Today in poison pills:

"It is an issue of fairness, it's deeply unfair. We've got to own that. We've got to acknowledge that." According to California Governor Gavin Newsom speaking to noted racist, transphobe, and human toe Charlie Kirk, on trans women in women's sports.

Newsom and Kirk seen here sitting on
chairs upholstered in genuine puppy-leather.

On the upside, I can't wait to vote for his
replacement when he terms out in 2026.

What's messed up here is that Newsom was agreeing with Kirk, and saying that trans women playing in women's sports is deeply unfair. Now, if it sounds to you like I'm saying "women playing women's sports" it's because I am. Trans women are women. Gender is a construct. That's the whole goddamn point, and with one ill-chosen podcast interview, Newsom has likely just made it impossible for a lot of us--including myself--to vote for him should he ever run for President. 

Remember? When everything wasn't
an absolute trash fire all the time?

Speaking of, I have to admit, there's a part of me making excuses for him. A part of me saying "oh, well, he doesn't really feel that way, he's just setting himself up as a candidate that even conservatives can vote for." After all, pre 2008 election Barack Obama said that he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman because he wanted to be President of America. Then, post 2012 election Obama was all: "Gay marriage for all!" Because he'd already won a second term, and no longer needed to court the homophobe vote.

It's not like a medical background
is necessary anymore. 

But this is different. Newsom's comments sound dangerously close to "trans women are just dudes in dresses" and I don't know that he feels that way, but it sounds like he's saying that being born biological male--which, is way more complicated that I'm about to make it sound--confers unfair athletic advantages. And I have some problems with that. Actually, I think science has some problems with that, but again, I'm not a doctor, so I'm just going to yammer on about things that seem correct to me.

According to this article from PBS, the NCAA says there's something like ten trans athletes out of half a million competing in college sports. And I know we're not necessarily talking only about college sports, but even if there's a hundred we're still making up rules that apply to a tiny fraction of people. But ok, is there evidence that athletes who went through, let's call it male puberty, and then later transitioned, had an athletic advantage? 

Above: male puberty.

I think it's safe to say that being a cis man
in no way confers no athletic advantages.

Yes, but also no. Ok, according to the same article, there's a possibility that there's something to the idea that some trans women might have an advantage. Or they might not. It's an incredibly small sample size. But what I'd like to know is is this possible advantage outside the range of ability of cis women athletes? That is, are all trans woman, by virtue of having gone through male puberty, naturally stronger and bigger than all cis women? Or, are we going on gender stereotypes?

When the President bloviates about how he "will not allow men to beat-up, injure and cheat our women and girls." I can't help but feel he's not coming from a place of protecting women, but just pandering to the nutters he's conned into voting for him.

Again, this is a guy who bragged that he liked to sneak into the changing
rooms at beauty contests to ogle teens, so forgive me if I don't take him at his word.

Pictured: I don't know, tennis?

But to get back to Gavin Newsom's gross pandering, I guess I just don't care enough about sports? Let's say for the sake of argument that there's a chance that some trans women can, in some really specific cases, have a slight athletic advantage over some--but again not all--cis women. So what? Chromosomes, hormone levels, and whatever are just factors, and can't replace hard work and training. I assume. Again, I don't sport, and to be clear, I'm not any kind of expert.

But since when has not being an expert stopped anyone? I guess what I'm saying is that discriminating against an entire class of people feels far more deeply unfair than some women having a vaguely defined, possibly not real advantage while playing a game. And is Newsom's sudden, gross stance on this enough to keep me from voting for him in some hypothetical race against an octogenarian Trump in some grim future where he's somehow allowed to run again? Yikes, I don't know.

Of course, that presupposes that we'll even have elections in the future.

Today in exquisite dining experiences:

It's a lazy, but apt metaphor for our times.

Can we chat about something not having to do with the garbage fire that is politics right now? I know, I know, it's hard to escape, as much as we'd all like to. And to be clear, as a fire, it's urgent and should be discussed. The administration is doing illegal, unconstitutional, and un-American things every day and should be resisted and spoken out against at every opportunity. That said, I'm hoping we could talk about Fancy Feast?

Above: No. None of this.

