CodyyyGardner's Categories
CodyyyGardner's Authors
Latest Saves
Time to talk Trumpers.
This is Cori Bush's bill to expel from congress anyone who supported election challenges yesterday.
Yesterday was Jan 6.
The bill is dated Jan 5.
*SHE KNEW YOU WOULD PROTEST, LOSE CONTROL, AND GET VIOLENT. AND SHE HAD A BILL READY FOR WHEN YOU DID*
I believe the Republican members of Congress who have incited this domestic terror attack through their attempts to overturn the election must face consequences. They have broken their sacred Oath of Office.
— Congresswoman Cori Bush (@RepCori) January 6, 2021
I will be introducing a resolution calling for their expulsion. pic.twitter.com/JMTlQ4IfnR
2/
You guys are going to take the "L" here and quite frankly you deserve it. Cori Bush is going to eat your lunch every day until Biden is inaugurated and there isn't a thing you can do about it.
So....
Let's talk about how to make sure this never, ever, happens again.
3/
How did Cori Bush know you guys were going to have problems and violence?
Because she was trained in the lefty protest movement. Lefty organizing are what she did for years, that's her area of expertise. So she knows just how quickly and easily protests go off the rails...
4/
She knew that this was likely planned by people who did not understand how easily protests go bad, and she knew there was a high likelihood of something going wrong.
Someone is going to say "They had people planted to make it go violent, it is not our fault..."
5/
So what?
Your job is to make sure your people behave, and that you have enough trained people to handle agitators looking to make trouble.
The left knows how to do this. The hold peaceful protests *WHEN THEY WANT TO*
Look at the Women's march, 2 million people, no violence
Make better choices, America
This is a fundamentally violent and abusive
The commitment to the ahistoricism of of "this is not who we are" is not merely objectionable. It is actively dangerous.
You can't fix something that you refuse to acknowledge is
Joe has GOT to cut the "this is not who we are" stuff.
— A Shady Dame From Seville (@SorayaMcDonald) January 6, 2021
It's fundamentally ahistorical. The KKK used to openly march down Pennsylvania gotdamn avenue FFS
Frederick Douglass, in 1852:
"To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me...?”
https://t.co/wbbsbfdMny
So the general mode in "consumer"-capitalism is what we literally see is wares and their prize only. Images (situationists) or brands (Klein) took over. What one
A super dieend quick de-reading of Naomi Klein's (?) book entitled Lo Nogo in n episodes. First things first. "It was twenty years ago tonight". We, me and us never read it. Why? Because there is a premise in there as we and I know it - knew it beforehand. No incorporation pic.twitter.com/d8FMFenFrp
— WORKSHOP (@zineworkshop) January 6, 2021
can see to - hey, phenomenology! - the divisions and disassociations: people separated from their products. Branding comes in at this point. Only Klein does depict but does not explain. Explanation tries to find laws or logics in a way abstractions can be used to
discuss their possible use for a modification of society. There is nothing new in the fact of a ruling classes ruling. The abstract incorp therefore rules and so does the state which can (not _must_) be the rulers "instrument". Lo nogo wants a social a good state. State and
nation are results within the "project" of competing capitals. Klein argues contra the "McDonaldization of society" and the market. In her fairy tale companies are the kings here and market is the land. The new new thesis the market would be the horses and the kings would be
the riders claims a sort of trade capitalism that is not existing except in second order not predominantly. No logo lo nogo has no idea or better no concept of the sources of the processes in this trading world. As money buys politics Klein
Never thought I’d be grateful for @VP Mike Pence - but I am. He gave one of the finest speeches of any politician last night.
1/ I follow (and am followed by) people from across the political spectrum. We share a commitment to reversing the extremist agenda of the LGBT trans lobby; preserving women's sex-based rights & protecting children & vulnerable young people from puberty blockers & sterilisation. https://t.co/eMXliTbqDm
— Allison Bailey (@BluskyeAllison) November 8, 2020
2/ But most of all, despite everything that happened overnight in the US, I never thought I’d feel fear about a Democratic president, with control of both Houses of Congress - but I do.
3/ I’m a Democrat. I’m also a Black British feminist & a lesbian. I believe that sex is real & immutable. I believe passionately that gender-diverse & transgender persons must be protected from discrimination, but not at the cost of erasing ’woman’ as a sex based legal category.
4/ @biden has said that he will pass The Equality Act / HR5. If he does, women’s sex-based rights in the US will disappear & this will reverberate around the world: males able to elect to be locked up with women in prison; the end of women’s sports & scholarships...
5/ ... any mediocre male will show no shame in declaring themselves women & playing women’s sports; the end of safe spaces for women in hospitals, psychiatric units... it will mean that it will become impossible & illegal for women to organise & meet in the absence of males.
London intends to make use of its costly SPS regulatory autonomy. As widely anticipated, first area of divergence expected to take place in the field of Crispr technology for genome editing, area where the UK has long argued for a more liberal stance.https://t.co/btRoxU3saZ
— Emily Rees (@emilyrees_eu) January 7, 2021
Let's start off with: I don't think any trade experts are surprised by this. It is why the TCA did not do much on SPS. It is why the EU did not offer much on SPS. It is why the UK did not ask much on SPS.
But it also shows that the popular slogan "after Brexit we'll have the same standards as before, so why would anything change in trade" was wrong - and worse, it was purposefully trying to stifle a necessary debate.
And this leads me to the next point: I have no issue with changing the rules, I have a massive issue with how it is done. Here's what we should discuss:
The decisive question: What are the standards the UK as a country wants. To inform this debate, we need the following information: