Connect with us

Eight Months From Today, The America We Know Will Be Gone



For better or for worse, America will be truly changed after November’s midterm elections.

Eight months from today, America will vote for thirty-nine Governors, the entire U.S House of Representatives — all 435 seats — and thirty-six U.S. Senators. And that doesn’t even include state legislatures or local elections. Forty-six states will hold elections for some form of state legislative office. And there will be mayoral elections in fifteen major U.S. cities and countless others. Untold numbers of elected officials, from Congressmen and Governors to dog catchers, will be on the November 2 ballot. Primaries have already begun for some of these seats, in Illinois and Texas.

This is a major election, and while not a presidential election year, many seats are up for grabs, especially as term limits are automatically throwing incumbents out of office. Voter anger is high — as is America’s obsession with politics. And rightly so. Whether that anger turns out to more people showing up at the polls is always the question, but those the most angry are often those who show up to “throw the bums out.” Yes, if you’re the incumbent, you could be on thin ice. (Who’s on the thinnest? HuffPo says these eight.)

For better or for worse, or perhaps both, the America we knew just a decade ago has been erased. Much of the progress we saw in the Clinton years has been eviscerated. And what we thought was progress in the Bush years was wiped clean before he even left office.

There’s much at stake here. Too much to not get involved.

Right now I’m in the middle of looking at all the races I can, and figuring out where I want to focus. I’m committed to removing the homophobes, like Virgina Foxx (remember her horrific comments about Matthew Shepard? Fight back. Join FireFoxx!) and Iowa’s Steve King from office. And there are so many more.

What’s at stake? Who controls the House and the Senate. Whether states have Republican or Democratic governors. Whether cities have Democratic or Republican mayors.

Why does this matter? Well, while the Democrats have been no friend to the LGBTQ community, the GOP has been actively hostile. Let me stress that before you start writing me mail about how I shouldn’t support the Democratic party. I’m not.

Let me also say, vote for a candidate and not a party. If you’re going to contribute money, do not contribute to a political party — contribute to a candidate who fully supports LGBTQ rights. Do your homework. Does your candidate support repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and DOMA? Do they support enactment of ENDA? Did they vote for or against the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes bill? Do they support same-sex marriage — not just civil unions, but marriage? And are they brave and transparent enough to be squarely on the record on all these points?

Don’t know? Can’t find their position anywhere? Call them. Write them. Demand a response.

Aren’t getting one? Ask me and I’ll do my best to find out.

So, again, why does this matter? Because governors sign — or veto — same sex marriage legislation. Governors and mayors include — or exclude — the LGBTQ workforce from their anti-discrimination policies. (Thank you again, newly sworn-in Virgina Governor Bob McDonnell, for removing protections for LGBTQ state workers, even though you campaigned on an agenda that you claimed wasn’t about social issues, but financial ones.)

Why does this matter? Because there still are Republicans who would like to not only ensure DOMA doesn’t get repealed, but that there’s a federal marriage amendment written into the constitution that clearly defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Think that’s impossible today? Not when support for same-sex marriage in some polls is slightly declining, and not when the last time the Federal Marriage Amendment was voted on was less than four years ago. (And not when just two weeks ago, Senator Mike Pence called for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage!)

We’ve seen the pendulum swing both ways.

It’s important, no, vital, that we see the pendulum swinging our way, that we, as a country, move more to the left than to the right, that Democrats get the message that we aren’t a “center-right” nation, that Democrats realize that voting for Democratic ideals is why we put them in office.

Please. Get involved. Involve your friends, your family, your coworkers, your neighbors, everyone you can. When people have the ability to vote on our rights, when we are second class citizens, when the Party of No could become the Tea Party, when the wall between religion and politics becomes slimmer and lower, when corporations become people and money becomes speech, yes, I’d say our very lives are at stake.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Fox News Host’s Inaccurate Reporting Leads to False Right-Wing Speculation Breyer Was Forced Out



Barely minutes before 12:00 noon on Wednesday NBC News’ Pete Williams broke the news that Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer was going to announce he is retiring, at the end of the term.

Hours later Fox News host Shannon Bream breathlessly tweeted, “Multiple sources tell me Justice Breyer was not planning to announce his retirement today. They describe him as ‘upset’ with how this has played out. We still await any official notice from his office and/or the #SCOTUS public information office.”

That was 2:41 PM.

Her tweet was inaccurate – based on her own reporting, about a half-hour later.