You know, the cat food? I ask because I refuse to pay for YouTube, and consequently am bombarded with advertisements; something I find intensely unpleasant, owning both to my natural aversion to marketing, but also to the wildly ineffective ad targeting. Anyway, today I encountered an ad for something called Fancy Fest Gems which is weird because I don't now, nor I have ever, owned a cat, much less expressed a desire to supply my non-existent cat with a feast, much less a fancy one.

Nevertheless, I was...intrigued isn't the word. Morbidly curious maybe? I was morbidly curious as to what gems--nominally a word used to describe a stone--had to do with cats. They, to my knowledge, eat meat? Like, they're carnivores, so I was understandably confused and decided to let the ad run longer than I normally would before hitting the skip button. The product, I came to understand, is a pyramid of food topped with goo.

I...what even is this?

I presume this is what cats eat, but I also
may just have had slovenly housemates.

Now, I said I've never owned a cat, that's not to say that I've not had living situations that included cats, only that said cats weren't mine, nor was their well being any of my concern. Typically I would offer them a nod of acknowledgment, which they would return, and that would be the extent of our interaction, so exactly what they eat was not a question that came up for me. I was hazily aware of an unpleasant smelling plate of an unappetizing meat-like paste slowly hardening on the floor next to a water dish, or a dry variety resembling Cocoa Puffs. 

Huh? Oh, it's that weird, puffy hat that
chef's wear. I looked it up. Because Pedantry.  

This however, is not that. Why is it pyramidal? And what is that gel on top? Like I said, I didn't watch the commercial in its entirety, but that clammy beige ziggurat gnawed at me, teasing me to learn its secrets, so I did what any 21st century internet-addled adult would do instead of anything productive: I looked it up. The Fancy Feast website refers to it as "A Culinary Crown Jewel" that promises to "delight your cat" with an "exquisite dining experience." It's evidently a mousse paté, although to call it that feels like a personal affront to every French chef who's donned a toque. Oh, and the stuff on top is supposed to be gravy. Another thing I'm sure cats care about.

An ounce of food is like the size of
a cat's face. They're going to notice.

And look, to be clear, I have nothing against your cat and I am in no way suggesting that your cat doesn't deserve an exquisite dining experience. I'm sure they've worked very hard. I'm only pointing out that Fancy Feast Gems is a scam. It varies depending on where you shop, but a 3oz. can of Fancy Feast jellied fish parts and offal is $.99, or $.33/oz. while a two-pack of two-ounce Gems is like $2.50 or $.63/oz. and screws your cat out of an entire ounce of cat food per serving. That's like, a third less gross paté.

Again, I have no dog in this hunt, but I had to sit through this ad and now I've made it my mission to ruin the Fancy Feast company by convincing you that if you have a cat, to please not fall for nonsense like mousse paté for cats.

 I mean, who are you trying to impress?

Yeah, but we don't pass bathroom bills so...

I never understood, nor will I, how anyone can look at anything the President is doing this time, did in his first term, or really has ever done or will do in the future of his self-centered and heartless existence with anything other than horror and disdain. 

Pictured: a draft dodger shaking down a war-time leader and

berating him both for his unwillingness to hand over territory to an

invading force and for his fashion sense. Not pictured: a hint of irony.

On the one hand I do not approve of
vandalism. On the other hand, this.

For the most part, his behavior has been enough to alienate the last of the few family members and vague acquaintances of mine he once had enthralled, and that's a start. Now, when I refer to the vast fields of rubes who bark along with this insanity, at least I'm not talking about anyone I care about. And for the most part, as a Californian, other than the odd Tesla, I'm statistically unlikely to encounter any out and proud MAGAs in the wild. 

To be clear, no group adopting a skull
as an emblem has ever been the good guy.
Also, the Punisher hates fascists.

But still, there's a sense that vast swathes of the country that are simply under the sway of an occupying force. An army of zombified zealots who traded their souls for a lazy political ideology, and replaced having a personality with red hats and Punisher decals. And maybe they feel the same way about us: a bunch of woke liberal socialists indulging in the sin of empathy or whatever nonsense they tried to float a few weeks back. But since they literally cannot define the words "woke" or "socialist," I'm hopeful history will bear us out. 

