By David Futrelle
Hey everyone, I’m still lost in headache-land (see my last post for details) but this is REALLY REALLY important for all WHTM readers in the US.
Senate Republicans have scheduled a vote after lunch TODAY on a “motion to proceed” that will pave the way for a final vote on their bill that will take away healthcare from tens of millions of Americans (including me, and probably a lot of you).
Tell them NO.
You can get the numbers of your Senators (and more info) at 5Calls.org Moveon.org, or on the Senate website or by calling the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121.
Here’s what MoveOn suggests you tell them (roughly):
Tell Republicans: “Please oppose any bill that takes away health care from tens of millions of Americans.”
If you’re one of those Americans, definitely tell them that.
Tell Democrats: “Thank you for doing everything you can to fight Trumpcare. Please use every tactic at your disposal to slow and stop this bill, including the filibuster-by-amendment (which means: slowing down the bill with a high number of amendments when the bill does come to a vote). Please DO NOT vote for ANY amendments that will make it easier for Republicans pass Trumpcare.”
If any of the Republicans listed below are your Senators it’s ESPECIALLY important to call; Collins is a “no” vote; the others are (as I write this post) on the fence.
https://twitter.com/rsegbers/status/889595637469245440
Canada recently had a vote on changing the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Section 15) to do exactly that, @PoM. The Liberal government pushed to put freedom of gender expression and gender identity explicitly in the Charter, and of course the Conservative opposition railed against it. They said that the law was already interpreted as including gender expression and identity as a component of sexual orientation, which was in the original form of the Charter, so they called it all Liberal showboating and a waste of taxpayer money.
(They of course forgot to mention that not a year ago the Conservatives tried to redefine marriage to one-man-one-woman, proving pretty h*cking clearly the need for this sort of thing being made explicit.)
I’m pleased to say that C-16 passed and the Charter was approved – one of the few things the liberals have done worth approval in recent months. At the same time, the Liberals have been putting money into enforcement of the Charter, which the Conservatives obviously de-funded for the past decade or so.
Those guys can go to heck, I mean seriously. So sick of politicians. I really want you guys to have LGBT protections down there, but in your current state I’ll limit myself to hoping that you stay sheltered, safe and healthy.
hello @Ingmar, and welcome!
@Ingmar
There’s a lot of this among certain people. Like, uh, the folks commenting on Yahoo new stories. Mind you, I’m fairly certain a bunch of them are professional bot using trolls, but the idea that transgender is simply a “mental illness” thing still remains strong. nonetheless. Heck, some people are still upset that being gay is no longer considered a mental illness by actual medical professionals. What do those guys know anyway, they’re just PC doctors!
I would also advise avoid painting Europe with a broad brush in terms of it lacking a strong “religious right”, particularly since it’s full of wildly different countries with parties which look pretty similar to the American religious right if they aren’t putting it to shame. The Polish Law and Justice party, for instance, is pretty out there. I’m pretty sure their handling of sex-ed goes no further than a passing reference to storks delivering babies.
@Robert Walker-Smith
It just means water’s freaking awesome.
@dreemr
Further evidence that chemistry classes are invariably evil and should be replaced with cooking, which is tasty chemistry.
Weird (thumper of trumpanzees) Eddie … and anyone else concerned about future elections.
One thing we now know is that 2018 will be a bit “different” from previous elections. Check out this Rachel Maddow segment.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/huge-jump-seen-in-2018-democratic-challengers-for-house-seats-1008078915987
(If it won’t work for you first time, try opening it in an “incognito” window. It should work then.)
@Scildfreja
I was very annoyed when they went back on their promise of election reform!
Trump’s comments about banning transgender persons from military service because it’s “too expensive” are ludicrous, and from scanning over the comments you all seems to have already covered the main points. The broader issues that disturb me (as citizen, as academic in the field, and as servicemember) are the waste of resources/talent and, as some of you have mentioned, the employment of the “cult of reverence for the ‘sacred’ military” to advance repugnant ideology *by people themselves who are clearly ignorant of military affairs*. I recall the ink spilled and right-wing ideologues’ mewling about Stephanie Gutmann’s book The Kinder Gentler Military: Can America’s Gender-neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars? (New York: Scribner, 2000). A decade and a half’s worth of experience in two major regional wars disproved her contentions. Her arguments were driven by ideology. What were here qualifications and background knowledge of the issue? It’s interesting that Trump’s excuse isn’t about some kind of inherent unfitness for service (which is probably what his supporters would prefer?) but money. Actually, it’s more just weird than interesting, but it’s bizarre nonsensical nature is par for the course with Trump, in my opinion.
