Tuesday, November 19, 2024

Iraq snapshot

Tuesday, November 18, 2024.  The exodus from Twitter continues, the silence on Black women also continues, Hegseth is not qualified for the role of Secretary of Defense, and much more.



You ready to get off Elon Musk's plantation?




. Elon Musk was born and grew up in South Africa and he loved it.  Until apartheid began to crumble.  The thought of Black people having the same rights as he did caused him to flee South Africa.  The racism is ingrained in him and that's the only 'free speech' that he ever tolerates.

THE GUARDIAN, The Free Press, Gabrielle Union, Jamie Lee Curtis and so many others are doing the right thing and leaving the racist's social media.  He's lost money on Twitter but that doesn't matter to him because he has influence as long as he owns it -- if it remains popular.  If we leave it, it's over.  It's nothing but a nest of racists, sexists and homophobes and then it has no cachet and popularity.  

Over on Blue Sky . . .

Jody Watley opens up on disrupting and diversifying the dance floor and the fashion world for more than four decades…in the cover story for Canada’s IN Magazine’s November / December 2024 Issue “An Everlasting Icon” inmagazine.ca/2024/11/nove...

[image or embed]

— Jody Watley (@jodywatley.bsky.social) Nov 17, 2024 at 7:44 AM

Okay, y’all… I have finally decided that retreat is the better part of valor. Bringing some rainbow energy over to these blue skies. #bydhttmwdi

[image or embed]

— LeVar Burton (@levarburton.bsky.social) Nov 18, 2024 at 1:43 PM


It wasn't enough to have Glenn Greenwald, Ryan Grim, Zaid Jilani, Lee Fang, and Matt Stoller all emphasize the "positives" of Matt Gaetz, now Cenk Uygur is joining in too.

[image or embed]

— Post-Left Watch (@postleftwatch.bsky.social) Nov 16, 2024 at 12:58 PM





Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye and Diana Ross (Sept 6th, 1980). On stage at Wembley Stadium for Stevie's final "Hotter Than July Music Picnic" concert.

[image or embed]

— Stevie Wonder (@thesteviewonder.bsky.social) Oct 20, 2024 at 10:09 PM

Yes. He would. Because these dudes aren't about liberation or protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority

[image or embed]

— Imani Gandy (@angryblacklady.bsky.social) Nov 18, 2024 at 6:29 AM

"I-I-I-I-I-I Ain't Gonna Tweet on TWITTER (Ava and C.I.)" -- let's all say goodbye to X and to Twitter and to racists who actively work to destroy our lives.



Let me note one more to join Bluesky.


Hey BlueSky peeps! @alyssamilano is here on Bsky and so are we. Make sure you're subscribed anywhere you find podcasts! podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/a...

[image or embed]

— Alyssa Milano: Sorry Not Sorry (@sorrynotsorry.bsky.social) Nov 15, 2024 at 5:50 AM

I called Alyssa out two weeks ago for not being on BlueSky.  Now the reason most give me is that they're afraid they'll lose their following.  Most of the people refusing to budge -- racist Katrina vanden Heuvel of THE NATION, for example, don't have a following.  Alyssa built up her TWITTER following and has huge numbers.  Knowing Alyssa,  I doubt she's stopped Tweeting but at least she's also gone to BLUESKY.  And I will say thank you and I will applaud.  

Or I will applaud those of you going to BlueSky.  

If, on the left, we can't even do that -- and do it to oppose racism, sexism and homophobia -- it says a great deal about our lack of priorities.  

Run X into the ground and Elon Musk is just another ugly man with ass hair implanted on his scalps and jowls.  


Now let's note this from Reshonda Tate on THE DEFENDER NETWORK.
 



Community member Keesha weighed in on that video above noting that this is the big story of the post-election period "but no Democracy Now segment, nothing on The Majority Report or at The Progressive or In These Times or The Nation.  The same outlets that ignored us in the lead up to the election are ignoring Black women after the election.  I guess they couldn't do all their lying if they had to listen to Black women.  So they just ignore us instead.  I'm registering and I doubt I'm the only one who is."

