Politics

[SeekNDestroy]

The country is being dragged further to the left. That’s complete bullshit.

Guns are everywhere, roe v wade got overturned, the federal tax rate is as low as it’s been in forever, public financing of elections is dead, Citizens United has pumped huge amounts of dark money into the political process, the defense budget is still huge….pretty sure those have been part of the conservative agenda for as long as I’ve been alive.

The present day GOP is basically everything the John Birch Society aspired to.

RDrayerU is further to the right than Attila the Hun. You can’t argue facts with someone who views the world through such a narrow prism.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

This one deserves a bump. Not surprised this hasn’t gotten more attention but is a perfect example of real change that members of both parties could get behind.

Why would any of them change the status quo when they get elected, take their net worth from $400k to over $10 mil on a $200k salary in a handful of years and do no actual productive work.

 

[drayer54]

The country is being dragged further to the left. That’s complete bullshit.

Guns are everywhere, roe v wade got overturned, the federal tax rate is as low as it’s been in forever, public financing of elections is dead, Citizens United has pumped huge amounts of dark money into the political process, the defense budget is still huge….pretty sure those have been part of the conservative agenda for as long as I’ve been alive.

The present day GOP is basically everything the John Birch Society aspired to.

We have they/theirs buttons at work, tranny flags wherever they sell coffee; nobody gets charged for crimes in the cities or prosecuted unless it's really bad, wide open borders where you get a fist bump when you cross, colleges parroting whatever Marxist shit the radicals think, ESG standards, EVs being shoved down our throats, dark money from around the world pouring into politics- more so the left, gender transitioning kids, Hollywood pushing left-wing narratives into every stupid show, a media bias that is now just accepted as being far-left outside of one cable network, and the complete takeover of suburban wine moms into the most annoying people on earth.

 

[drayer54]

Why would any of them change the status quo when they get elected, take their net worth from $400k to over $10 mil on a $200k salary in a handful of years and do no actual productive work.

I'll bet a good bit of them on both sides show up to make a difference. It's like fixing a company culture; it isn't easy, especially when a big chunk heavily disagrees with you, and a small chunk is absolutely nuts. The C suite is occupied by a sleepy geriatric who showed up over 50 years ago.

 

[Irish#1]

This one deserves a bump. Not surprised this hasn’t gotten more attention but is a perfect example of real change that members of both parties could get behind.

IMO, the reason this isn't getting any attention is twofold. These ideas have been put out there numerous times over the years and they haven't happened, so no one cares and congress is too greedy to give up such a cushy lucrative job.

 

[PerthDomer]

IMO, the reason this isn't getting any attention is twofold. These ideas have been put out there numerous times over the years and they haven't happened, so no one cares and congress is too greedy to give up such a cushy lucrative job.

If you want to reduce corruption in any governmental organization you increase compensation and then increase standards.

The current pay for staffers on up to congressmen makes it clear that if you want to be in government and be wealthy you need to ingratiate yourself with special interests.

That's why term limits are dumb. Want to reduce any independence among legislators or speed up the government to lobbying pipeline? Limit the time they can spend in congress and keep lining up new marks with less experience.

 

[Irish#1]

Jordan failed after three votes. Kevin Hern Oklahoma is going to take a crack at it.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

The country is being dragged further to the left. That’s complete bullshit.

Guns are everywhere, roe v wade got overturned, the federal tax rate is as low as it’s been in forever, public financing of elections is dead, Citizens United has pumped huge amounts of dark money into the political process, the defense budget is still huge….pretty sure those have been part of the conservative agenda for as long as I’ve been alive.

The present day GOP is basically everything the John Birch Society aspired to.

Book banning is back in a big way, too.

 

[Jiggafini19Deux]

Jordan failed after three votes. Kevin Hern Oklahoma is going to take a crack at it.

 

[greyhammer90]

The growing tally against (20-22-25) is a pretty obvious "fuck you" from the rest of the party.

 

[ulukinatme]

Book banning is back in a big way, too.

The books conservatives want banned:

Spoiler

My favorite is when the school board tries to stop the parent from reading the book aloud, saying "This isn't appropriate for a school board meeting." No shit, but it's okay to have in a middle school or elementary library? No. Doesn't even belong in a high school library, quite frankly. That stuff is borderline smut.

 

[drayer54]

Book banning is back in a big way, too.

If a school says you can’t put hustler magazine in the school library, does that count as book banning?

 

[greyhammer90]

The books conservatives want banned:

Spoiler

My favorite is when the school board tries to stop the parent from reading the book aloud, saying "This isn't appropriate for a school board meeting." No shit, but it's okay to have in a middle school or elementary library? No. Doesn't even belong in a high school library, quite frankly. That stuff is borderline smut.

