2020 Election Results Part 8: Lawsuits, Qualified Biden Nominees, and a Pouty Toddler

[Howl]

4 hours ago, Ozlsn said:

Why is the WSJ publishing this dreck?

People are noting the use of "kiddo" as generally condescending, but to me the larger insult is that it is addressed to a 69-year-old woman, accomplished in her own right,  who was Second Lady of the United States for eight years.  

WSJ is acutely aware of what it's doing; it's not an accident.  It's sowing a seed of derision and hate to discount her accomplishments and by association, pre-diminish Joe Biden's presidency.  It's all of a piece. 

 

 

 

[47of74]

WSJ is getting some well deserved blow back over this.  Including from within WSJ itself.

Quote

Epstein's comments also sparked anger on social media, with many public figures in politics and academia alike stepping in to support Jill Biden.

Melissa Korn, who is the higher education reporter at the Wall Street Journal, called the column "disgusting."

"Pieces like that make it harder for me to do my job," she wrote.

Douglas Emhoff, the husband of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris and the country's first incoming second gentleman, said Biden had earned her degrees "through hard work and pure grit."

Me thinks some unkind words to WSJ advertisers is in order here.

[Destiny]

This guy has a history of being a misogynist bag of dicks. Iirc he’s also the one who called Melania a whore.

[Howl]

So. I like to mention the caveat that I'm not a conspiracy minded person.  BUT, certain elements of the Republican party are extremely strategic thinkers, going for a long con with absolute power as the payoff.

They've stacked all of the Federal agencies with Trump fanatics and extreme loyalists at the highest levels, (including the IRS), they tried to trash the Post Office,  there's skull duggery going on at Defense, the corruption is  wide and very, very deep.

So, it occurred to me that by using inflammatory language, cuddling up with white supremacists, giving the Proud Boys a stage, they are actually hoping to activate someone, somewhere to assassinate Biden or Harris or to plan and execute other acts of domestic terrorism on public officials.  I don't think even Republicans are safe. 

Remember, always remember, the Las Vegas shooter.  Although he had no apparent political motivation, he had a vantage point and weapons and managed to kill 61 people and injure over 800 (411 from gunshot wounds). AP reported that

Quote

The night of the massacre, Paddock used assault-style rifles to fire more than 1,000 rounds in 11 minutes into the crowd of 22,000 music fans. Most of the rifles were fitted with rapid-fire "bump stock" devices and high-capacity magazines. 

and never forget Timothy McVeigh, whose fertilizer truck bomb

Quote

...detonated at 9:02 am and killed at least 168 people, including many children, injured more than 680 others...

...[the power of the blast] destroyed or damaged 324 other buildings within a 16-block radius, shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings, and destroyed or burned 86 cars.

In 2013,  ammonium nitrate stored in unsecured open bins at the West Fertilizer Company in West, TX caught fire and exploded, killing fifteen people (mostly volunteer firemen responding to the fire), injured 160 people and damaged/destroyed 150 buildings. Part of the town was leveled.  Texas still decided to not add any "burdensome" regulations to the storage of ammonium nitrate.  It's basically still out there for the taking. 

The force of the blast that destroyed the oceanfront and major parts of Beirut was fueled by the explosion of stored ammonium nitrate. 

Already multiple lone-wolf gunmen referenced Trump as their inspiration.  

I'm just worried and Buddhist praying that these types of events don't happen in the near future, but the ongoing rhetoric of a stolen election is pouring gas a on raging fire for people who identify with victimhood and see Trump as their savior, no, LITERALLY their savior and look back to bombers and lone-wolf gunmen as their "inspiration". 

Edited December 13, 2020 by Howl

[Ozlsn]

5 hours ago, Destiny said:

This guy has a history of being a misogynist bag of dicks. Iirc he’s also the one who called Melania a whore.

He certainly comes across as extremely insecure about a woman with more advanced qualifications who is almost certainly more intelligent than him and who he probably thinks doesn't give him the respect he "deserves". 

