Candace Owens Is Toxic: Here Is Why

Candace Owens is a pollutant to political discourse, the African-American community and society writ large. Full stop!


This may sound a bit hyperbolic or just flat outrageous. But, I believe it to be wholly true, and I make no apologies for the statement.


If you follow this blog or any of my social media posts, you are likely well aware of my disdain for Stacey Dash's broke down cousin aka the low rent Omarossa. My contempt for Candace, I believe, is firmly buoyed by evidence.


Recently, at a Summit Tv panel featuring Candy, T.I., Killer Mike and Katrina Pierson T.I. asked Owens, "What era are we trying to replicate when America was last great?" Now, this is a question I've asked frequently and have yet to receive an actual answer. I know this is because Trump supporters cannot answer it honestly without being boxed into a corner forced to defend the indefensible. If they do attempt to answer it they go to the predictable playbook of employing red herrings and non-sequiturs, which is exactly what Candace did.


She started babbling about how "slavery was all over the world". T.I. cut her off and demanded she answer the question, which she insisted she was. She was not. She was making an attempt to justify America's actions with the always thoughtful "Well, they did it too" defense.


This weak ass sauce is a part of what encapsulates what Candace Owens is all about.


I have a plethora of issues with Candace Owens. I stringently feel her entire spiel is pernicious and distracting. Her rhetoric is often ahistorical, fallacious and disingenuous. When she does state facts it is void of context and perspective. Candace is frequently intellectually dishonest in her arguments and positions.


What I find the most disturbing is her absolute willingness to fetishize herself for a subset of white rightwingers and alt-righters who receive some sort of demented pleasure from seeing people of color go on tv or audio media trashing other people of color or poc as a whole. Even more disturbing is her regurgitating white nationalist/white supremacist talking points so they essentially can be laundered giving white nationalists and white supremacists cover to promote their hateful and insidious ideology.


An example of this is her so-called Blexit campaign which is an effort to convince African-Americans to leave the Democratic Party "plantation". She frequently reminds us that Democrats were in favor of slavery and against Civil Rights. 'Ol girl loves to spew the Republican talking point it was a Republican who freed the slaves. She loves to mention the Klu Klux Klan was supposedly a Democrat group. Candace claims social safety net programs such as welfare were created by Democrats to keep black folks in a slave mentality.


Now, here is where Stacey Dash's broke down cousin inserts some truth into her bullshit propaganda but it's drenched in disingenuousness. Yes, Democrats promoted slavery and were vehemently against Civil Rights. However, what she conveniently neglects to mention is it wasn't all Democrats it was southern Democrats (and southern Republicans for the record). The same regarding the Klan. As for welfare, if it is a trap to keep black people on the plantation it's putting some white folk there too since there are more white people per capita on welfare than blacks. Another oversight by the black Ann Coulter.


Candy also loves to spout another alt-right talking point which is this feigned concern for the absence of black men in the home. When she speaks about the detrimental effect the absence of a father can have on a family she is correct. She blames this on Democrats which they actually possess some culpability. But, their culpability lies in their cosigning rightwing projects which favors increased incarnation of young African-American men. People like Joe Biden advocated for engaging in the drug war which was nothing more than a war on black people. Not only did increased incarceration occur but so did blatant disproportionate sentencing which literally has black men in prison for multiple decades, if not life, for non-violent drug offenses. Shall I even go into stop and frisk. All of these things were Republican projects that, yes, were supported by some Democrats. But, for some reason Candace leaves the Republicans' responsibility out of it.


Something that Candace Owens has done which directly bolsters white supremacy by completing being ahistorical is her depiction of the Republican Party's strategy the last 50 plus years. A few months ago she went onto Ari Melber's show on MSNBC saying the "southern switch" and the "southern strategy" aren't real and are lies perpetrated by the Democrats. This is demonstrably false!