Source for you saying those specific books are available in a middle school or elementary library? Most of those parents seem to be reading sex scenes from the book What Girls Are Made Of, which is a 208 page book recommended for Grades 10 (16 years old) and up. It seems to be a cautionary tale re: young love about a 16 year old girl named Nina who gives sexual favors to her boyfriend Seth in order to stay on his good side. The sex does not appear meant to be sexy or fun.

Maybe this is why the school board is telling them it's not appropriate? Because reading the sexual paragraphs of a hundred plus page novel and then screaming at the school board that they're sexualizing your children isn't a productive use of time or a good faith argument?

 

[ulukinatme]

Source for you saying those specific books are available in a middle school or elementary library? Most of those parents seem to be reading sex scenes from the book What Girls Are Made Of, which is a 208 page book recommended for Grades 10 (16 years old) and up. It seems to be a cautionary tale re: young love about a 16 year old girl named Nina who gives sexual favors to her boyfriend Seth in order to stay on his good side. The sex does not appear meant to be sexy or fun.

Maybe this is why the school board is telling them it's not appropriate? Because reading the sexual paragraphs of a hundred plus page novel and then screaming at the school board that they're sexualizing your children isn't a productive use of time or a good faith argument?

Yeah, I think some of them are from What Girls Are Made Of, but the last one with illustrations is from Gender Queer. There have been a lot of parents reading these books out loud at school board meetings in an effort to get the point across.

I've been tracking this for awhile and I've seen a number of articles and posts of schools up in arms over some of these books. Here's one I just found, but I'm sure you can find more:
Sexually Explicit Books Are Available in NH Middle Schools - NH Journal
and another about banned books in Georgia along with a teacher that was fired for reading a book to 5th graders about gender identity: Georgia school district is banning books, citing sexual content, after firing a teacher

It doesn't matter what the intent is, if parent's don't want it available in a public school that's their call. The material is still sexual in nature, regardless if it's "fun" or not.

You don't see the hypocrisy in these parents reading these inappropriate books in front of a school board, but the books are okay for the children's library? They have no place in education, they're of no literary value.

 

[drayer54]

Source for you saying those specific books are available in a middle school or elementary library? Most of those parents seem to be reading sex scenes from the book What Girls Are Made Of, which is a 208 page book recommended for Grades 10 (16 years old) and up. It seems to be a cautionary tale re: young love about a 16 year old girl named Nina who gives sexual favors to her boyfriend Seth in order to stay on his good side. The sex does not appear meant to be sexy or fun.

Maybe this is why the school board is telling them it's not appropriate? Because reading the sexual paragraphs of a hundred plus page novel and then screaming at the school board that they're sexualizing your children isn't a productive use of time or a good faith argument?

Some lib school districts have purposely taken it too far to draw criticism.

 

[PerthDomer]

Yeah, I think some of them are from What Girls Are Made Of, but the last one with illustrations is from Gender Queer. There have been a lot of parents reading these books out loud at school board meetings in an effort to get the point across.

I've been tracking this for awhile and I've seen a number of articles and posts of schools up in arms over some of these books. Here's one I just found, but I'm sure you can find more:
Sexually Explicit Books Are Available in NH Middle Schools - NH Journal
and another about banned books in Georgia along with a teacher that was fired for reading a book to 5th graders about gender identity: Georgia school district is banning books, citing sexual content, after firing a teacher

It doesn't matter what the intent is, if parent's don't want it available in a public school that's their call. The material is still sexual in nature, regardless if it's "fun" or not.

You don't see the hypocrisy in these parents reading these inappropriate books in front of a school board, but the books are okay for the children's library? They have no place in education, they're of no literary value.

The issue in all of this is, is this what "the parents" want, or is this what the rightmost 10% of parents get fired up about to the point they all show up to school board meetings?

Back in my day it manifested with the middle school not being allowed to use PG 13 movies/clips in class because their precious 14 year olds would be corrupted by "explicit material"

 

[drayer54]

The issue in all of this is, is this what "the parents" want, or is this what the rightmost 10% of parents get fired up about to the point they all show up to school board meetings?

Back in my day it manifested with the middle school not being allowed to use PG 13 movies/clips in class because their precious 14 year olds would be corrupted by "explicit material"

Little difference between PG-13 and glorfying gay sex to minors.

 

[PerthDomer]

Little difference between PG-13 and glorfying gay sex to minors.

Except most books getting banned aren't that. The activists will always find the one most egregious example and harp on it while their real target is anything that is outside of their puritanical worldview.

 

[drayer54]

Reasonable minds could likely agree to what should and shouldn’t in the library. Far-left people trying to slips books about the most extreme things brings out the far-right people pushing back.

