🔥 TODAY is the day. They are scheduled to vote tomorrow. Our first Call to Action is the tax plan vote. Please call every number in the picture below and follow the script. 🔥

“Republicans have only a 52-48 majority in the Senate, meaning they can’t afford to lose more than two votes if they want to pass any bill. A number of senators have already spoken out against the tax proposal; here are seven Republicans who could kill it outright.”
Script when making the call:

“Hello, I’m ________ from ________. I strongly oppose the GOP’s proposal to make deep cuts to taxes for the wealthy and corporations. I also strongly oppose the GOP’s attempt to sabotage healthcare access by removing the individual mandate. Thank you.”

For a less scripted approach, here are some talking points:

✅Republicans in the House and Senate are proposing more than $1.5 Trillion of unfunded tax cuts over 10 years.

✅The House passed its version of the bill on November 16, 2017.31 percent of middle class families will see their taxes rise over the next ten years while big corporations and the rich get significant tax cuts.

✅The Senate’s proposal reduces corporate taxes from 35% to 20%.

✅There is no indication that the cost of this cut will be completely offset by economic growth as Republicans commonly claim.

✅The elimination of state and local tax deductions will disproportionately hurt families living in states with high taxes such as New York and California.

✅Eliminating or raising the cap of the estate tax will benefit the top one-half of one percent of Americans (approximately 5,000 families), perpetuating dynastic wealth and extreme inequality that contributes to social and economic instability.

✅A complete bill and CBO score will be necessary to fully evaluate the cost of the Senate plan.”

I think what Kathy Griffin did was wrong.
It was vulgar. It was violent. It was inappropriate.

It helped no one and supported no cause.

It was shocking for the sake of being shocking and it only gave Republicans angry talking points to detract from real issues (like Russia) which they are desperately looking for right now.

It also echoes all the violent, vulgar things many republicans did over the last nine years I found so abhorrent. She sunk to their level and played their dirty game.

That all being said, the standards we’re apparently holding a D-List celebrity to are higher and have more consequences than those of the President.

People (Trump voters) think Trump is so smart… Smarter than us all… And should be leading us into greatness (again). However, he’s also considered too stupid and infantile to have to own up to any of his unorthodox and offensive behavior.

He gets a pass.

I think most of the consequences Griffin faced (like being fired from CNN) were probably appropriate. She messed up.
But we apparently hold the bar higher for a comedian than a president. This is wrong.

The President should be held to a higher standard than us all. Not be given a pass for childish and primitive behavior.


1. private sector: corporate sector

2. detainees: prisoners

3. reform: replace existing laws with more corporate friendly laws

4. tort reform: limit the average person’s ability to sue big corporations

5. privatization: moving government assets or functions into corporate hands and turning public land and utilities into for-profit corporate businesses  

6. opportunity gap: a deceptive non-sequiter intended to divert attention away from income inequality caused by republican policies and opposing things like gender pay equality and minimum wage increases

7. education reform: (see number 5 above)

8. enhanced interrogation: severe torture

9. white collar crime: corporate crime

10. the american people have spoken: my richest political donors have told me what to do

11. job creators: my very richest political donors

12. free market solutions: dangerous, unregulated capitalism that only helps big corporations

13. the middle class: those poor bastards who idgaf about

14. austerity: punishment, cutting education, slashing social safety net programs, class warfare on the poor

Keep reading

Mythic Values/Folk Values

I have a theory that every social group has two sets of values: Mythic Values, and Folk Values.

The Mythic Values are the qualities of that group’s exceptional members, its heroes, the semi-mythical figures that everyone in the group more or less aspires to emulate.

For example, the Mythic values of Catholicism are about emulating Christ and the Saints, their self-sacrifice, their faith, their not-of-this-world-ness. The Mythic values of nerd culture center around figures like Nikola Tesla and Steve Jobs, the archetype of a Mad Scientist/Captain of Industry hybrid. Scientific knowledge, inventiveness, not giving a fuck about what the muggles think. The Mythic values of movement Conservatism are embodied in the archetypal cowboy and archetypal soldier. The physical strength, the physical courage, the combat ability, the sheer animal dominance.

Folk Values, on the other hand, are the qualities of that group’s average members.

Nerd culture’s folk values center less on scientific knowledge, more on nerd trivia. The key question is “how devoted a fan are you?” Are you an Old School D&D player? are you a Hardcore Gamer? Have you memorized the entire screenplay of Monty Python and the Holy Grail? Conservative folk values are about liking country music and spaghetti westerns, and complaining about hippies, reciting the republican talking points. I haven’t spent enough time in Catholic communities to know what Catholic folk values are, but i suspect is has something to do with celibacy and Chesterton quotes.