The "southern switch" most certainly took place. After the passage of Civil Rights and the Voting Rights Act in 1964 and 1965 respectively the vast majority of southern Democrats were so angry they left the Democratic Party. Where did they go? The Republican Party where they were welcomed with open arms and where they have been ever since.


Regarding the "southern strategy" it also is very real. It was created by Lee Atwater. Atwater was a campaign advisor for Richard Nixon in 1968 and 1972, the campaign manager for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984, as well as George H.W. Bush's campaign manager in 1988.


The "southern strategy", as described by Atwater in a now infamous recorded interview with a reporter, is a strategy that utilized racism and racial resentment to stir up the Republican base but did so by employing dog whistled and coded language. Atwater said Republicans can't say, "Nigger, nigger, nigger anymore" but must use phrases like "law and order" (which is code for keep the blacks in line) and make welfare synonymous with black people thus where phrases like "welfare queens" and "young bucks buying Cadillacs with their welfare checks" came into play. Any of that sound familiar?


On his deathbed Atwater claimed he felt great remorse over what he did and the stigmas he helped place on black people. He allegedly begged for forgiveness. Whatevs.


So, for Candace Owens(an African-American woman) to go on national television and lie about things that manifestly had an adverse negative effect on the black community and the body politic as a whole and still does til this day is abhorrent. It is indefensible. She knows she's full of shit but she does it anyway.


Why? Why does she do it? It is simple. Turning Points USA (a far rightwing organization geared toward college and high school students), billionaires such as TPUSA bankroller Foster Fries and conservative media like Fox News pays her quite handsomely. Also, she receives massive exposure which a narcissistic clout chasing grifter like Candace Owens craves almost as much as the money.


Owens is willing to suspend her conscience and integrity to play a role. As I stated before she fetishizes herself for a segment of rightwingers whom literally get off to seeing poc demean and denigrate other poc under the guise of "helping them". It is especially exciting when it is a black woman. They get all warm and fuzzy and horny inside. Some day perhaps I'll go into the psychosis of this perverse lunacy but not now. And, if they throw in a few ridiculous rightwing talking points along with the white nationalist ones all the better.


The perfect example of this and what truly sums Candace Owens up was her interview a year or so ago with Joe Rogan on his podcast. Rogan, who full disclosure I like despite him often being a conduit for alt-right ghouls like Candy, asked her about climate change. (Rogan strongly and correctly believes climate change is real.) Predictably like a good little rightwing oligarch funded girl Candace said she didn't believe in it. Rogan asked why. She said, "I just don't." Somewhat baffled Rogan again asked why. Owens responded she just doesn't believe it because it is not really proven. Amazed at this stupidity Rogan said, "Over 99% of scientists agree it's real." Candace said they "have an agenda" although she didn't say exactly what that agenda was. She then went to a Trumpism and said it was a "Chinese hoax". Visibly staggered by the utter ignorance coming out of Owens' mouth Rogan was about to have his mind blown little did he know. He again pressed Aunt Tomasina why exactly she didn't believe in climate change. Then she says, "Well, honestly, I've never actually read up on it." Incredulous Rogan retorted, "How can you say you don't believe in something you've never actually read up on?" Her response, "I'll read on it, but I just don't believe it."


Upon hearing this exchange any doubt I had about what Candace Owens actually is was unequivocally removed. She is nothing more than a shill regurgitating talking points. But, more disturbing and telling was she couldn't even articulate the talking points because she hadn't even taken the time to learn them and craft an argument. Not only is she a sellout and a fraud she is lazy.


Of course, she can be because her backers don't care as long as she plays the part. In fact, the reality she does appear to be lazy just plays into the narrative they're wanting to propagate.


What Candace Owens does is noxious. It is malevolent. She intentionally disseminates fallacies and ahistorical references. That is not helpful to political discourse.


It is more than I disagree with her politics. It is what she's doing is frankly dangerous. She is laundering an evil and pernicious ideology that has already shown itself a deadly hazard to society.


