hundreds of thousands of dollars, even with good health coverage, and still scream afterward, "socialized medicine is evil!"

It's enough to give me an ulcer. Or a heart attack. But I don't dare get either of those - it will cost too much!

Forgive me as I echo Steve Martin in the movie Roxanne, but I have a dream. It's a simple dream, really. It's not an impossible dream. It's not even much of a challenge, really. All I want in this country is that, if (heaven forbid) a citizen gets a major illness, that person doesn't end up screaming at the top of his lungs, "For god's sake, whatever you do, don't take me to the hospital! It'll ruin me!"

The manhunt for Thompson's killer goes on. I'm reluctantly impressed at the shooter's meticulous planning and (if you'll forgive the pun) execution. 

But real healthcare for all is proving to be even more elusive.

Eric

**

We Need A Better Defense Of Trans People

In the Right's perpetual campaign to bash liberals, anti-trans sentiment has been an extremely effective weapon. Voters who might otherwise agree with Democrats on just about every issue imaginable are nevertheless driven away from their own best interests when Republicans brand everyone to the left of themselves as being in favor of Drag Queen Story Hour, or trans female athletes competing in sports, or 13-year-olds receiving double mastectomies, or whatever other outrage-porn the Right Wing Media Machine decides to push next.

Nearly all political analysts have cited one particular commercial aired by the Trump campaign. That commercial played a clip of Kamala Harris saying that she supported gender-affirming care for inmates in California, and from there associated this with her wanting to give such care to illegal immigrant criminals. "Kamala is for they/them," the ad said. "Donald Trump is for us."

We laughed at this. But it worked.

Now, the response to the accusation was actually pretty solid. Federal prisoners were offered gender-affirming care during Trump's administration too. On Fox News, Kamala called this "throwing stones while living in a glass house." Also, under Kamala's term as California AG, only two inmates ever received such treatment. TWO. The total number of inmates to receive any such medical treatment as of December 2022 was only 20, and since ICE has a policy of incarcerating illegal immigrants as briefly as possible, it's almost certain that none of those was an illegal immigrant.

Yet none of this gained any traction. Nothing resonated. Part of this, of course, is because the Right Wing Media Machine has utterly taken over. But the other part is simply this:

We need a better defense of trans people!

I feel I'm uniquely qualified to bridge the gap on this particular issue. I'm a gen-X'er, part of that older generation which truly struggles with understanding the whole trans thing. What's more, I was once a fundamentalist Christian, ticketed for the ministry throughout my youth (though I've done a 180 since). Admittedly, the whole subject still seems a bit odd to me. Thus, as a self-described "Christian in recovery," I can clearly relate to how the anti-trans arguments resonate with believers. To their mindset, gender fluidity is utterly and monstrously alien. I understand how certain people, belonging to a community so traditional that short hair/skirts on women are still frowned upon, will almost certainly look upon "transality" (for want of a better word) as insane in the extreme, and those who accept it with tolerance, doubly so. For them, their pronouns are, "What the fuck are you even talking about?!" and "Get the hell away from me!"

So I fully comprehend how well the cards are stacked against us. We can't even try to mount an argument without automatically being seen with suspicion and revulsion.

But here's an attempt anyway:

Back in 2004, the issue that swept George W. Bush into a second term was opposition to gay marriage. It, like gender fluidity, filled conservatives with utter revulsion. But only several years later, by 2011, the issue was largely settled. The vast majority of Americans slowly came to accept gay marriage. Why? It wasn't just because of a 5 to 4 Supreme Court ruling which legalized it. It was because young people, many of whom had gay friends or were gay or bisexual themselves, rebelled against their elders. Usually, such social rebellion loses and the next generation settles into middle-aged capitulation. But this time, the youth movement won. The parents who rejected gay marriage came to accept it, based largely on wanting to accept their own children and their far-out opinions. Until, that is, those opinions stopped seeming quite so "far-out."

The trend lines are similar today, 20 years later. The youth of America, Millennials and Gen-Alpha mostly, are so strongly pro-trans that they will brook no argument on the matter. (Which is part of why Kamala didn't take a stronger mitigating stance regarding gender-affirming medical care. She knew if she offended the youth vote, she didn't stand a chance.) That insistence, like the one of 20 years before, will turn the tide of public opinion.

But that's tomorrow. For today, the argument is simply this:

Fundamentally, being trans is just like being gay.

Well, not just like being gay, naturally. But what I mean is, someone with gender dysphoria is born, not made. Yes, as humans, there is a spectrum. Yes, the nature-vs-nurture arguments abound. Yes, there are borderline cases. But for the most part, when a person's rebellion against their birth-gender is 1) consistent, 2) persistent, and 3) insistent, it's nature.

When society sees a trans person as having a condition on-par with being a gay person, the hard-won tolerance gay people have largely achieved comes along for the ride.

But my argument has a second part to it: We also need to finally loosen the fuck up! We'll never get anywhere if we regard those with an innate revulsion towards trans people as nothing but fools and morons. That kind of attitude never convinced anyone of anything. Indeed, it will just entrench the opposition further.

I'll use myself as an example, here. You see, I really don't know what to do yet about the problem of female trans athletes competing in sports. I freely admit I'm still trying to find a good solution to that one. (If I find one, I'll let you know.) But I've encountered so much blowback for this temporary middle-ground that I truly wonder about my friends on the Political Left. Can't I even take some time to process?

We'll never get anywhere if we can't even have a discussion.

Or then there's this one, already almost 10 years old: Back in 2015, on the podcast version of this blog (which I might resurrect someday, who knows?), I made a seemingly low-key joke about Caitlyn Jenner. My wisecrack at the time was, now that Bruce is Caitlyn, she's a woman over the age of 60. And as we all know, the media just doesn't talk about celebrity women over the age of 60. Therefore, to be truly fair to Caitlyn as a woman, the media must completely shut up about her.

That was reasonably funny. I got a few laughs. But I also got so much blowback about it that I'm still stunned. Apparently, Caitlyn has been the brunt of so many trans jokes that the pro-trans side drew a line in the sand: No joke about her, no matter how low-key, was even allowed to be funny. On the one hand, I see their point.

On the other hand, we will NEVER win any election again with an attitude like that!

So that's my take: Use the trans-like-gay angle as a jiu-jitsu move, using its weight to pull the opposition over to our side.

That, and don't treat people like absolute dirt for having a contrary opinion.

But that should go without saying.

Don't agree? Change my mind.

Eric

**

Why Biden's Pardon Of Hunter Makes Sense

So Joe Biden has given a presidential pardon to his son Hunter, in spite of saying numerous times that he would not do so.

Yeah, it's a flip-flop. A broken promise. And a bit of naked nepotism, too. But I think it makes perfect sense. Here's why:

To hear Biden's own reasons, he said, “I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice.”

Interestingly, that is precisely the same reason Trump will give when pardoning January 6th rioters, various other toadies, and himself.

Except that whereas Biden's complaints are legitimate, Trump's are bogus.

But that's beside the point. Biden, like many of us, knows that a world of abuse is coming. Trump will abuse his powers for revenge and personal gain as much as he is able, and given his cabinet nominations, it's clear that he wants to maximize that abuse. There will be hurt, there will be pain, and there will be chaos.

And in that coming chaos, the only thing that will be left that will truly matter to Joe Biden is an old man's undying love towards his son.

So yeah, I don't blame him. Trump is about to break all sorts of promises. That's what he does, and what he's always done. So one more broken promise by Biden really doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of the corruption which is about to dominate the White House.

I only hope he also gives a blanket pardon do anyone else Trump deems an "enemy of the state" as a means of blunting the upcoming abuse of the justice system.

Eric

**

What Was The "Little Secret" Trump Had With Mike Johnson?

With so many families getting together over Thanksgiving weekend, there will undoubtedly be a lot of discussion about politics.

And a lot of arguing, I expect.

Not like anyone really needs more fodder for discussion, but here's a really juicy tidbit of a question that families with that in-your-face-about-Trump uncle (and let's face it, there aren't many families who don't have at least one of those) will appreciate:

Back on October 27, during the now infamous rally at Madison Square Garden, Trump said that he and Mike Johnson had a "little secret." He promised to tell what it was after the election.

Well, the election is over. So what the hell was it?

Only two days afterward (which is, you know, before the election was over), Mike Johnson tried saying that it was a tactic being used to "get out the vote." Trump campaign press secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested something very similar, saying that it referred to the "countless telerallies reaching millions of Americans across the country in key regions that also helps bolster Republicans in congressional races."

Well, maybe.

Certainly it's no secret that the Trump campaign had a program to target disaffected male voters, ask them what specifically they didn't like about the Biden administration, and then target that. It apparently was a very effective tactic. But was this the real secret?

We may never know what it was, because after Mike Johnson broke Trump's promise on his behalf and gave an explanation well before the election, Trump has refused to comment on it after the election, breaking his promise directly.

What was that "little secret?"

I don't have a good answer for you. It could range anywhere from Musk's takeover of Twitter, to cyber-fraud, to undermining the certification of the vote at the State level.

But the speculation about it should make the potatoes and gravy go down a little easier as that crazy uncle struggles to come up with an explanation.

Eric

**

Biden Can End Ukraine's War Now (And Should!)

Ukraine seems headed to defeat. At the very least, it faces a Trump-sponsored settlement that gives Russia complete control over much of the eastern territories, if not all of them. At the worst, Trump backs Putin as Russia drives their forces straight into Kyiv and takes over the whole country.

I'm sure that's part of why Biden finally allowed Ukraine to use long-range missiles built in the U.S. To be sure, Russia sending North Korean troops into Ukraine certainly didn't help matters, either.

