The wolf realized that he couldn’t blow the disco ball house down. The only reason he was sad and angry and blowing peoples’ houses down was because his parents didn’t accept him for who he was.Wise child.
He aced the assignment.
When I last posted I included an item about the rich giving very little to charity. Here are a couple more charity related items, showing the lie the rich say that charities will pick up the slack.
That big tax giveaway to the rich from a couple years ago included raising the personal exemption. That gave a small tax cut to those who don’t have a lot of deductions.
But most of those deductions for people of modest means were because of charitable giving. No tax incentive for giving and people are less likely to give. And charities are feeling it. Fundraising revenue for the first half of this year was down 7.3%.
The nasty guy administration (showing why I call him the nasty guy) has proposed rule changes that would cause 3.7 million people to lose eligibility for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) otherwise known as food stamps.
In the GOP and nasty guy thinking 3.7 million people going hungry isn’t a flaw, it’s a feature. It is a show of supremacy.
And charity – in this case food banks – can’t cover another 3.7 million people. Jocelyn Lantrip of the Food Bank of Northern Nevada said, “Food shouldn’t be a luxury.”
A few days ago I posted that because of the Democratic National Committee’s ever higher thresholds to qualify for debates, it prompts candidates to seek funding from billionaires and compromising their progressive message. It also prompts billionaires to enter the race.
That prompted Shannon to tweet:
I wish the DNC had adjusted the debate qualifying formula months ago, when it first become clear how easy it was for billionaires to game them. I truly don’t understand why they didn’t, and it’s too late now to make it up to the candidates who got screwed.Candidates who got screwed include Cory Booker and Julian Castro.
Laura Clawson of Daily Kos has a few important things to say about the knife attack in London a few days ago:
As tragic as the murder of two people is, it’s nonetheless staggering that a group of people was able to join in the fight back—and survive.
Knives, it turns out, are less dangerous to crowds of people than are assault weapons.
...
Yeah, London has attacks where two people die and narwhal tusks and fire extinguishers help end things. The U.S. has mass shootings where dozens of people may die and where the rare case where a bystander—or a police officer—is able to subdue a shooter without more deaths is a national story for days. For that matter, we barely even consider it newsworthy if a shooting kills only two people. The horror of the London Bridge attack shows how bad things are in the U.S.
To coincide with the release of the movie Knives Out Michigan’s LGBTQ newspaper Between the Lines published a profile of Jamie Lee Curtis by writer Chris Azzopardi. I’ve heard the movie is a comedy whodunit so I might go see it.
Most of the article talks about Curtis being an LGBTQ ally. For that it is a nice read. Towards the end discussion turns to which character in the movie is a gay icon. Voices on the internet have decided that nod should go to a flamboyant character. But Curtis disagrees with the choice. She thinks the true gay icon should be Marta Cabrera, the caregiver, “because she’s kind.” As Curtis explains:
You see, embracing LGBTQ issues, the root of it is kindness. Not clothing or lifestyle. The root of acceptance of a human being is kindness and the kindest person in ‘Knives Out’ is Marta Cabrera. I would hope what LGBTQ people focus on is whether someone is kind and loving and inclusive and expansive versus rigid, cold, judging and hateful, and that is, to me, the dividing line.
No comments:
Post a Comment