The truth is I could go on to cite so many other examples of her ignorance and malfeasance.


And, it must be noted literally six weeks before her "conservative awakening" Candace ran a website mocking Donald Trump and questioning his penis size. Her website also featured such intellectually thoughtful pieces as "I Can Take Your Man". But, then suddenly she realized Trump was awesome. I'm sure the Brinks truck of money she was given had nothing to do with her political rebirth.


I don't like Candace Owens. I don't respect her. Frankly, I have little to no patience for people who defend her.


Her Auntie Ruckus act is so obvious. She doesn't care about black people. If she did she would come talk to us regarding solutions instead of babbling vacuous Trump talking points about how he has done so much to help black folk when we all know he hasn't and his racism has been quite apparent. Seriously, name one positive thing Candy has done for black people.................


She is not here for us. Her ostensible purpose is to help African-Americans progress. However, her entire shtick is geared toward white crypto-racists, white supremacists and people who are mildly bigoted but susceptible to being pulled further right. She goes on cable tv and YouTube saying things these people want to say but feel they can't. She gives them cover. They can say, "Sure, what I said sounds racist but Candace Owens said the same thing so it can't be."


It is repugnant and disgusting! It is extremely harmful. And, I'll continue to call her out and debunk her bullshit just like I do with any extreme rightwing and alt-right garbage.


I don't think Candace Owens believes most of the shit that comes out of her mouth. But, it really doesn't matter if she does. What she says is putrid! And, it must be called out as such.

Biden Has A "Black" Problem (Stop Pretending He Doesn't)

Through any objective lens Joe Biden has some problematic views and perceptions regarding race.


For the last four years the common media narrative has been that it is Bernie Sanders who has an African-American voter problem. However, that narrative is disingenuous and misleading. Please contain your shock that the media would propagate a disingenuous narrative. Sanders actually has a favorability rate with black voters under the age of 45. It is the older contingency where his issues lie, which is the case across the racial spectrum, but that is neither here nor there for the purposes of this discussion.


The current Democratic presidential candidate whom actually has the real "black" issue is Joe Biden.


As has been heavily reported Biden has quite an extensive history of holding questionable views on certain racial matters,  making (if I am being kind) tone deaf comments regarding black folks and promoting legislation that has been detrimental to the African-American community.


Over his near 50 years in government he has repeatedly used language that sounded like it came out of Mitch McConnell's mouth more than the civil rights advocating liberal he claims he is. For example, when Biden was pushing for the 1994 crime bill, which by the way he authored, he routinely referred black male youths as animals, predatory and often hopeless. In a famous speech on the Senate floor he rhetorically instituted imagery that suggested little white women like his mother were susceptible to these brooding dangerous criminals (who were black).


Biden has often employed condescending statements that are dripping with tropes and implicit racism. During the 2008 presidential election he said about Barack Obama, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." Now, I am quite sure some will read that and say, "So, what is wrong with that?" Well, aside from being horribly historically inaccurate it also implies that Obama was "one of the good ones". I understand some people believe that is a compliment. I assure you it is not!


During this 2020 Democratic Primary Biden has repeatedly placed his foot in his mouth. He bragged about his ability to work and be friendly with segregationists back in the day. As if the bragging about befriending virulent racists wasn't bad enough, the "working with" he boasted about was the effort to fight bussing.


At a campaign stop he equated black people with poor people. He said (while discussing struggles of African-Americans) that poor kids are just as talented and bright as white kids.


To be fair I understand what he was attempting to convey. However, it is troubling that in his mind black kids are unilaterally the same as poor kids.


Then there was the last Democratic debate on the campus of Texas Southern, a HBCU. Biden was asked about a comment he made in the 1970s essentially regarding reparations and what responsibility people today have about healing the wounds and repairing the damage from slavery which still affects the country today as well as the racial inequalities in our schools. [And, it does regardless of what fantasyland some rightwingers want to dally in.] Biden said (in the 70s) that he "wasn't responsible for what happened 300 years ago but what his generation has done today".