52 minutes ago, Howl said:

Already multiple lone-wolf gunmen referenced Trump as their inspiration.  

Between them and those referencing Breivik I am also very concerned. 

55 minutes ago, Howl said:

Texas still decided to not add any "burdensome" regulations to the storage of ammonium nitrate. 

Of course not. Personally I would move storage to the near vicinity of the Texas legislature and see if that changed their minds at all. They regard the poor as expendable, but probably value their own lives.

[Howl]

16 minutes ago, Ozlsn said:

and those referencing Breivik

That was the Swedish shooter, right?

 

[Emma]

@Howl I have no doubt that various nasty people are planning various nasty things. I also have no doubt that the FBI,  the Secret Service, and others are working on it. 

[Dandruff]

7 hours ago, Howl said:

WSJ is acutely aware of what it's doing; it's not an accident.  It's sowing a seed of derision and hate to discount her accomplishments and by association, pre-diminish Joe Biden's presidency.  It's all of a piece.

This has me thinking.  What's the rest of the piece?  What was the motivation for allowing this clearly inflammatory op ed to be published?  Does the WSJ expect a net gain, vs. loss, of subscribers and advertisers?  Do they think the white supremacists are going to get interested and want to read every day?  Educated women?  People with non-MD doctorates?  I would think that the advertisers would be likeliest to respond to changes in readership; i.e., money talks.

[Ozlsn]

26 minutes ago, Howl said:

That was the Swedish shooter, right?

Norwegian, but yes. That concerns me a lot because one of his stated aims was to target the next generation of left-leaning political leaders, which is why he targeted a youth summer camp run by the left-leaning party. He was referenced also by the NZ mosque shooter, who basically wanted to wage jihad. There are a lot of disturbing threads.

[Howl]

21 minutes ago, Dandruff said:

This has me thinking.  What's the rest of the piece? 

Yes, exactly. It's so overtly condescending, it's designed to invite blowback. 

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, Howl said:

That was the Swedish shooter, right?

 

Close. Anders Breivik is Norwegian. He committed his atrocious killing spree in Oslo and on the island Utøya.

Oops, I should have updated my screen before posting. @Ozlsn already said he's Norwegian.

-----

A sad, very scary example of things to come...

[WARNING: distressing images]

 

Edited December 13, 2020 by fraurosena

[Cartmann99]

 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Dear Rufus, please help Warnock defeat Loeffler in the January runoff:

[GreyhoundFan]

Please take some Maalox before watching this:

Don't say I didn't warn you...

[thoughtful]

10 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Don't say I didn't warn you...

If that isn't the most infantile thing ever. Also incredibly dangerous and stupid. And infantile, dangerous and stupid. I know, I'm repeating myself, but it's really exceptionally infantile, dangerous and stupid!

It is a good challenge to the "can you find anything nice to say" part of my mind, so here goes:

Spoiler

He's wearing a face shield! 

 

[Black Aliss]

On 12/12/2020 at 3:01 PM, Dandruff said:

She's a doctor and, AFAIC, he's a worthless, whining POS.

Worse, actually. Go read his entry on wikipedia. Executive summary:

In 1970 he wrote

Quote

Epstein wrote that he considered homosexuality "a curse, in a literal sense" and that his sons could do nothing to make him sadder than "if any of them were to become homosexual."

But, hey, a mere 45 years later he started to come around!

Quote

"I am pleased the tolerance for homosexuality has widened in America and elsewhere, that in some respects my own aesthetic sensibility favors much homosexual artistic production."

In other words, he still probably wouldn't want one of his sons to come out as gay but he would hire a gay man as an interior decorator. He continued

Quote

My only hope now is that, on my gravestone, the words Noted Homophobe aren’t carved.

Nah. At this point Pan-Asshole will work just fine

 

Edited December 13, 2020 by Black Aliss
but wait, there's more!

[Cartmann99]

20 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Please take some Maalox before watching this:

Don't say I didn't warn you...

Is this his way of announcing a POTUS run for 2024?