"Hey,  don't have to stand here and
tolerate your intolerance of our intolerance."

-Press Secretary Leavitt

Eventually. And I'm frustrated by the question of what their plan is. Like, the polls are aways half approve, half disapprove. Republicans support this lunacy by a 90% margin and Democrats abhor it by, yup, a 90% margin. But how are we supposed to have a functioning society when half the county is screaming about tearing everything down and replacing it with some kind of weird Elo-garchy, and half of us just want to look at our phones without thinking "what's he done now?"

"Where was everybody? Really could
have used that grudging coalition."

-Shoulda Been President Harris

Again, I get that the Right hates the Left and feels the same way, but the difference is that when our star is in ascendance--or more accurately, when we've mustered together a grudging coalition of generally progressive viewpoints and manage to win an election--nobody is a public enemy. No broadly defined group of people is marked out as being responsible for whatever perceived ills society is facing. Democrats don't run on a platform of making life miserable for entire groups of people. There are no bathroom bills under Democrats.

So I'm not saying that the American Left is perfect or doesn't make huge mistakes, but on balance I think we're talking about a worldview where everyone is welcome versus one where straight, white, Evangelical Christian, cis-gendered, English-speakers are American, and everyone else is barely tolerated, or not tolerated at all.

Above: a broadly defined group that probably should be
marked out as responsible for the ills our society faces.

Borrenpohl: 3, Hired Goons: 0

So maybe you saw the footage from the town hall where a woman was forcibly dragged--ok, maybe you saw it, maybe you didn't. I don't know. This is a blog and communication is one way, so I'll presume that you haven't and give you some background. It's just easier this way.

I can't actually hear you.

"Liberals want litter boxes in classrooms!"

-who even knows with these asshats?

So on Saturday, a town hall meeting was held in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. The meeting was held by Republicans and so consisted largely of whatever nonsense they're usually on about. So, a woman called Teresa Borrenpohl called them out, admittedly heckling them, but I mean, there are only so many times we can hear them drone on about how awesome school vouchers are or how books are making kids trans. Doesn't matter how right she was to sass them, what followed is goddamn Orwellian.

Pictured: Borrenpohl being attacked
by...I don't know, some dudes?

Dr. Borrenpohl--yes, doctor--was warned that if she continued to interrupt that she'd be asked to leave. But she wasn't asked so much as she was set upon by several men including Sherif Bob Norris (out of uniform, and not immediately recognizable). He then instructed three randos to remove her. She, very reasonably, asked who these men were, but no answers were forthcoming. Dr. Borrenpohl was violently dragged out of the meeting. It was, and I think most would agree, a fascist shitshow.

Evidently, it was a lecture. On how
awesome compliance with authority is.

Which, I mean, it was a town hall and descent is part of being American as much as these Trump-drunk MAGA goons refuse to admit it. In a brutal owning of the speaker, Borrenpohl even asked "Is this a lecture or a town hall?" She also later pointed out that people cheering the speakers weren't asked to stop sycophantically applauding, only those who took issue with the speakers' bloviating. So obviously this is already pretty sketch.

Is Sheriff Norris unfamiliar with
how video and the internet work?

So who even were the Sheriff's goons? At first, nobody seemed to know. The Republican Central Committee Chair and at least one committee member both said they had no idea what security company was hired. Norris said he didn't contract the company, never instructed anyone to remove her, and that he'd left the room and came back to find that the security guys had Borrenpohl on the floor, which is weird because he's 100% on video siccing the goons on her while she's asking who they are and if they're his deputies. 

Pictured: the bus under which
Norris was so quickly thrown.

But did he hire them? Who knows? Does it really matter? While Norris denies knowing anything about it, the two Republican committee members both said it was indeed him who'd hired the security company, later identified LEAR Asset Management, in perhaps the most grim corporate dystopian name for a business ever. Which, I mean, you almost have to admire how quickly they turned on him. 

Not for nothing, but it took three of
these hired goons to restrain her.