Here is how Biden responded to the question:


"Look, there's institutional segregation in this
country. And from the time I got involved, I started dealing with that. Red lining, banks, making sure we are in a position where — look, you talk about education. I propose that what we take is those very poor schools, the Title I schools, triple the amount of money we spend from $15 to $45 billion a year.


We have [sic] make sure that every single child does in fact have ... three, four, and five-year-olds go to school, not daycare.


We bring social workers into homes and parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It's not that they don't want to help, they don't know quite what to do.


Play the radio, make sure the television — the, excuse me — make sure you have the record player on at night ... make sure the kids hear words."


Lawd Jesus where do I begin with this hot mess?


He started off fine. He is 100% correct about redlining, institutional racism from the banks and the lack of funding for schools which is swallowed up in systemic racism. It is so engulfed I can't go into it here because it is way too detailed
and a couple of sentences won't do it justice. I suggest watching Contrapoints YouTube video about Baltimore. It explains Baltimore's contemporary issues which can be paralleled with nearly every other innercity and predominantly black and/or brown poor community in this country.


But, then he goes off into some ramble about three, four and five year olds going to school and not daycare. Honestly, I am not quite sure where he was going there.


Then he goes off the rails into implicit racism territory. He essentially questions black folks' ability to raise children and then more or less implies they don't know how to raise children. It was very condescending and Daniel Moynihan-ish. He literally sounded like one of those moderate Democrat from the 1980s that didn't believe black people were descendant from monkeys and of course were deserving of equality but are a "little bit inferior" and in need of a white savior.


He concluded his mind-numbing diatribe saying have the record player on and making sure the kids hear words. Look, I don't know what the "record player" fuckery was about. I can't even pretend I do.


However, I think his meandering about kids hearing words was in reference to some education and child development experts believing the more words children hear the more likely they are to excel and have robust vocabularies. Now, I have no desire to go down that road right now. I will just say I believe there is merit to that.


Is that what Biden was saying? I really don't know.


Regardless, the gist of his comments were troubling. They added to a pattern of Biden's that is less than flattering to people of color. It can be said his comments added to a few narratives, all of whom are problematic for someone wanting to be the Democratic nominee tasked with defeating the most corrupt, amoral bigoted president of the last 100 years.


Hey, the fact is Biden is the frontrunner. He possesses the majority of African-American support. I would argue his position on both fronts is tenuous. I believe as the time for actual voting nears and more people start actually paying attention Biden could be in trouble.


Aside from the fact people are not paying attention now and are so effin apathetic what is troubling me that these gaffes and views aren't seemingly affecting those who are paying attention right now. I guess I understand this obsession with electability, which I believe is actually an obsession with this delusion Trumpsters can be swayed away from Cheeto Jesus and they'll "see the light". That strategy is dangerous, naive and ill-conceived.


I am also aware segments of the Democratic electorate believe Biden's problematic racial views are actually beneficial. What those people don't seem to grasp is such an approach will alienate chunks of their base and voters who stayed home in 2016. For many of them Trump being a wannabe fascist menace isn't enough if they believe they are just voting for Republican light which partially got us into our current mess.


And, I want to be clear. I don't believe Joe Biden is a racist. If he is the nominee, of course, I will support him over that fool in the White House.


However, Biden has some very bothersome cringy racial views. Frankly, that is only a fraction of my issues with him.


Again, if he is the nominee, I'll down a shot of rubbing alcohol and vote for him. But, there are significantly better choices, so let's just go with one of them instead of during the general election enduring Uncle Joe deciding to reminisce about as a kid how he just loved Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben because they were "good role models for [the] blacks".

It's A Primary Debate; Not A Love-In

Apparently, some Democrats are very confused about exactly how a presidential primary works.


