Is your shower/bath routine the same every time, the same things in the same order, or do you tend to mix it up?
Shaker Gourmet
Whatcha been cooking up in your kitchen lately, Shakers?
Share your favorite recipes, solicit good recipes, share recipes you've recently tried, want to try, are trying to perfect, whatever! Whether they're your own creation, or something you found elsewhere, share away.
Also welcome: Recipes you've seen recently that you'd love to try, but haven't yet!
In the News
Here is some stuff in the news today...
[Content Note: Racism; Islamophobia; white supremacy] "Skittles are literally more dangerous than refugees." In addition to everything at that link, another cool thing about Trump Jr. tweeting about hypothetically poisonous food is how his dad just proposed rolling back food safety regulations last week.
Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are reportedly getting divorced. I am not linking to any story about that, because they are all garbage. Best wishes to both of them as they make tough decisions about what's best for their family.
Hillary Clinton has written an open letter to the Wells Fargo customers who were defrauded by their bank. "There is simply no place for this kind of outrageous behavior in America. Our economy depends on a strong and safe banking system to help keep it moving. But even after Americans spent years working hard to recover from the Great Recession, the culture of misconduct and recklessness that preceded that crisis too often persists. I have a plan to address it."
[CN: Video may autoplay at link] And tomorrow: "Hillary Clinton's economic speech on Wednesday in Orlando will focus on how the United States can create an economy that values people with disabilities, an attempt to contrast the former secretary of state with Republican nominee Donald Trump. Clinton, an aide said Tuesday, will propose an economy that 'welcomes people with disabilities, values their work, rewards them fairly, and treats them with respect.'" Wow.
George Soros explains why he's decided to "earmark $500 million for investments that specifically address the needs of migrants, refugees, and host communities. I will invest in startups, established companies, social-impact initiatives, and businesses founded by migrants and refugees themselves. Although my main concern is to help migrants and refugees arriving in Europe, I will be looking for good investment ideas that will benefit migrants all over the world."
[CN: Displacement; racism] "A Proposed Coal Mine Would Put Alaskan Natives at Risk: Coal production may be falling, but one company is taking a gamble—one that would affect the Tyonek tribe's fishing and hunting grounds."
Neat: "It was already known that tardigrades, also known as water bears, were able to survive by shrivelling up into desiccated balls. But the University of Tokyo-led team found a protein that protects its DNA—wrapping around it like a blanket."
What have you been reading?
This Is the Pay-for-Play You Were Looking For
I've got a new piece at Shareblue about the latest revelations regarding Donald Trump using his charitable foundation as a slush fund, which is definitely unethical and possibly illegal:
As my colleague Matthew Chapman detailed, the breathless reporting on the Clinton Foundation yielded nothing but innuendo and speculation. When no evidence of wrongdoing was unearthed, it magically became a story about "optics," with pundits arguing something nefarious could have happened, even if nothing did.There is much, much more at the link. And the long and the short of the media's response to these new facts is this: Having set a high standard for how important even the appearance of wrongdoing is, this is a story they simply cannot ignore without a wholesale abandonment of all integrity and credibility.
By that standard, the newest revelations about the Trump Foundation from David Fahrenthold in the Washington Post should warrant round-the-clock coverage from now until Election Day—because there is much more to this story than the mere appearance, or possibility, of wrongdoing.
We have known for some time that Donald Trump was alleged to have used his charitable foundation to buy the compliance of two state attorney generals who were tasked with investigating fraud complaints against Trump University, and to buy retribution against another who refused to drop his investigation. He also used the foundation's money to purchase self-aggrandizing items such as a six-foot-tall portrait of himself.
Now, Fahrenthold reports that Trump used at least $258,000 from his foundation to settle lawsuits brought against his for-profit business, which may constitute a violation of laws regarding "self-dealing—which prohibit nonprofit leaders from using charity money to benefit themselves or their businesses."
...What is abundantly clear—at minimum—from these newest findings is that Trump has used the charitable foundation which bears his name to avoid having to spend a dime of his own money to settle lawsuits generated by his own businesses. The question that Trump needs is answer is: Why?
Was it simple greed—or was it a decision he made to help perpetuate another fraud? Is it possible, as some have speculated, that Trump, the self-proclaimed "king of debt," is not remotely as wealthy as he asserts and didn't even have enough liquid cash to fund these larger settlements?
That's a question Trump needs to be asked—and he cannot be taken at his word when he reflexively treats the question as absurd. He needs to provide verifiable evidence, e.g. his tax returns.
Daily Dose of Cute
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
ELECTION UPDATE!!!