[thoughtful]

I think most people in the comments under the Crenshaw video were either with him (ew) or too gobsmacked to even be clever (what, no melon jokes?). I like the calm subtlety of this, though:

Lots of people posting his bizarrely gerrymandered district, or articles about the woman he smeared.

https://www.newsweek.com/rep-dan-crenshaw-linked-smear-campaign-female-vet-led-va-secretary-watchdog-says-1553928

 

Spoiler

 

[GreyhoundFan]

25 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

Is this his way of announcing a POTUS run for 2024?

Either that, or putting his name in the hat for a MAGA Mission Impossible film series.

[Dandruff]

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

A sad, very scary example of things to come...

[WARNING: distressing images]

I agree...people need to reexamine their assumptions, but that's nothing new.  This isn't a comic book.  Things don't necessarily work out in the end.

[kpmom]

3 hours ago, Dandruff said:

This has me thinking.  What's the rest of the piece?  What was the motivation for allowing this clearly inflammatory op ed to be published?  Does the WSJ expect a net gain, vs. loss, of subscribers and advertisers?  Do they think the white supremacists are going to get interested and want to read every day?  Educated women?  People with non-MD doctorates?  I would think that the advertisers would be likeliest to respond to changes in readership; i.e., money talks.

My understanding is the WSJ is owned by Dow Jones Corporation which in turn is owned by Rupert Murdoch.  So maybe that explains things.

[GreyhoundFan]

10 hours ago, Howl said:

People are noting the use of "kiddo" as generally condescending, but to me the larger insult is that it is addressed to a 69-year-old woman, accomplished in her own right,  who was Second Lady of the United States for eight years.  

WSJ is acutely aware of what it's doing; it's not an accident.  It's sowing a seed of derision and hate to discount her accomplishments and by association, pre-diminish Joe Biden's presidency.  It's all of a piece.

 

This is a good perspective from the WaPo: "The Wall Street Journal column about Jill Biden is worse than you thought"

Quote

In one of my favorite episodes of “The West Wing,” Abigail Bartlet, a trained surgeon and the fictional first lady, speaks with a White House attorney about a looming scandal. The lawyer addresses her as “Mrs. Bartlet,” to which she responds with the iciest correction: “Dr. Bartlet.”

“When did I stop being Dr. Bartlet?” she continues. “When in the campaign did I decide women were going to like me more if I called myself ‘Mrs.’?”

The issue was not about her credentials; nobody could take away her Harvard MD. The issue was about her identity. She used to have one of her own, but now she had only what had been conferred by her husband. She missed herself.

This is the scene I went searching for on Netflix after reading an exceptionally bad column in the Wall Street Journal.

“Madame First Lady — Mrs. Biden — Jill — kiddo: a bit of advice on what might seem like a small but I think is not an unimportant matter,” writer Joseph Epstein began. “Any chance you might drop the ‘Dr.’ before your name? ‘Dr. Jill Biden’ sounds and feels a touch fraudulent, not to mention comical.”

His reasoning, as it were: Jill Biden is not a medical doctor. In her 50s, she acquired an EdD from the University of Delaware; she now works as a community college professor, and plans to continue through her husband’s presidential term. For Biden to use the title of “Dr.” is highfalutin and misleading, Epstein wrote, as “no one should call himself Dr. unless he has delivered a child.”

If you witnessed online outrage over this column, it was probably over these aforementioned paragraphs, so let’s dispense with them quickly:

1) There is nothing “comical” about toiling for years to achieve a credential that is technically and socially correct for Jill Biden to use.

2) The fact that she accomplished this later in life, after having raised three children and worked another career, is admirable. The title of her dissertation — “Student Retention at the Community College Level” — sounds important and not, as Epstein writes, “unpromising.”

3) The premise that only medical doctors should get to hold the Dr. title is etymologically specious because, as Merriam-Webster dictionary pointed out on Twitter, “doctor” comes from the Latin word for “teacher”; it was scholars and theologians who, back in the 14th century, used the title well before medical practitioners.