Anyway, Dr. Borrenpohl was left bruised, but not seriously injured and she is using her ordeal to draw attention to the serious abuses of authority and attacks on free speech on the part of Republican legislators. Even the police chief agreed that her First Amendment Rights had been violated, and went on to drop a battery charge against her which--if it was even real--was clearly self-defense. And a GoFundMe campaign has raised $182,000 for her which I'm sure will come in handy when she sues the bejeezus out of everyone involved. Well, almost.

I'm not going to link to it, because I'm
classy, but Ed Bejarana has a website.

Being a garbage human isn't, unfortunately, actionable, but let's talk about the moderator, a job title I think has to be ironic in this instance. He's a voice actor called Ed Bejarana and you can hear him on the microphone mocking Borrenphol:

"This little girl is afraid to leave. She spoke up and doesn't want to suffer the consequences."

-Ed Bejarana, noted terrible person 

Anyway, I don't know how we got here, but I know how we got here. Know what I mean? I guess what I'm saying is, here's a link to Dr. Teresa Borrenpohl's GoFundMe. 

Yeah, I really think we're burying the lead here, so once again:
she resisted three private security guards. Three. 

Just trying to have a society here...

More scrutiny? you know, I'd settle for any
scrutiny whatsoever. Some oversight too.

Look, we all know that government can be inefficient...well, no, that's not true, we all know that comedians have, for decades, tapped the rich vein of comedy that is based on the apocryphal story of the government paying (insert exorbitant dollar amount here) for a wrench or whatever. It would be more accurate to say we all assume that there are areas of government spending that warrant more scrutiny. But I think most people have come around to the idea that we don't want to throw out the essential government services with the bathwater.

Pictured: the same guy swearing to
uphold the law...like a month ago.

That hasn't stopped a President most people didn't vote from tasking a multi-billionaire nobody voted for dismantling entire agencies, illegally withholding funds congress has already approved, and helping himself to private information. The aforementioned President recently said "He who saves his Country does not violate any Law [caps his]." Which is nonsense for two reasons: one he's not saving anything. We're pretty screwed right now. And two: he who violates the law should be in prison.

But whatever, I want to talk about Dolly Parton. Yes philanthropist, champion of children's literacy, and, so I'm told, a country music singer? I don't know, I don't follow country music. It doesn't matter, she's a national treasure. When someday, God forbid, she is no longer with us, her loss will be felt the world over. Unlike some other people whose names, faces, and preposterously heartless actions I won't even mention. Which brings us to the Indiana State Budget cutting funding for her Imagination Library. Because socialism or whatever. 

Above: Socialist monster Dolly Parton, seen here using her
power and influence to help others. Why, it's positively un-American.

"Funding opportunities like many those
lazy, free-loading kids should get jobs."

-Governor Mike Braun

Anyway, inspired by her impoverished childhood and her father's illiteracy, Parton created the program to provide children from zero to five with free books and is funded through partners and local funding including six million from the State of Indiana. Parton has pleaded with the Governor who--due solely to how bad the whole thing makes him, the GOP, and the State of Indiana look, has promised to "identify funding opportunities." Which to my ears sounds a lot like "good luck with that" and not "the State will live up to its obligations to kids." Sorry, are we great again, yet?

And I mean, what are we even doing here? We're just trying to have a society. Like, it's such low hanging fruit to demand that our taxes--if we have to pay them at all--only go to the most basic governmental services (and a massive military budget that's thrice that of the world's next largest, but is still somehow not enough to take care of our veterans). Kids should have books. How is that controversial? And yes, our taxes can and should be used to help kids, especially those furthest from opportunity. Again, not exactly a hot take. 

"Huh, it says here that we're supposed to have three co-equal branches
of government and a separation of church and State. How interesting."

-Why Republicans would rather

kids not have access to books

Today in America's Golden Age:

Absolutely not. No. In no way shape or form and also, no. What even am I talking about? Why Claudia Tenney's proposal that we make Trump's birthday a Federal holiday. Obviously, there is a lot wrong with this idea, and it's almost certainly just about the attention, but let's take the bait anyway, shall we?

I hope you sent out those cards! By UPS, Fed Ex or some other private
delivery service of course, as the Postal Service is a wasteful cesspool of socialism.

Pictured: the president making out with
Old Glory...whihc is both gross and almost
certainly against the U.S. Flag Code.