 

[greyhammer90]

You don't see the hypocrisy in these parents reading these inappropriate books in front of a school board, but the books are okay for the children's library? They have no place in education, they're of no literary value.

I think the reason it's inappropriate is for the reason I gave above. It's not acceptable to read three paragraphs of a 200 page novel aimed at 16 year olds out of context in a public meeting and then say that it's pornography. There's lots of examples of more graphic imagery used in classic literature. Ever read Grendel by John Gardner? It was required reading when I was in high school in rural Tennessee. There's a scene in it where the titular monster contemplates putting a hot iron poker in the "ugly hole" between a maiden's legs. I could read that paragraph out loud at a school board meeting and then conclude that its "of no literary value" but that doesn't make it true. Grendel is an important novel, and a major theme is of sexual frustration.

But I don't think anyone actually believes that these have "no literary value." What is actually meant is that they dont represent "MY values." They represent a worldview and perspective that the banners don't agree with. But a lot of people do agree with them, or don't mind the resource being available to kid's who are actively seeking information.

 

[ulukinatme]

I think the reason it's inappropriate is for the reason I gave above. It's not acceptable to read three paragraphs of a 200 page novel aimed at 16 year olds out of context in a public meeting and then say that it's pornography. There's lots of examples of more graphic imagery used in classic literature. Ever read Grendel by John Gardner? It was required reading when I was in high school in rural Tennessee. There's a scene in it where the titular monster contemplates putting a hot iron poker in the "ugly hole" between a maiden's legs. I could read that paragraph out loud at a school board meeting and then conclude that its "of no literary value" but that doesn't make it true. Grendel is an important novel, and a major theme is of sexual frustration.

But I don't think anyone actually believes that these have "no literary value." What is actually meant is that they dont represent "MY values." They represent a worldview and perspective that the banners don't agree with. But a lot of people do agree with them, or don't mind the resource being available to kid's who are actively seeking information.

https://jghsenglish.edublogs.org/files/2015/10/Grendel-chapters-7-12-1e0tidt-x6q94y.pdf

Page 109? That line is more graphic than what they're reading at the school board? No, not even a little bit. Grendel is a classic for a reason. It was written 50+ years ago. Writers were more tactful and less explicit in their writings. Even in Shakespeare's time if they wrote about risqué things it was done through metaphor, like talking about sex as "making the beast with two backs." There's no illusion with that vulgar writing they're reciting at the board, they're spelling out every action and it's unnecessary filth. It does nothing for the story except illicit things younger kids aren't ready to understand or comprehend, it's disgraceful.

If parents don't want their children to have access to that garbage, that's their right as parents. If some parents want their kids to have access to it they're free to do that in their own homes. Let me ask you this, are you a parent with young children and would you allow them to read that crap before they're an appropriate age?

 

[greyhammer90]

https://jghsenglish.edublogs.org/files/2015/10/Grendel-chapters-7-12-1e0tidt-x6q94y.pdf

Page 109? That line is more graphic than what they're reading at the school board? No, not even a little bit. Grendel is a classic for a reason. It was written 50+ years ago. Writers were more tactful and less explicit in their writings. Even in Shakespeare's time if they wrote about risqué things it was done through metaphor, like talking about sex as "making the beast with two backs." There's no illusion with that vulgar writing they're reciting at the board, they're spelling out every action and it's unnecessary filth. It does nothing for the story except illicit things younger kids aren't ready to understand or comprehend, it's disgraceful.

If parents don't want their children to have access to that garbage, that's their right as parents. If some parents want their kids to have access to it they're free to do that in their own homes. Let me ask you this, are you a parent with young children and would you allow them to read that crap before they're an appropriate age?

My point is that your entire argument is being made in bad faith. I've never read the books at issue, but I need a hell of a lot more context before I'm going to say "oh shit, the author of this one book just described a vagina getting wet. Maybe the book-banning group that actively lobbies for Slaughterhouse V to be removed from high school libraries is actually reasonable."

You're being extremely quick to call things that you have not read "pornographic", "filth", "smut", and "of no literary value". These are award winning books that other people have found comfort and meaning in.

Most books requested for removal in these cases are from high school libraries, so I'm not as concerned about elementary school kids as you are and believe that is usually a false flag designed to fear monger. Here is a list of books that were requested for removal by Moms for Liberty in Arkansas with a column for the current availability in the school system in question. Almost all the "smut" being requested for removal is only available for high schoolers. Also note that most of these books are not being asked to be removed for any sexual reason.