Some here (sorry for not being able to address you individually by nym; it’s late) mentioned the foolishness of assuming that people stop being *people* with all the elements of their core identity, emotions, relationships, and deeply-held beliefs when they put on the uniform. At least in terms of the U.S. Army (and this is essentially true for the other services as well) the whole ethos of leadership and the theory of leadership training and education in fact rests on the notion of *precisely the opposite* – we KEEP being who we are, in all that complexity, when we enter military service, and leaders must be aware of that — NOT as some kind of liability to accommodate, but as assets to take advantage of in accomplishing our missions! The Army’s current view is that diversity among our personnel is essentially a force multiplier.
Also, Trump’s inarticulate way of attempting to communicate is further revealed. He talked to “Generals”, he claims. OK, “Generals” — not “general officers, the JCS, the service secretaries, and the Secretary of Defense”…not even just “general officers” but “Generals”. O.K., so we if we take him at his word then he didn’t get any advice from anyone in the U.S. Navy or U.S. Coast Guard. (They have admirals, not generals.) So that means you have no evidence for banning transgender persons from the USN or USCG, right Mr. President? You often remind us you’re such a smart guy, and smart people choose their words carefully to ensure they convey their meaning precisely. So I know that’s what you meant, smart guy, right?
@Scolar Visari
Yes. My comments don’t apply to every EU country. Poland is the obvious counterexample.
I’m pretty convinced that “big evangelicalism” in the US is more or less about preserving de facto segregation and making money with megachurches and expensive private schools.
As someone near the Pentagon (our largest military management office) said, “What, we take orders over Twitter now?”
The more policy changes he announces over his “personal account” the more it becomes a public forum possibly requiring no blocking of US Citizens. Good luck to those suing to be unblocked (even though that’s kind of an “own goal” situation if you win).
@History Nerd
What? Are you implying that private schools are creating segregated districts by letting God’s blessed take their blessed children away from integrated districts only to fuel their continued budget shortfalls and justify further 21st Century white flight!? Preposterous! It’s choice I say! Choice!
Though . . . I must say, it is rather entertaining to think of a bunch of people complaining about, “failing schools” taking their children to schools that fight tooth and nail to deny multiple disciplines of science. I mean, I see people attack others for having been educated in the public school system on a horrifyingly regular basis (as if they had a choice in the matter), and I often ponder if the same people making such attacks grow up to think the world is only 6,000 years old.
History is just an incomplete inaccurate log of the simulation of the universe. Nothing really happened before I was old enough to think. The dinosaur skeletons were planted by paleontologists to get grant money! That weird dark boundary layer in sedimentary rocks? God spilled black paint he had left over from painting the sky. Everything is a shared hallucination of my brain cells, so no one else exists, and I’m the only one who matters.
Disagree with me? Doesn’t matter, you don’t really exist.
I wonder whose mindset this might describe.
@Scolar Visari
There are people with evangelical beliefs who are anti-racist, but they’re largely the very personally religious apolitical people. But if you look where all the money is, you might start to see some patterns.
The reason the religious right is weaker in Europe is historical, the USA can trace it right back to Manifest Destiny and earlier. The idea that America was some kind of New Jerusalem was promoted after Columbus and his cronies ‘discovered’ the Americas, and believed they had found the Garden of Eden.
The situation in Britain is more nuanced. We still have “Christian” party leaders, Tim Farron of the Liberal Democrats, for example, (he’s just handed the reigns to Vince Cable) is an evangelical Christian and pro marijuana. How he fits into the Christian Right’s view of evil liberals I really don’t know.
Generally, the Tory Party are the party who want to prop up the status quo, and claim to be Christian as they support the queen as the head of the Church of England. If you know any history, you’d know that the Church of England is a political rather than religious body, set up by King Henry the Eighth to rival the papacy. That is all. It’s not anything to do with spirituality, but a nationalist statement.
Labour are more complicated, they usually avoid nationalistic religion and the CofE, but are more in touch with ‘multi faith’ groups. Blair was an exception, he was involved with a lot of so called ‘Christian’ groups, many of whom were actually Masonic. Historically, the Labour movement were connected to Methodism and non conformist Christian churches, neither catholic nor CofE.
@ virgin mary
At least he had the honesty to admit he couldn’t reconcile his Christian beliefs with being a liberal and stepped down.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/14/breaking-tim-farron-resigns-liberal-democrat-leader/
It’s an interesting historical quirk that the Sovereign’s title as “Defender of The Faith” was originally granted to Henry VIII by the Pope for Henry’s defence of Catholicism.
@alan
Tim is a coward, plain and simple. I don’t think there is any reason one cannot be a liberal and a Christian, after all, Jesus believed in social justice. I think Timbo is just scared of the big bully Christians saying he’s not a Christian unless he hates the gays. The abortion thing is a weird one, it’s never been a big political issue in the UK (NI excepted) but it’s the yank influence we’re seeing pushing it into the spotlight. Besides, the only way to reduce abortion is provide education and free contraception, and to intervene where young girls are being forced into non concentual unprotected sex. No one has abortions for the lols. 🙁 that’s a myth put about by the alt right.