It is very hard to ignore the silencing that's taking place.

An e-mail to the public account (common_ills@yahoo.com) is from a woman asking how long she should sit it out?  You'll know when -- and if -- you're ready to take part again.  Some will need longer to take care of themselves and to heal.  Some will never come back (and I don't blame you if that's what you need to do).  

This is a very important time and you need to take care of you because the 'left' has demonstrated that they won't -- not just before the election but also, as Keesha points out, after as well.

Don't let them steal your joy -- we've all heard it.

But damned if they didn't try, right?

Kamala was the first Black woman to run for the presidency on a major ticket.  And to even be joyful about that brought attacks from others.  Brought nonsense about Gaza.  

Most political nominees aren't tasked with solving the world's problems before they're even elected president.  Not so with Kamala.  She had to solve everything and please everyone and do so before she was in the Oval Office.

Yeah, let's pretend like she was being judged by the same standard.  That's what so many on the left who helped derail her campaign want us to believe. 

We're not that stupid.

We grasp that every column attacking her, every segment attacking her, every speech attacking her was devaluing her -- intentionally devaluing her.  

And they try to act like she's the failure.

My state's still got 6% of the vote to count but per the official results nationwide right now, Kamala got 48.3% to Trump's 50%.  

That's a less than 2% difference.  For a candidate who had to hit the ground running in August.

But don't the White men like Seth Prissy Moulton want to attack.  Hey, Seth, unlike you, she had a general election opponent.  You didn't.  So you should have gotten 100% of the vote -- running uncontested.  But you didn't, did you?

So maybe you're the last White windbag that needs to be speaking right now and maybe people need to grasp that when you speak -- running unopposed, he couldn't even get 100% of the vote this time. 


Let's note Satanic Trump's unqualified nominees.  Pete Hegseth is not qualified to be the secretary of any department.  You didn't have to go left to find a qualified candidate.  There are people serving in leadership of the military that could have been elevated.  There are people in the Senate who are Republicans who would be qualified -- Joni Ernst, Mike Rounds, Roger Wicker, Bill Cassidy, etc. 

They have the knowledge base.  Hegseth doesn't have the knowledge base or the experience.  What he does have is a sad and drunken assault.  It was seven years ago.  It is not the distant past.  He was 37 years old.  David Kurtz (TPM) notes:


More details emerged over the weekend about the sexual assault claim against Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for secretary of defense.

The WaPo was first with extensive new information about the circumstance of the alleged sexual assault, based on (i) a memo it obtained that was provided to the Trump transition team late Wednesday by a friend of the victim; and (ii) a statement from Hegseth’s lawyer, Timothy Parlatore.

The woman later reported the alleged assault to police, but no charges were ever filed:

According to the police statement, the complaint was filed four days after the encounter, and the complainant had bruises to her thigh. The police report itself was not released.

Hegseth settled the woman’s claim for an undisclosed amount, and she signed a nondisclosure agreement.

Trump is standing by Hegseth in the face of the undisclosed settlement of the sexual assault claim.


That's reason enough not to confirm him.

But he's also not qualified for the job.


He shouldn't be confirmed.  He shouldn't even be nominated.  He's not fit to oversee the Pentagon -- he does not have the background.  If the nomination was to be Secretary of Veterans Affairs, I'd have a few problems -- mainly around the issues of female veterans.  And I would also question his ability to oversee any department because he just doesn't have that experience -- not in his military service and not in his civilian experience.


This is a huge department that is taxed with many, many duties including ensuring the US military is prepared.


What in Hegseth's past experience argues that he knows a thing about hiring or recruiting, for example?


The last Senate hearing on military readiness was eleven months ago. 