At 3:14 PM Bream “clarified” her reporting, making clear that Justice Breyer “firmly decided” to retire on his own, and was merely “surprised” that a top-notch veteran Supreme Court reporter broke the news:

Her first tweet has received thousands of retweets and likes and led to false speculation among many right-wingers (adding to the already false claims from the far right) that President Joe Biden forced Justice Breyer out the door – something impossible (unless you do over a billion dollars in business with a bank where the son of a Supreme Court Justice works.)

Too late, the damage is done. Ordinarily many reporters will delete tweets that are inaccurate or wrong, then post the reason why, and a correction. Bream did not.

Related: Fox News Host Asks How We Can Tell ‘Bad Guys’ If We Can’t See ‘Tone Of Their Skin’?

Over at the right-wing National Review, senior writer Charles C. W. Cooke posted an article titled: “Did the Democratic Party Preempt Justice Breyer’s Announcement to Force His Hand?”

Its only content: Bream’s inaccurate tweet and the words, “It certainly seems possible.”

Here are more results of Bream’s inaccurate reporting:

Chief political correspondent, Washington Examiner and Fox News contributor Byron York:

Another Washington Times columnist and a SiriusXMPatriot personality:

Former senior advisor to the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC):

Blogger at right wing website Hot Air:

Radio talk show host:



Continue Reading


Silenced by Psaki: Reporter Pushing Right Wing Talking Points Can’t Answer Press Secretary’s Basic Questions About Them



A reporter was silent after pushing right-wing talking points during the White House’s daily press briefing and being asked to explain her question. The Q&A was so disturbing one well-known political scientist weighed in on social media to declare the White House press corps an “embarrassment.”

“Just a quick question on inflation,” the unnamed reporter began as she asked her question on the administration’s plan to strengthen the social safety net and grow jobs. “Many believe that government spending is a big factor in the current inflation levels. Can you speak to concerns that spending plans that come out of Build Back Better aren’t paid for, and so could mean higher deficits and more inflation in the future.”

Psaki, a little stunned, confirmed she heard correctly: “Aren’t paid for? Build Back Better is paid for.”

The reporter was silent. As time moved on, so did Psaki.

“Entirely,” she added, definitively.

“Okay,” replied the reporter, apparently out of facts and with little understanding of what she was asking. “Can you speak to the concerns that are coming in that it’s not, actually?”

“Who are the concerns from though?” Psaki asked.

Silence again.

“Who’s saying it’s not paid for?” Psaki pressed.

More silence.

“Because there have been a range of economists saying it’s entirely paid for, and that has been a priority for the President. It has also been concluded by a number of Nobel laureates and experts from a range of economic experts on the outside that it will not contribute to inflation. So those are the global experts that we would point to, but there may be others suggesting something else, but I don’t know who those people are,” she said, allowing the reporter to offer a different response, to possibly retain her dignity.

“So if those bills do pass it will not raise taxes?” the reporter asked, which is an entirely different question.

“Well, something being entirely paid for means that part of that is the highest income Americans highest that companies would be asked to pay a little bit more. That has been part of the proposal and part of reforming the tax system to make it more fair,” Psaki explained.

“So they’re also not expected to contribute to future inflation, then?”

“The Build Back Better Bill? Again, it’s fully paid for, we would point to Nobel laureates and a range of global economists who have conveyed that it would not contribute to inflationary pressures.”


Continue Reading


Influential Far Right Conservatives Ballistic Over Breyer Retirement: ‘They Must Be Stopped’



As soon as the news broke that Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer will retire at the end of the current session, right-wing activists began declaring that Breyer had been “bullied” into stepping down and therefore Republicans must do everything they can to block whomever President Joe Biden nominates to fill that seat.

Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network and Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch both asserted that Breyer had been forced out of his seat on the court.

Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America declared that Biden must use the vacancy to unify the nation by appointing to the court a “constitutionalist” (which is conservative code for “right-wing ideologue”).

Proclaiming that the Senate is the “our last line of defense against radical leftist SCOTUS justices,” Ohio Republican Senate candidate Josh Mandel used the opportunity to promote his own campaign.

Rep. Lauren Boebert proclaimed that Biden should take a hint from Breyer and “follow him out the door.”

Right-wing activist Brigitte Gabriel openly asserted that it doesn’t even matter whom Biden nominates, “they must be stopped.”

Right-wing commentator Matt Walsh demanded that the position remain vacant until following the midterm elections in November, insisting that “it would be an assault on our democracy” to confirm any nominee before then.

Taking things a step further, radical Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers called on the U.S. Senate to “filibuster, stall, delay and hold Biden’s Supreme Court pick until 2024.”

This article was originally published by Right Wing Watch and is republished here by permission.

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.