1. Hillary Clinton continues to call out Donald Trump's horrendo bigotry on the campaign trail: "We're facing a candidate with a long history of racial discrimination in his businesses. Who re-tweets white supremacists. Who led the birther movement to delegitimize our first Bblack president, and is still lying about it today. He refuses to apologize to President Obama, his family, and the American people. We have to stand up to this hate. We cannot let it go on."
2. Donald Trump continues to engage in horreno bigotry. WHO IS RIGHT? ISN'T IT JUST AS BAD TO CALL SOMEONE A BIGOT AS TO BE ONE? Well, that's what the media tell me, so it MUST BE TRUE.
3. Our national media is garbage.
4. Tim Kaine continues to be very delightful and also makes good and serious points about how Donald Trump is a terrible candidate. I hope he's never sent or received any emails or started a foundation that has saved millions of lives or coughed or sat on a stool or felt faint from a combination of heat and pneumonia or rested against a pillow or SUSPICIOUSLY wore his purse on a different shoulder than usual one day or change his hairstyle or wear something unflattering. Although it probably doesn't matter, because he's a dude.
5. Mike Pence continues to be the absolute fucking worst.
48 more days of this shit.
That about sums it up! Discuss.
And Again
[Content Note: Racism; police brutality; death. Video may autoplay at link.]
Last Friday, a police officer in Tulsa, Oklahoma, shot and killed Terence Crutcher, a 40-year-old Black man, whose vehicle had stalled. Another officer used a Taser on him.
Authorities said the shooting occurred after an officer stopped to investigate a vehicle in the middle of a road. Police said Crutcher approached after officers arrived to assist. Police spokeswoman Jeanne MacKenzie has said Crutcher refused orders to put up his hands.Dashcam footage of the shooting has already been shown to Crutcher's family members and community leaders, ahead of its public release. They said "it clearly shows that Crutcher's hands were in the air when he was shot."
Police say Tulsa officer Betty Shelby fired the fatal shot, while officer Tyler Turnbough used a stun gun on Crutcher. Both officers are white, MacKenzie said Monday.
Damario Solomon-Simmons, an attorney for his family, said at a press conference: "We saw that Terence did not have any weapon. Terence did not make any sudden movements. We saw that Terence was not being belligerent."
It pains me that they need to say this. It pains me to know that there are people who believe that "sudden movements" or "belligerence" are justification for being fatally shot by police.
Black people should not have to be perfect in order to live. That is the most unreasonable expectation. That is an impossible standard.
Think just for a moment about the millions of viral videos, the countless segments of that disgusting show COPS, showing white people acting like dangerous, disrespectful, antagonistic fools with police officers. Think just for a moment of the white people you probably know who have done something stupid and reckless and maybe even criminal, yet walked away from an encounter with police. Think of the white mass murderers who have been taken alive in handcuffs. Think of how very different white people's expectations of police interactions are, and vice versa; how white people are never expected to read police officers' minds and behave in precise accordance with their expectations just to stay alive.
This is just fundamental inequality. Rank racism in action. Over and over.
My sincerest condolences to Crutcher's family, friends, colleagues, and community. I grieve with you, and I take up space in solidarity with you.
You have my sympathy and my rage. I'm so sorry. I'm so angry.
She's Got This
[Content Note: Bigotry.]
It's an election that shouldn't be close, by any reasonable standard, but it's close all the same. Which is worrying for those of us whose skin puckers into goosebumps at the mere thought of a Donald Trump presidency.
The corporate media have done their worst to level the playing field for Trump by subjecting Hillary Clinton to horrendous coverage which focuses almost exclusively on "optics" rather than policy—a standard by which Clinton would be the clear winner. And they continue to give Trump a comparable pass on his bigotry, white nationalism, and violent incitement, in order to create an illusion of equivalency between these two startlingly disparate campaigns.
As a result, we're left with a tight contest, with both the most qualified candidate in the history of the nation and the most dangerous candidate in the history of the nation having a real chance of assuming the presidency.
Scary times. But there is one very bright spot of reassurance, to which I turn over and over: Clinton is the best person to be standing in between Trump and the presidency.
It's not just that she is exponentially more capable, prepared, and temperamentally suited to lead—all the qualities and competencies that are evident to even the most cursory glances—but also that Trump's egregious assault on decency is deeply personal to her in a very concrete way.
The stuff of Trump's campaign—the myriad prejudices, the proposals for building walls and banning entry, the appeals to white nationalism—is publicly discussed, when it is discussed at all, by media who are disproportionately conservative, white, and male. They frame their analysis as process debates: Is Trump's bigotry a winning strategy? Can he win if he alienates marginalized people?