At that hearing, US Army Maj Gen Johnny Davis spoke on a number of topics including the statements below:


Today's youth are far more likely to pursue education beyond high school. Currently,
high school seniors and recent graduates account for more than 50% of our annual
contracts. However, they only represent 15-20% of the labor market. We will transform
our prospecting to expand into a greater representation of the labor market and enter
the larger prospect pool. In addition to the high school market, we will target those with
more than a high school diploma, this includes a college degree, some college, or a
technical certification. By FY 2028, it is our goal for one third of new recruits to have
more than a high school diploma.  We are growing our analytical capability to incentivize and position our recruiting force, tailor marketing based on segmentation, and place our recruiters in the right place with  the right training, products, and tools. Our quarterly Industry Engagement Program allows us to identify new tools to improve operations across the enterprise.
As we transform how the Army prospects for talent, we will continue to innovate and
leverage data analytics, artificial Intelligence (AI), and Machine Learning (ML) to quickly
identify the right talent and provide tailored messaging to potential talent. We are
expanding our presence on both social media and digital job boards to communicate the
Army's Employee Value Proposition (EVP). Expanding our market is critical to
accomplishing the mission today and in the future.



What does Hegseth know about hiring practices, recruitment and retention?  Nothing.  Can he address, off the top of his head, the issue of evidence-based learning capability?  Does he know what a command wide retention surge is?  If so, does he approve or does he think it's a waste of time.  Each of the four branches needs to be adequately staffed (the Air Force didn't make the goal in 2023).  How does Hegseth plan to address this.  Does he have an overall plan or is he going to propose piece meal strategies?


He wants this office why?  How does he see himself delivering in this office?  

Where does he stand on waivers?

Due to his plethora of body markings, I'd assume he is okay with tattoos.  But what about age restrictions -- what his top end for someone serving in combat?  On drug tests, what's his wait window on retesting -- 60 days, 90 days, less, more?  And why?  Drug testing does include testing for alcohol.  

ESaR has been a semi-successful recruiting tool for the Navy (Every Sailor a Recruiter).  Is that a policy Hegseth agrees with?  Why or why not?

The Navy's "Make Your Name" series has been successful in recruiting -- noting women's roles and experiences serving in the Navy.  It's a fairly inexpensive recruiting tool and it has been successful.  Does he endorse this recruiting tool?  If not, why not?  If not, is it because he has a limited view of what women can do in the military?

Grasp that -- without him -- women have been moving up in the ranks in the military.  Are these women going to hit a glass ceiling if he becomes the Secretary?  How is he planning to address these issues?  How is going to maintain the US military's competitive edge?


Guess what, those are very basic questions about basic duties and that's before we get beyond workforce issues.  I see nothing in his background that demonstrates experience with those type of issues.  

Again, we still haven't gotten to other issues that include oversight, combat, military exercises and partnering with the VA to improve the transition from veteran to soldier.  On that last one?  I don't think he has expertise but I think his experience -- personal -- could compensate for the lack of expertise.  I do not feel that way about any other responsibility that he would be tasked with should he become the Secretary of Defense. 

The US Army is supposed to be refocusing with an emphasis on LSCO (Large-Scale Combat Operations).  That is one of the defined 2025 goals.  Hegseth will pursue that how?


These are not minor details.  And you can't learn it on the job, not as Secretary of Defense.  That means being over the defense of this country so Americans are entitled to expect someone in that role to have actual experience.

Hegseth has none.

Again, this isn't a right-or-left issue.  There are Republicans who are qualified for this post.  Hegseth is not one of them.  Any sitting senator on the Armed Services Committee is qualified for the post.  

They would know the issues needing to be addressed before they were even sworn into office.

Hegseth doesn't know the issues, he's never overseen any workforce -- let alone a workforce as large as the Defense Dept -- and he would put military readiness at risk as the whole world had to wait for him to learn on the job and familiarize himself with tasks and concepts that he's honestly not suited for.




The following sites updated:






 
Posted by at