In a sane world, we’d recognize folk values and mythic values as two separate things, and use them to differentiate the members of a community from the leadership of a community. But we don’t.

Instead…. we invest the practice of Folk Values with a… talismanic property. a kind of sympathetic magic, where the symbolic qualities of one thing are supernaturally transferred from one entity to another. Do you think wearing that ten gallon hat means you’d survive a day on the Frontier?

I am not a man of singular integrity. I didn’t realize any of this until circumstance forced me to.

It was kind of like… dreaming. like in some superstitious way I thought I was laying the foundation for something real. All I had to do was hold on to the Folk Values hard enough, and for long enough, and one day the Mythic Values would simply pop into existence within me. When the time came, I would suddenly transform into the man I wanted to be.

But of course the time never did come.

Once you understand on a visceral level that mourning John Wayne doesn’t make you John Wayne, you can’t really be a conservative.

You’re either a Soldier or a Civilian. A Cowboy or a Tenderfoot. A Hero or a Bystander. there’s nothing in between.

Once you understand on a visceral level that Fucking Loving Science has nothing to do with possessing scientific knowledge, you can’t really be a science nerd.

You’re either a Scientist, or a Layman. A Morlock, or an Eloi. there’s nothing in between.

Once you realize that there is no connection whatsoever between the folk values and the mythic values, so many cultural milieus become off-limits to you. But what’s more, you realize that… everyone around you is holding themselves to despicably low standards. Every subculture– or at least the ones with a lot of subcultural pride– starts to look like a bunch of puffed-up chest-beating macho bullshitters who’ve made a secret pact to never call each other out on their bullshit.

(“I’ll pretend that you posting all those Neil DeGrasse Tyson memes means you actually possess scientific knowledge if you do the same for me.” “I’ll pretend that you owning every Rage Against the Machine album means you’ve actually contributed to Anarchist politics if you do the same for me” “I’ll pretend that your encyclopedic knowledge of Clint Eastwood films means you’d survive a real world shootout if you do the same for me.” )

You start to realize that the act of sympathetic magic that makes participation trophies work is the same magic act that holds society together. The magic that says “You can be one of the Good Guys even if you’ve done nothing to deserve it.”

The latest Republican talking points are basically stating that the president’s party usually loses in the midterms, they’re bracing for defeat.
GOP Senators No Longer Want The People To Decide On Supreme Court Justices

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) made a noteworthy declaration about his post-election political intents on Monday, though it was lost amid his joke, for which he has since apologized, about shooting Hillary Clinton.

Should he head back to the Senate, Burr pledged, he would try to block any Supreme Court nomination from a President Clinton.

“If Hillary Clinton becomes president, I am going to do everything I can do to make sure four years from now, we still got an opening on the Supreme Court,” he said.

This is how constitutional crises are made. And it’s also why Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Clinton’s running mate, told The Huffington Post that Senate Democrats would try to nuke the filibuster option on Supreme Court nominees should they regain power in that chamber.

Beyond that, though, Burr’s words Monday are directly at odds with the preferred Republican talking point about the Supreme Court that arose when President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland in March to take the seat of the deceased Antonin Scalia ― a talking point that Burr adopted.

A talking point that was absolute bullshit on its face.

The latest Republican talking point is that for 80 years it has been ‘standard practice’ not to confirm any Supreme Court nominee in an election year. Besides being untrue — Justice Anthony Kennedy was confirmed by a Democratic Senate in 1988 — the claim actually insults Justice Scalia, whose originalist, text-based approach to the Constitution would surely have found room for one of a president’s explicit constitutional obligations.

New York Times Editors

The GOP: Never Let the Facts or the Constitution Get In Your Way

siraranispleased  asked:

Where did the image of the NDP being good intentioned but overly spend-y and fiscally irresponsible come from? All I can think of is "It fits the narrative of one party being Economically good, one party being Ethically good," classic Republican v Democrat talking point.

The NDP did have some spending problems while in office in Ontario and BC, but for the most part the provinces or country were already in an economic low point when they were elected and so they had to change how they spend their money to reflect that situation.

I think a lot of people are blowing the whole issue out of proportion. In BC for example the BC Liberals have messed up the economy far more than the NDP did, but nobody pays attention to that.