First of all, Trump's birthday happens to fall on Flag Day which Tenney is aware of and evidently sees as not only not a problem, but providence. Now, am I ascribing an almost religious zealousness to the congresswoman's idea because I view all Trump fans as belonging to some kind of bizarre cult of personality centered around a convicted felon who's done nothing but fail his way up all the way to the top of American politics and who's only avoided jail through cowardice on the part of those charged with holding him accountable?

Yes, but also check out some excerpts from her press release:

Yikes, is he holding her pets hostage?
Blink twice if your in danger, Claudia...
 

"No modern president has been more pivotal for our country than Donald J. Trump. As both our 45th and 47th President, he is the most consequential President in modern American history, leading out country at a time of great international and domestic turmoil...Just as George Washington's Birthday is codified as a federal holiday, this bill will add Trump's Birthday to the list, recognizing him as the founder of America's New Golden Age."

-Representative Claudia Tenney 

gushing about about a convicted felon

Honestly, I'd rather give COVID
a Federal Holiday.

So, couple of things, consequential doesn't necessarily mean good. Hurricanes are consequential. COVID was consequential. Speaking of, was his botched handling of that crisis the beginning of our Golden Age? Or was it that time he sicced a mob of insurrectionists on the capital and waited to see how things would shake out? Or is she referring to the last four weeks in which he let an unaccountable billionaire and some incel tech bros dismantle government agencies and access America's private information? 

What I'm saying is that rational people
builds golden idols out of real estate moguls.

In either case, his first swing at the Oval Office is generally regarded as the worst in history by anyone above a third grade reading level, and his second has only just begun and is beset by scores of lawsuits because pretty much every single sweeping policy change he's tried to executive order into being is against the goddamn law. So I'm left to draw the conclusion that this isn't about him being a good president, but instead about Tenney's weird Trump obsession. And that's what it is, an obsession. And one I'll thank her not to drag the rest of us along for.

She went on to say: "By designating Trump's Birthday and Flag Day as a federal holiday, we can ensure President's Trump's contributions to American greatness and the importance of the American Flag are forever enshrined into law,"  Which, look, I know this is just more MAGA noise designed to distract us while they undermine and pillage the institutions on which we rely, but seriously, these folks need to dial back the Trump worship. It's creepy.  

"Who needs the basic government services and benefits we've been paying into
for years when we can bask in the love of the "grab'em by the pussy" guy?"

-A typical American family, shortly before 

succumbing to a preventable disease

Wow, he definetly earned this chairmanship.

Not content with destroying healthcare, the separation of church and state, our international standing, and the Notre Dame reopening ceremony, the President has now decided ruin the arts. Which is weird, because, I mean, shouldn't he be letting Elon ruin it for him?

Pictured: The new chairman of the board of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts,
seen here shaving WWE CEO Vince McMahon's head. Incidentally, Federal Prosecutors have
just dropped their investigation into the sexual misconduct charges against McMahon.*

Look out! I think she's loaded!

So why the sudden interest in the arts? Apparently the Center had been doing drag shows that targeted young people. Which, ok, couple of things. Firstly, no they weren't. Secondly, how do you target a drag show at young people? What does that even mean? Thirdly, no they weren't. It's nonsense, just utter nonsense. Poppycock, even. Anyway, so Trump had a dream or something that the Kennedy Center was doing drag at children, so he decided to take the only reasonable course of action: ousted the chairman.

I also read he plans to give himself
a retroactive Oscar for his performance.

Yeah, so the Kennedy Center obviously already had a chairman of the board. Specifically David Rubenstein who, along with the rest of the board were fired when noted patron of the arts Donald "Home Alone 2 Cameo" Trump fired them and replaced them with a bunch of MAGA sycophants--who then, in turn, elected him the chairman. Or something, look, I don't know how boards work, but it's enough to know that there're are bound to be some changes.

Pictured: the Kennedy Center, seen
here radiating woke gay rays upon
an unsuspecting populace.

Presumably. Donald himself has never actually been to the Kennedy Center, but he's pretty sure that it was like, super gay, and has promised that it will be "not woke." Which is a term he can define, and not a word conservatives have adopted as a byword for that frightens and angers. Sorry, did I say byword? I meant hetero-word. Speaking of, can he even do this? Now-former president of the now-formerly prestigious institution isn't even sure. According to Deborah Rutter, the bylaws--heterolaws--are unclear. 