4) Absolutely nobody is worried that if a pilot gets on the intercom and asks, “Is there a doctor on this flight?” Jill Biden is going to leap from her seat and try to perform a tracheotomy.

And finally: If he wants to get technical about it, Biden did deliver a child, out of her own uterus.

As supporting evidence for his reasoning, Epstein cites his own refusal to be called “Dr.” when he taught courses at Northwestern University — which would, in fact, have been fraudulent and comical because Epstein’s highest degree is a bachelor’s. It seems he would like Jill Biden to deny herself what she earned, because he denied himself what he did not.

He also casually notes that he was the recipient of an honorary doctorate and that throughout his career, people have assumed he was a PhD and insisted on referring to him as “Dr.” anyhow. This assumption is not, I can assure him, experienced by female academics, who are more likely to be mistaken for administrative assistants or lab techs even when they do have doctorates. Perhaps it is easier to turn down honorifics when they’ve been mistakenly sent to your table on a series of platters and you’re already stuffed.

We could go on picking things apart at the sentence level, but it becomes preposterously too easy; there’s no sport in hunting an animal that has already shot itself in the foot. I do doubt that Epstein would have written this column about, say, Dr. Henry Kissinger. I do believe Epstein wouldn’t have called him “kiddo.” I do believe that Epstein saw this as a column about titles, but it was also about his innermost beliefs regarding what kinds of people he thinks deserve honorifics and what kind — he implies that Biden’s doctorate was easy — do not.

I am the daughter of an English professor who, like Jill Biden, taught for years at a public college. I have a soft spot for the academics who would show up late at our house for dinner because they had lost track of time after spending their entire weekends grading papers, talking proudly for hours not about themselves but about their students: how to best serve them, how to help grow the minds of America.

On Saturday, a lot of these old friends — mostly women — went online to share the work that had gone into acquiring their doctorates. One said she insisted on being called “Dr.” only after she realized her students had been reserving the title for their male professors, and used “Mrs.” for women with the degree. One recalled how her grandfather earned his PhD — by leaving for a summer of solitudinous research while his wife cared for the homestead, the children and their boarders — and how, when she worked for her own PhD generations later, her dissertation was written between the hours of 4 and 6 a.m., before rousing her children, preparing their lunches, getting them to school and then going to her own full-time job.

During the pandemic, female academics have been found to be falling behind their male colleagues in terms of submitting research and writing papers, probably because of the outsize burdens of domestic labor they have taken on this year.

But we are not here to lament the plight of the female academic; we are here to talk about Joseph Epstein and Jill Biden. “Forget the small thrill of being Dr. Jill,” he instructed her in the final sentence of his column, “and settle for the larger thrill of living for the next four years in the best public housing in the world as First Lady Jill Biden.”

It was that sentence that sent me over the edge. And sent me searching online for Abigail Bartlet.

Because what it implies is that Jill Biden’s own accomplishments should not be as important as those which are conferred by her husband. She should accept this marital title and eschew her personal identity.

As of Sunday morning, Biden had not directly responded to the column, but her spokesman Michael LaRosa did. “If you had any respect for women at all you would remove this repugnant display of chauvinism from your paper,” he tweeted to the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page.

And to the future first lady: Whatever happens, for pity’s sake, don’t listen to this weird, grumpy, elitist man. Don’t ever sit in the White House and wonder what happened to your old sense of self. Be Dr. Biden. Be Dr. Biden forever.

 

[thoughtful]

8 minutes ago, kpmom said:

My understanding is the WSJ is owned by Dow Jones Corporation which in turn is owned by Rupert Murdoch.  So maybe that explains things.

I think that has something to do with it.

I've never read the WSJ, but always thought of it as fairly conservative. If I remember correctly, quite a few of the commenters were saying that the news part of it is good, but the editorial department has been more right-wing for a long time, even pre-Murdoch.

[Audrey2]

So I'm just curious. Say some future president has a wife who has earned her m div and who has worked as a pastor. Would Epstein demand that she dropped the Rev title, too? Unfortunately, I fear that the answer is yes.

[Cartmann99]