One of the reoccurring themes throughout the Democratic Primary thus far has been this mind-numbing lamenting over candidates and their supporters criticizing other candidates.


Everyone from Bill Maher to Neera Tanden to even President Obama has whined about candidates sniping at each other and critiquing others records. A few months ago Obama referred to it as a "circular firing squad". That is just silly.


This is a presidential primary with an ungodly-and I mean an ungodly- number of people running. These candidates have to distinguish themselves and their policy sets from their opponents. They have to put forth a platform convincing the Democratic electorate why they should be the nominee to take on #CheetoJesus himself, Donald Trump. The way they do that is by selling themselves AND by ripping other candidates' records and pointing out issues. This is how campaigns have worked since....oh, I don't know.....FOREVER!


This ridiculous notion (honestly, mostly pushed by centrists, Neoliberals and hating Trump consumed liberals) that candidates should just stroke each other and not ever seize on any mistake or questionable policy stance is infantile and counterproductive. Frankly, it's undemocratic.


As I just mentioned there are certain types of folks doing all of this bemoaning and unfortunately it is a bit more nefarious than it seems.


Much of this nonsense stems from moderates, centrists and corporate media who wants a centrist candidate like Joe Biden or for some ungodly reason Amy Klobuchar because either they believe in centrism, want to maintain the status quo/return to "normalcy" or they think a centrist is most electable. Others are pushing this "everyone hold hands" narrative because they are capping for Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris because they are actually more in-line with their politics and they think will be more palatable to moderates than, say, Bernie Sanders. Also, regardless the motivation, they also believe in-fighting will lead to a repeat of 2016.


Now, on a surface level I get that. However, the argument is specious. Hillary Clinton didn't lose the election because Bernie supporters didn't show up for her. In fact, 85% of Sanders' voters voted for Hillary. She lost, in part, because of her own political malfeasance. But, I am not here to yet again re-litigate the 2016 Presidential election.


The reality is critiquing candidates and vetting their records is good for the political process. It is vital in helping voters determine whom they feel is the candidate who will best represent them. Not you! Not me! Not the donor class! Them!


And, some people really need to cease with this false equivalency nonsense that combing through one's public service record is analogous to attacking them personally. It is absolutely asinine to bemoan people questioning Joe Biden about his past comments on race and racial issues. These matters are important. And, I already know some tool is saying, "Oh my Gawd! It's not like Biden is like Trump." Right. Not saying he is. But, it's mine and others prerogative to have someone a bit more progressive on race as the person representing us.


In the same respect I believe it is beyond fair to question Elizabeth Warren on her votes regarding the increase in military spending. It is fair game to go after Bernie Sanders on his record in Congress. Kamala Harris should be forced to defend her sketchy record as California district attorney. Julian Castro should most certainly be asked about his questionable decisions while in the Obama administration. Cory Booker needs to answer about his ties to charter schools which have ostensibly disaffected the inner-city communities he's always talking about. Marianne Williamson, whom I adore, should absolutely be pushed on her "it's all about love" strategy and asked what the hell is she talking about.


All of the candidates should be picked apart and pushed. These people aren't running for the head of the Blueberry Festival committee. They are running to be President of The United States!


But, I am not naive. As I previously noted, some people are simply hawking this childish lunacy because they want the status quo or centrism. They don't want Biden or Klobuchar or Pete Buttigieg critiqued or dug into because they fear if they are the Democratic base will reject them and pick Warren or Sanders who they either feel isn't electable (which is ridiculous) or they will threaten their influence and/or wealth hoarding (which is why one of them should probably be the nominee).


The primary season is not a kumbaya fest. Primary debates are not for candidates to get on a stage and slob each other up because...you know...civility.


Grab a dictionary or get on the 'ol Google machine and look up the definition of debate.