But here's the thing: I think Biden should use these last two months to really get tough with Russia and force a complete withdrawal from Ukraine altogether - before Trump even gets sworn in. If Biden acts now, it's very possible. Once done, we fast-track Ukraine into NATO, and then there's nothing Trump can do about it.

Well, except maybe back out of NATO altogether, but that's a travesty for another day.

"But wait!" you might ask, "If Biden gives Putin an ultimatum, won't that risk sparking a nuclear war?"

I don't think so. Here's why:

When we were about to send financial aid to Ukraine, Putin threatened the possibility of nuclear retaliation. We sent aid anyway, and nothing happened.

When we were about to send ordinance to Ukraine, Putin threatened the possibility of nuclear retaliation. We sent ordinance anyway, and nothing happened.

When we were about to send tanks to Ukraine, Putin threatened the possibility of nuclear retaliation. We sent tanks anyway, and nothing happened.

When we were about to send jet planes to Ukraine, Putin threatened the possibility of nuclear retaliation. We sent planes anyway, and nothing happened.

Putin again threatened the possibility of nuclear retaliation if Ukraine ever fired U.S.-made long-range missiles into Russia. Well, Ukraine just did.

And again, nothing happened.

At this point, calling Putin's bluff is almost a given. He knows damned well that when the first nuke hits Kyiv, the second nuke will hit Moscow.

He won't escalate. Because he can't.

It's time for Biden to move the 5th Fleet into the Black Sea, and say to Putin, "All right, jackass, you've had your fun, now get your goddamned troops back over onto your side of the border - NOW! INCLUDING Crimea!"

After all, Putin can't even defeat Ukraine. What on earth would make him think he could defeat Ukraine AND us?

The poetic tragedy of it all is that Biden has the will to do this, but probably not the guts.

Trump has the guts to do this, but definitely not the will.

Who knows? Maybe Biden will decide to leave it all on the field on the way out.

Then again, my optimism has taken a hit since November 5th.

Eric

**

Twitter Derangement Syndrome

Here's a thought shared by many:

Social media is driving us all insane.

And by "insane," I don't mean a little neurotic. I mean foaming at the mouth, bat-shit, nucking futz!

According to Tristan Harris, the man behind the landmark documentary, "The Social Dilemma," there are entire programs of study, at Stanford, at Harvard, at many other prestigious universities, wholly devoted to the study of what grabs human attention, and keeps it.

Not classes. Programs.

These schools of thought have been training the corporate leaders which drive our social media algorithms to gear them solely toward increasing engagement. The algorithms behind Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, and many others, don't give a damn about what drives the engagement. They only care that the user is engaged, and that such engagement increases. If it increases due to right-wing extremism, or conspiracy mongering, or religious zealotry, or anger, or fear, or outright lies, all of that in ancillary to the machine that drives the increased engagement. The user is interacting more - fuck everything else.

Your commitment to the social media is all that matters.

Nowhere is the impact of this more evident than the cesspool that Twitter/X has become. Elon Musk bought it up, lost a crap-ton of money on it, but gained an outsized influence upon one of the biggest social media platforms. It paid off, in as much as Musk was (arguably) able to influence the 2024 election more than anyone realized. It goes without saying that his opinions, forced upon all users whether they liked it or not, were not of the pre-Trump quality that we came to expect from Elon Musk before.

(I mean, let's be honest: Electric cars, space exploration... these are not the sorts of things pursued by retrograde Christian-nationalist dipshits marching people back towards the Middle Ages. Elon Musk once had clout among those who enjoyed watching TED and the Big Bang Theory. How the mighty have fallen...)

But this happened because first Elon Musk himself was sucked in by Twitter algorithms. They radicalized him. And when the Babylon Bee had its account suspended on Twitter, he hauled off and bought the entire platform.

In other words, Elon himself so loved the thing which poisoned his mind, he took over the whole thing. Just so that his favorite radicalization memes wouldn't get blocked from his eyes.

Or yours.

Social media has been very effective at spreading a particularly pernicious idea, that "Trump Derangement Syndrome," (a.k.a. "TDS") is actually the derangement caused by the rejection of Trump, rather than the purely sane reaction to someone so dastardly. Such a purely upside-down mindset could only have been promulgated by the unholy alliance between the Right-Wing Media Machine, and the increasingly powerful forces of social media.

But I have a radical proposal regarding "TDS." Given that right-wing radicalization is so often brought about by social media, "TDS" should be re-branded as "Twitter Derangement Syndrome."

(Yeah, yeah, I know, it's actually "X." But no. Just.... no.)

We may not be able to fully undo all the damage that social media has done to the conscience of the general public. But we can do one small thing to reclaim what we've lost down that hellhole. We can at least re-designate "TDS" as "Twitter Derangement Syndrome."

It seems the least we can do.

And it's a lot closer to the truth.

Eric

**