Duffelblog now has a number of articles about Trump’s announcement (including an interview with a transphobic F-35). Satire is probably superfluous nowadays, the reality has overtaken it, but they make the obvious points.
“The Justice Department Just Argued Against Gay Rights In A Major Federal Case”
https://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/the-justice-department-just-argued-against-gay-rights-in-a?utm_term=.lk2PbbJyA2#.rcKVNNR8yM
I stand corrected, looks like they’re trying to get rid of protections for LGB people too.
Evangelical Christians often pay lip service to anti-racism because they want to recruit some brown and black people. But they “love” people of color in a very colonialist kind of way that I think is pretty racist. They’re not self aware enough to realize that though.
@Jesalin: May all their shoes be forever filled with legos. HONESTLY.
@weirwoodtreehugger
That’s true. Those are not the “anti-racist” people I’m talking about. I brought “anti-racist evangelicals” up because I want to avoid painting religious groups with a broad brush and I’m unconvinced that belief in weird supernatural stuff is the problem. But, speaking of statistical averages, you’re right.
Jim Mattis has just said he will be making no changes to military policy regarding transgender people unless Trump gives him a direct order.
(Apparently it wasn’t discussed with him either. He was on holiday.)
@JS: And the only reason we need catapults at all, as I understand it, is our jet aircraft don’t fly at low airspeeds and need a boost to take off from a carrier’s deck, which is much shorter than an airstrip can be.
Back when Poppy Bush was flying and ditching Grumman Avengers in the Phillippine Sea, warplanes could take off from carriers under their own power. Maybe we ought to go back to piston engines! No one can explain how jet engines work! They’re hollow! Bad!
@Falconer Yep. Also current Navy doctrine is that ramps at the end of the deck are much less versatile than catapults.
Senate votes today on a Republican(!) sponsored single-payer system amendment that was originally proposed by a Democrat in the House. The Republican proposing it is thought to be doing so as a stunt to make red state Democrats vote for it, providing fodder for campaign ads. It would make an interesting Republican “own goal” if it should happen to pass, I think.
I’m not sure whether this analysis is correct though.
@JS
It would, but it’s unlikely to pass. Bernie Sanders has spoken out against it. I think everyone is aware of the stunt they are trying to pull.
I honestly wonder if the Republicans think they are being sneaky because, if so, they are really bad at it. Everyone can see that this is a political stunt. The “skinny repeal” is just a plan to force Obamacare to fail so they can get rid of it. Obamacare is not perfect, but it can be improved or fixed. If they pass the “skinny repeal,” Obamacare will fail because they will be pulling out the things that make it work. They have to force it to fail in order to get rid of it. It’s absurd.
Thanks for the welcome :). Pom@ why would a voting process be more undesirable than an unilateral decision, at least I’m not a fan of central single person decision making in such matters, well maybe not about army in general (but I have no prejudice). I suspected that gender identity is not explicitly protected in the army, but is it, for jobs and work in general, to some extent?
It’s still a contentious matter which things have to be explicitly protected. The point is, on the notion of army being a high priority sector I guess it has this special statute that still stays a step or two behind these conquest before they get “promoted” beyond the grade of “pc” quibble, but that said, does that mean that the CIC can explicitly discriminate on the basis of being trans in itself or on the basis of not wanting to pay for the medications. Despite it being of course an excuse. Do we have examples of people in the army with health issues but considered fit, for which medications are passed? I have asthma in mind, but not sure about it.
You can perceive what bugs me about indiscussed decisional process, if not the lack of voting process, a valutation process, to establish if a complaint is legitimate or has no basis in reality. Example, deciding to fire a worker for transexuality, with no basis in fitness and productivity. Thanks again fellows (or friends? (:)
As has been noted by others recently, the Defense department spends much more on Viagra and similar drugs than it has on the health care for trans people. This would be an example of people in the army with health issues that take medications for it, and are still allowed in the army.
The actual amount estimated to treat trans soldiers is miniscule compared to everything else the Defense Department pays for health treatment. Skipping three trips to Mar-A-Lago would more than pay for ALL of the 2016 RAND estimate of trans health costs. Not buying one M1 tank would cover DOUBLE RAND’s highest estimate. Those 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles Trump launched? If he’d decided to launch only 50, it would cover the expected health costs.
The current Republican “estimate” of the cost is orders of magnitude too high, and even that ridiculously over estimated amount could be easily covered by reducing the F-35 order by 1 fighter, or not replacing approximately 4 and a half Apache helicopters.
Health costs aren’t the reason Trump wants this to happen. Every word out of that man’s mouth is likely to be untrue, and also actively disingenuous.
Until Trump actually uses the chain of command and forces this through, nothing happens from just tweeting.
Also, treatable asthma got an acquaintance of mine discharged early from one of the US armed services several years ago (despite her appeal). I don’t know if it’s still an almost automatic discharge or not.