They explore it in the abstract, because this is not the stuff of their lives.
It is, however, the stuff of the lives of Clinton and her team. Clinton has strategically built a diverse team that looks like the country: "Over 50% of the campaign is female. Of the campaign’s more than 500 staffers nationwide, more than one-third are people of color; nearly 40% of Hillary for America's senior staff are people of color. Regional press secretary Tyrone Gayle points out that these numbers roughly reflect national demographics."
Among her senior staff are people from populations whose identities have been under siege from Trump, Pence, and the rest of their party. Her campaign manager Robby Mook is a gay man. The vice chair of her campaign Huma Abedin is a Muslim woman. Her senior policy advisor Maya Harris is a Black woman. Her chief strategist Joel Benenson is a Jewish man. Her senior advisor Minyon Moore is a Black woman. Her political director Amanda Renteria is a Latina. Her director of state campaigns Marlon Marshall is a Black man. Her communications director Jennifer Palmieri is a woman. Her congressional liaison LaDavia Drane is a Black woman. Her director of progressive media Zerlina Maxwell is a Black woman.
This is hardly a comprehensive list. It is a tiny sample of the hundreds of people employed by Clinton; just a few of the people who have her ear—to whom she listens, not just as political advisors, but as people, like herself, who are targeted by Trump's divisive and hateful rhetoric and policy, by virtue of their identities.
They are people who gaze across at their counterparts in Trump's campaign and see men like Steven Bannon and David Bossie and Roger Stone promoting white nationalism. People who have to hear Trump incite violence against their boss, and listen to his children engage in homophobia and anti-Semitism, all in the span of a few days.
Team Clinton are people who are under attack. They are people who have had to traverse the barriers Clinton talks about wanting to tear down, who have spent their lives navigating the systems of oppression she talks about wanting to dismantle.
This is not abstract for them, and it is not abstract for her—a woman who has swum against a ceaseless tide of misogyny her entire life.
Someone has to stand on the line between Trump and the presidency. And I grieve every day that Clinton and her team have to suffer the indignities and abuse that standing on that line obliges, but I am also relieved that it's they who are there—people for whom this isn't just an abstract exercise, but for whom it is intimately important. Who know personally what is at stake.
There is something tragically poetic about the fact that Clinton, after a lifetime dedicated to the colossal task of dismantling inequality, would meet in this, her highest stakes battle, an opponent who's a Pokémon final form of bigoted grotesquery. But as much as I regret the contours of this fight, I am glad it's Clinton who's there to take on the epic challenge.
There are no guarantees about who will win. There never are. All I know, in this moment, is that she's got this. She's got the fight. She and her team are better prepared than anyone else could be, and determined to fight to the last with the heaving completeness of people who know how much this matters.
They are all in. And so am I.
Question of the Day
Suggested by Shaker ivyceltress: "What was your last 'What Was I Thinking?' moment?"
The Monday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by rain.
Recommended Reading:
Amie: President Obama's Push to Permanently Protect Planned Parenthood
Sarah: [Content Note: Racism] Trump's Birtherism: A National Narrative of Exclusion
Sean: [CN: Racism; anti-semitism] This Is What Happens When a Gay Latino Goes to an Alt-Right Press Conference
Imani: Michigan Officials Strip Flint of Right to Sue Over Water Crisis
Monica: [CN: Transphobia; violence; death] RIP Crystal Edmonds
Roe: [CN: Abusive relationships; misogyny; sexual violence] Are "Faux-Feminists" the New Pick-Up Artists?
Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged!
The Best
Car just went by while I was sitting on the front porch. Little girl in the back seat shouted at me through the open window: "GHOSTBUSTERS!"
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) September 17, 2016
That is definitely the best thing that's ever been shouted at me from a passing car, by orders of magnitude.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) September 17, 2016
This Shouldn't Be Remarkable, But...
I've got a new piece at Shareblue about President Obama calling out the sexism that Hillary Clinton faces in this election:
If there's anyone who knows about previously insurmountable hurdles along the path to the presidency, it's the person who broke the 220-year history of only white men holding the office. On Sunday, President Obama acknowledged the systemic gender bias confronting Hillary Clinton on her journey to become the first woman elected to the U.S. presidency.There's more at the link, including a perfect and terrible example of the unequal standards to which Clinton and Donald Trump are held.