Understand, I don't believe personal attacks are good. Although, the truth is voters respond to them whether folks want to acknowledge that or not. But, some spirited discussion and calling each other out for past (and current) words and deeds is not only acceptable it is healthy.


It is called democracy.


Oh, and let me be clear, regardless who the nominee is I'll support them. All of them are significantly more qualified and infinitely better human beings than the current occupant of the White House. This should go without saying.

Bill Maher's Problematic Shift To The Center

Since 2016 comedian and Real Time host, Bill Maher, has steadily shifted his politics to the center. This is disappointing and troublesome.


Maher built a reputation as a someone who was an outlier and a check not only on Republicans but the Democratic establishment. He was seen as a standard bearer for the Left-the actual political Left.


He said the quiet parts aloud about America's role in fostering Al-Qaeda's rise and its perpetual defense of and covering for Saudia Arabia. Maher was a vociferous voice against the Iraq War at a time when media figures like Phil Donahue were getting fired for their anti-war stances.


Bill Maher was a rare voice in the mainstream beating the drum about climate change in a period when political pundits and analysts weren't discussing it with any type of substantive seriousness. Maher spoke frequently about wealth inequality. And, of course, he pushed legalizing marijuana and stopping the drug war.


However, this was pre-2016 Maher. That Bill Maher early on endorsed Bernie Sanders for the Democratic presidential nomination.


Since that time Maher has steadily devolved into centrism and all its nonsensical talking points and vapid neoliberalism. He has become a cheerleader for the establishment he once ostensibly resented on some level and certainly didn't hesitate to criticize.


Now, this could be the result of him getting older. They (whoever the hell they are) say people become more conservative the older they get. Although I find myself becoming more progressive the older I get, but I am weird. Or, so that is the impression I discern some have.


Frankly, I believe it is a combination of factors as to Maher's shift. Maher has become entrenched in the mainstream. The mainstream he once ostensibly was a reluctant member of he now embraces.


Maher is a face of #TheResistance. Although I am sure he would pretend to recoil at such a label.


The idea of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" is largely ludicrous. What rightwingers call derangement most people call being decent human beings repulsed by a repulsive man in Donald Trump and his draconian policies. However, some people are obsessed with despising him for the sake of despising him. Bill Maher seems to fit that description.


It should be noted Maher and Trump have a history. Google Trump suing Maher over him questioning whether Trump's father was an orange haired orangutan or not. Of course, it was a joke (the best Maher ever had in my opinion) but we all know Daddy is quite thin skinned. So, predictably he threw a hissy fit.


Anyway, another factor in Maher's shift has to do with his somewhat illogical war on social media, college campuses and political correctness. Honestly, his incessant grievance mongering about it has turned him into "get off my lawn guy".


This unrelenting whiny railing against political correctness has led him to have people such as Milo Yianopoulous, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Petersen and Sam Harris on his show which, frankly, was a sign of his disturbing shift.


Look, having these grifters on his show is fine if he gave any semblance of substantive pushback against them. But, he didn't do that. Instead, he essentially laundered their toxic nonsense. In the cases of Shapiro and Milo he allowed them to seem reasonable instead of the monsters they actually are. And, when it came to Petersen and Harris, he basically had a love fest where they stroked each other off instead of providing any check on their pseudo science and crypto-bigotry. It was disgusting.


Herein lies why in part Maher's shift to the center is so problematic. His newfound ideology allowed him to provide a platform for overtly toxic cretins like Shapiro and Petersen. It gave them a vehicle to present themselves as "just logical people with a right bent". It presented them as civil when that is far from the truth.


Shapiro is a religious zealot, bigot and demagogue who has said and wrote heinous things about Muslims, Palestinians, Hispanics and African-Americans. Let's not even mention Benjamin is a shameless grifter who presents himself as an intellectual when he is the opposite of intellectual.


Something is undoubtedly wrong when a known staunch rightwinger on the BBC provides infinitely more objective checks on Shapiro than the supposed mainstream voice of the Left does.


