Share this comment
You're not wrong, but I guarantee the media is quaking in their boots, knowing full well that any fair.org screeching means absolutely squat to the right-wing nuts. Next thing you'll be expecting the police to get out of their cars and read and understand the inscription on the sides of their cars "to protect and serve."
You're not wrong, but I guarantee the media is quaking in their boots, knowing full well that any Fair.org screeching means absolutely squat to the right-wing nuts. Next thing you'll be expecting the police to get out of their cars and read and understand the inscription on the sides of their cars "to protect and serve."
I once got out of jury duty in LA by saying that in 40 years of living here, I had never once been "served" or "protected" by the LAPD. (Of course they didn't like my recounting of unplanned participation in the LAPD's first police riot at Century City either)
I was actually interviewed once as a possible juror in the Abner Louima case. I walked in, took one look at the thuggish, ugly cops and thought "they're fucking guilty as sin and I'm gonna find them guilty, period." I doubt I would have been chosen, but the cops copped a plea within a week. I just checked and the worst of them, Volpe (who wouldn't have been out of place in a fistfucking video) was released last year, six years early. good behavior?
If I get your meaning, I agree that the traditional media are not concerned that fair.org is going to turn the heads of "right-wing nuts." Deep conservatives, MAGA, and/or conspiracy-favoring people are not who promoting the message of FAIR.ORG is for. I am hoping that a better educated independent voter, or a Democrat who is put off by the absence of a more effective response of the U.S. to the epic events in Gaza, even when fully recognizing that the attacks of 10/7 were horrific, may remain motivated to vote against the fascist takeover of government that looms over the country. If more people read the media more incisively, their dissatisfaction with Biden would pale in comparison to their heightened awareness and understanding of the danger to normalcy that the cult-like phenomenon of the deeplly-felt minority popularity of a fraudulent, narcissistic, immature, ignorant, entitled, non-Christian racist hopefully-soon-to-be-convicted criminal represents. I am perfectly happy to advocate to vote AGAINST, rather than FOR, as long as it drives turnout, which is crucial. Just to be clear, I am not expecting, any more than TC is, a fundamental change in the character of the current or future individuals who voluntarily choose to become peace officers, or the culture, legal and social, in which they are conditioned and function, or their behaviors. That is distinct from claiming that is impossible that some degree of progress might occur in policing. Here again, a really well-educated public, which understood overpolicing, discriminatory practices, the racial bias in the court system, etc., such as enumerated in detail in Michelle Alexander's "The New Jim Crow", might make a difference, but not like the dramatic one you describe. Even a small win would be cause for pride. (In my professional work as a physician evaluating workers' compensation claimants, I have interviewed probably a thousand peace officers over 40-years.)
For beginners, "dissatisfaction with Biden" is a completely manufactured umbrage for the intellectually lazy, and we need to point that out at every opportunity. Biden's progressive record already exceeds Obama's, who most of these same people and I happen to think also did a good job considering the Congress he had to work with (Mitch, et al.). As For Biden's handling of the Middle East, there's the single-issue (read self-absorbed) voters sanctimoniously whining about Israel-Hamas who would have us think they have access to all the same intelligence that Biden has, so their judgments are of course morally superior. I think it was Jeff Tiedrich who phrased it as Dunning and Kruger having a baby, then dropping it on its head.
In my professional work as an Oncologist/Hematologist/Internist for 34 years, I have become painfully aware that exponentially, I am unable to help patients understand anything about what's going on with them without first explaining some very basic science, math, and technology, and using little words to do it, while also having to explain why most of the time Dr. Google got it very wrong, or worse. Yeah, they're definitely reading all those books....
But more on these lovely books collecting dust on the left's bookshelves, which the most voters will never even crack open -- thankfully, it seems there's a never-ending parade of wannabe authors-in-the-know who leave office, having sequestered their knowledge for said book$, instead of putting it out where everyone could read for the betterment of our democracy, oh, except newspaper paywalls now also make that inaccessible too. No wonder the masses get their "knowledge" from 30 second sound bites from teevee. We are doomed, but at least we can point at the fabulously appointed bookshelves and say, "See, they told us so."
I agree with you that the reporting of a loss of support for Biden strikes me s overplayed, as well, but it's non non-existent, particularly with younger voters who have experienced the years of ~unopposed climate denial and Israeli support that older voters did. I also agree with you that Biden's record of accomplishments is truly impressive and I certainly hope that the messaging on this strengthens and continues right up to the election. You are again correct that claiming to have the final, unassailable opinion on the MIddle East is tough, even for those with extensive diplomatic experience and/or academic knowledge. I absolutely sympathize with your (and my) need to correct misconceptions that patients develop from looking into things online in an uninformed way, which is usually the case in medicine, since there are so many unscientific sites that are very skilled in locating their websites high up in the match lists. I also find the general level knowledge of medicine (the most basic fundamentals of physiology, pharmacology, anatomy) in the population is quite low. However, I also find that patients come to me not with misconceptions but with ignorance about the most basic nature of their problem, despite having seen multiple physicians (and I don't mean quacks) for some time. And OMG, forget statistics - no idea. It sounds like you take patient education seriously, and I applaud that.
Who do you consider to be an author regarding contemporary political and social analysis that you trust as honest and knowledgeable?
George Orwell, it would appear. I would follow Paul Krugman except he's bundled with the fascists.
Correction: "not experienced the decades..." - sorry.
IтАЩm all for small wins. WouldnтАЩt mind hearing your opinion on workerтАЩs comp claims.
Whoa, big topic. I think most people have a more negative opinion about the workers' compensation system than is warranted. Yes, there is fraud, but that is a relatively small percentage. There is a lot of exaggeration, but that is something that the system itself, at least here in California, promotes. The experience for the claimant, even with a 100% valid claim, is typically one of denial and delay, and just getting a simple claim through the system is difficult. Even basic care for an accepted claim is a giant headache since the claims administrators deny and delay everything. The reason for that is just as much the fault of the demands of the insurers and employers, to save money, as it is the result of efforts by claimants and their attorneys to game the system. As I said, it's a complicated question. Gary
Thank you for this. I can believe that claimants have trouble getting any positive results. Seems the bureaucracy is stacked against so much. Social workers are better at such than I was as a counselor, but still....