But I mean, vast swathes of the President's actions these past few weeks have been legal but that has phased him not at all, nor has it stopped the quivering pile of compliance and acquiescence that is the current GOP. So what now? Artists have already begun pulling out, so I suspect they'll soon be down to Rob Schneider and newly minted board member Lee "God Bless the U.S.A." Greenwood.

Pictured: so it's just this from here on out, isn't it?
Is it me, or does this picture look like a Slim Jim tastes?

*probably because he's like super-innocent, and not because his buddy and fellow sexual misconduct enthusiast is the President again.  

What if the kid's on to something?

"Aaaand cut. Ok everyone, that's a wrap
and remember, take this to your graves."

-Some director

Ok, so, to be clear, I'm not one for conspiracy theories. Like, I can't believe and don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job or that the moon landing was a hoax because I don't believe that the number of people required to pull either of these off would, over time, keep quite about it. Someone will inevitably break. For fame, or for a guilty conscious, or whatever. If there's a conspiracy of more than one person, someone will spill. It's a law of nature. But conspiracy theories are all the rage now, so I thought I'd offer one of my own. And to be clear, I don't subscribe to this, I'm just putting it out there for entertainment value only. So don't like, send in the goons or whatever.

Aww...isn't it cute? He's playing 
unelected strongman. Just like daddy!

The other day, there was a hot mic moment in which the First Buddy was delivering a press conference from the Oval Office because that's what the kind of nation we are now. In it, the...I don't know, First Toddler? Can be heard telling the President that he's not the President and needs to go away. Which, preach. Oh, and all that he needs to, and I quote, "I want you too shush your mouth." Ok, I had to clean that up a bit. Can you believe the mouth on kids these days?

Pictured: Musk offering advice
to the President earlier today.

So the question is where does he get ideas like this? It would suggest that this is how Elon talks either to or about the President. That the comment about the President not being the real President and needing to go away is drawn from Musk playing big man and telling his child that he's the real power behind the throne. But here's where I'm going to wildly speculate: what if he's talking about the election and Trump really isn't the really real President?

Remember that weird comment Trump made back in January when he was still campaigning for some reason? When he said:

Did anyone, you know look into this?
Like, because of the voter fraud he's
evidently admitting to in front of everyone?

"He journeyed to Pennsylvania, where he spent a month and a half campaigning for me in Pennsylvania, and he's a popular guy. He was very effective. And he knows computers better than anybody. All those computers. Those vote-counting computers. And we ended up winning Pennsylvania by a landslide. So it was pretty good, pretty good. So thank you Elon."

-Noted chaos agent Donald Trump

suggesting that he stole the election

"Yeah, we're...we're pretty corrupt."

-Two-thirds of the Court

I mean look, obviously this is me wanting to believe this. Wanting to believe that America didn't really fall for the most obvious Trojan Horse since, uh, the Trojan Horse. Wanting to believe that some whistleblower will step forward with incontrovertible proof that the election was rigged, Harris won, and everything will be right with the world. Of course, this pre-supposes that one: the kid's on to something and two: that the Trump-appointees on the Supreme Court wouldn't just shrug.

Pictured: the guy who named his kid X.

Both of which are unlikely. It's probably just that Elon talks smack to sound big in front of his toddler. But what if it is real and what if my theory about the inevitability of the weak link bears out. What if Donald Trump, in an uncharacteristically noble moment--and in exchange for immunity--puts country ahead of party and self and outs the conspiracy. Yes, unlikely bordering on impossible, but understand that I personally would be happy to let him walk away scot-free if he would just, you know, walk away. 

Seriously. I would trade any comeuppance or justice or whatever for him in exchange for never having to see his smirking face again…oh, and for democracy and a healthy prison sentence for the guy who bought the election for him. Allegedly. And again, I don't believe in conspiracy theories. This is just a conspiracy supposition? Hypothesis?

Once more, let me just reiterate that I think lighting-wielding
space-wizards are more likely to than the scenario outlined
above and way more likely than a DJT hero turn.