And, Petersen literally is a conduit for incels. They see him as their Svengali. He is daddy. Yet, when he was on the show Maher was more interested in talking about 19 year old college kids upset about Richard Spencer giving speeches on their campuses and how snowflakey it was.


The other obvious problematic feature of Maher's newfound centrism is its affect on his viewpoint of the 2020 Democratic primary.


Hey, when a nominee is determined I'm all about pragmatism and realism. For the love of God Donald Trump is president. It goes without saying this buffoonish unintelligent unfit monster has to go. I get it!


However, right now pragmatism isn't required nor is it necessary. The entire reason primaries supposedly exist is for people to properly access the merits and policies of the people running for office. So, candidates must establish themselves and what distinguishes them from the other candidates. That is done by criticizing other candidates and pointing out why their policies and/or records aren't better than their opponents'.


This notion that Maher and others (including President Obama) push about the ills of a circular firing squad is utter nonsense. On recent shows Maher has lamented the critiquing of Biden's, Harris', and Buttigieg's records as bullshit nitpicking Twitter induced woke purity tests. That is demented.


Of course, Joe Biden's record matters. His refusal to acknowledge past mistakes matter.


Diminishing Kamala Harris' actions as San Francisco District Attorney and California Attorney General as, "She was a prosecutor who prosecuted. How dare she?", is at best infantile. It certainly matters that Harris was prosecuting parents for truant children but flatly refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchikin after he essentially stole millions of dollars and left numerous people penniless. That speaks to character.


It's not "woke Twitter bullshit" to hold Mayor Pete to account for his handling of policing issues. Nor is it unreasonable to critique policy ideas of the other candidates. It's called vetting.


Regarding the 2020 election what is perhaps most troublesome about Maher is his seemingly pushing the idea that Democrats just settle and pick an extremely flawed Joe Biden or a moderate because they have the best chance of winning. Choosing a candidate based upon "electability" is a stupid idea and has historically been proven to be a counterproductive one. History has shown the candidate people believe those outside of their tent will choose is rarely the actual right choice. See 2016. If Bernie Sanders was the nominee he would've won. I've had to atone many times for not understanding that.


But, Bill Maher's push for Biden or any centrist candidate I suspect is more than about electability. The dude who at one time was all about aspirational politics suddenly is an avid cheerleader for the status quo and incrementalism. The one time proponent of Medicare for all and increased taxation on the wealthy so they pay their fair share is like, "Well, let's slow down with that. It sounds like socialism which I have no problem with but..."


Translation: Maher is a really rich guy and like most rich people he doesn't want to give a dime of it up.  Now, I am sure he would say he's being pragmatic and an adult. Three years ago he was squawking about we need Medicare for all.


It is disheartening to see someone I looked up to descend into this neoliberal centrist self-serving black hole. The guy who advocated for environmental protections and making sure all people are looked after is now openly pushing an agenda that ultimately only looks out for the privileged. The man who was a progressive icon is now more concerned with rightwingers disingenuously whining about free speech allegedly being suppressed on college campuses than he is actual voter suppression across this country. The guy who was honestly the only semblance of a progressive voice in mainstream media is way more upset about Ilhan Omar making a substantive accurate critique of Israeli lobbyists that was disgustingly characterized as anti-Semitic than he is the President's overt Islamaphobia.


Maher has a huge platform he is simply using irresponsibly. And, because of his platform his politics are greatly problematic.


As I mentioned before, he will have on his show Petersen, Shapiro, Harris and Bret Stephens but never once has he invited Cenk Uguyr or Ana Kasparian or Sam Seeder all of whom viewers of his show know. And, sorry, Van Jones is not someone to use as a retort. Van is progressive but his progressivism is a bit too fluid.


I really hope this shift of Maher's is a simple product of wanting Trump gone but I sincerely fear it's not. It's been coming for awhile.