If my high school aged student read a book about teenagers having sex in high school, I'd probably shrug to be honest. If I found out my younger child was actively seeking out books on sex or other mature topics by checking out a book from the library, I'd probably want to discuss it with them and make sure I'm providing proper context. I might even tell them that this particular book isn't appropriate and remove it. I wouldn't dream of removing it as an option for other children who are looking for answers or presume that my take on poltics/race/sexuality is some sort of "truth" that needs protecting from alternative ideas.

 

[PerthDomer]

If you go back from Shakespeare a bit Chaucer is raunchy AF. And explicit.

7 Times "The Canterbury Tales" Was Way Dirtier Than "50 Shades of Grey"

I first read excerpts from Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales during my junior year of high school. (Brief synopsis: a bunch of pilgrims are traveling together and decide to tell one another stories.) We read a modern English translation, and I…

www.bustle.com

I remember in my freshman year of HS we got into the explicit parts of the Bible. That stuff would even make Chaucer blush.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Ban it.

 

[ulukinatme]

View attachment 3054658
Ban it.

King James version or GTFO

For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Good summary of all the gerrymandering and fair map lawsuits before 2024

Potentially +1 in Al, La, Ga, SC, UT, KY

Ohio GOP ran out clock on legislation so no change

TX potentially +3

NC new map gives GOP +4. Still being litigated for being wildly out of bounds.

NY +4 to 6 on a fair map.

Net 11-14 seats for Dems in 2024.

 

[ulukinatme]

My point is that your entire argument is being made in bad faith. I've never read the books at issue, but I need a hell of a lot more context before I'm going to say "oh shit, the author of this one book just described a vagina getting wet. Maybe the book-banning group that actively lobbies for Slaughterhouse V to be removed from high school libraries is actually reasonable."

You're being extremely quick to call things that you have not read "pornographic", "filth", "smut", and "of no literary value". These are award winning books that other people have found comfort and meaning in.

Most books requested for removal in these cases are from high school libraries, so I'm not as concerned about elementary school kids as you are and believe that is usually a false flag designed to fear monger. Here is a list of books that were requested for removal by Moms for Liberty in Arkansas with a column for the current availability in the school system in question. Almost all the "smut" being requested for removal is only available for high schoolers. Also note that most of these books are not being asked to be removed for any sexual reason.

If my high school aged student read a book about teenagers having sex in high school, I'd probably shrug to be honest. If I found out my younger child was actively seeking out books on sex or other mature topics by checking out a book from the library, I'd probably want to discuss it with them and make sure I'm providing proper context. I might even tell them that this particular book isn't appropriate and remove it. I wouldn't dream of removing it as an option for other children who are looking for answers or presume that my take on poltics/race/sexuality is some sort of "truth" that needs protecting from alternative ideas.

It's a bit more than just a vagina getting wet. There were multiple excerpts from that book that included detailing blow jobs, a boy inserting himself into the girl with all the details up to semen running down her leg, having sex for the first time, etc. It's beyond just one passage, the whole book is about a girl finding her sexuality...at 14. I've already linked instances where the book was found in Middle Schools, 12 and 13 year old kids don't need to be reading graphic novelizations about sex, and certainly not illustrations of the actions like in the other book.

A lot of those banned books may be high school recommended, but these books are found in some elementary and middle schools. Here's another story where Gender Queer, the book linked in the spoiler with the sexual illustrations, was pulled from libraries in elementary and middle schools in Texas: Fort Worth ISD removes 3 books deemed 'too graphic' for younger students

We're getting in the weeds here though. The point was these are the kinds of books conservatives are trying to ban, and it's their right as parents to limit what their children are exposed to if they're not ready. This isn't To Kill a Mockingbird or Huckleberry Finn, classic literature that's been banned in some California counties. You obviously have a different view, and that's great for you, but you're not the parent of other kids. You don't get to dictate what kind of material is inappropriate for them.

You've got the whole availability thing backwards. Does a Gentleman's club admit anyone of any age, or do they prevent minors from entering? What about websites with sexual content, are minors allowed in there? What about the old phone sex operators, do their commercials say you can be any age to call? All of that is sexually explicit content, and so are the words and illustrations in these books. They're all inappropriate for younger minds, some of which haven't even gone through puberty yet or are just starting. It's unnecessary, it's disgusting, it's perverted.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

Regardless of party this is who we all vote for when it comes to US Congress.

 

[GATTACA!]

It's beyond just one passage, the whole book is about a girl finding her sexuality...at 14.

Uhhh yeah? That's a freshman in high school?

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

King James version or GTFO

Sanitized but the same. Ezekiel is basically saying those women love the huge cocks and getting bukake’d.

Ban it.... or does this have significant literary, educational, or historical value for kids? Should kids read this and have it translated fully for them?? I have never heard this passage discussed in any of the church denominations I have attended.