At a DNC fundraiser for Hillary Clinton, President Obama said:
There's a reason why we haven't had a woman president; that we as a society still grapple with what it means to see powerful women. And it still troubles us in a lot of ways, unfairly, and that expresses itself in all sorts of ways.Like, as but one example, the ways in which women are obliged to conceal emotion can be translated as being cold, as Clinton herself recently addressed in a Humans of New York feature. It's one of the less obvious ways in which gender bias plays a role in politics (and every other arena), alongside the more visible double-standards like endless discussions about one's sartorial choices.
This is not the first time that President Obama has spoken out thoughtfully about the gendered challenges Clinton faces. During a January interview with Glenn Thrush, he recalled the tight primary contest they ran as competitors in 2008, saying she "had a tougher job throughout that primary than I did."
"She had to do everything that I had to do, except, like Ginger Rogers, backwards in heels," he said. "She had to wake up earlier than I did because she had to get her hair done. She had to, you know, handle all the expectations that were placed on her."It's a line he ad-libbed again during his address at the Democratic National Convention, at which Clinton got her historic nomination.
Have I mentioned a million times yet that I really, really like late second-term Obama? And how much I regret that we often only get to see the true depth of our politicians' decency (those who are decent, anyway) once they no longer have to worry about getting reelected...?
In the News
Here is some stuff in the news today...
[Content Note: Bombing; stabbing; injury; death] This is about as good (by which I mean as non-alarmist and non-presumptuous) an article as you'll find offering details on the spate of attacks in the NY-NJ area over the weekend. (Originally, it also contained details about the incident in Minnesota; then it didn't; then some information was back. The story keeps getting updated at the link.)
[CN: Bombs; guns; incitement] Meanwhile, without a trace of damn irony, Donald Trump says that people who incite violence "should be arrested immediately."
[CN: Privilege] Do you have someone in your life who keeps trying to tell you how awesome Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson is? Well, here is a handy primer to show them why you disagree!
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton writes: "Here's What Millennials Have Taught Me." I love the opening line: "We hear a lot of things about the millennial generation. But too often, the people who are busy trying to define you are the ones who have spent the least time listening to you."
This this this: "This is why I get so angry when you insult Hillary Clinton." Hell yes.
[CN: Harassment] "This Fifth Grade Girl Should Teach a Class on Boundaries." Accurate. But more importantly: The boy to whom she was obliged to write that list of rules should get a lesson on boundaries.
What have you been reading?
Daily Dose of Cute
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
Quote of the Day
"It's incredibly depressing. He's the most profoundly ignorant man I've ever seen at this level in terms of understanding the American presidency, and, even more troubling, he makes no effort to learn anything."—Stephen Hess, who served in the Eisenhower and Nixon administrations, quoted in Jonathan Martin's piece for the New York Times "Donald Trump's Anything-Goes Campaign Sets an Alarming Political Precedent."
Media Agree: Clinton's Policies Are Stellar—So No Need to Cover Them
One week ago today, Hillary Clinton unveiled her plan to "make debt-free college available to everyone and take on student loan debt." The plan will "make in-state colleges and universities tuition-free for families making under $125,000/year," which will "help more than 80% of families." It provides for costs beyond tuition, including books and housing, and commits to investments in historically Black universities.
Student loan debt is a major economic concern across generations—and Clinton's plan addresses many of those concerns. And yet on the day it was made public, the media were primarily concerned about "transparency" around her having pneumonia—a temporary illness for which she received treatment before returning to the campaign trail days later.
It was not an unusual day.
In fact, the media's disproportionate focus on "optics"—whether it's email, the Clinton Foundation, or health disclosures—has left many people accusing them of abandoning policy analysis altogether.
It certainly seems that way. But if the plentiful policies that Clinton had released were not solid, practical, and achievable plans, we'd be hearing about it.
The truth is, it's only because Clinton's policies are as strong as they are that we're not hearing about policy at all. If they were a vulnerability for her, the press would be all over them. But they cannot be exploited to give her bad headlines, so they are of no use to media determined to try to derail her candidacy.
Thus, it's not strictly true that the media has abandoned policy analysis. They've certainly scrutinized Clinton's policies—and found them to be of no use in coverage designed to harm her.
Combine that with Trump's woeful and sparse attempts at serious policy proposals, attention on which would aid Clinton, and there's simply no use for policy discussion. Not for a media who want a horse race (that Clinton will lose).
Ultimately, the endemic silence on meaningful policy analysis can mean only one thing: The media agree that Clinton's policy is pretty great. It's not a weak point for her; to the contrary, it's a strength.
Every day that passes without commentary on her policy is evidence that Clinton is winning on policy. Big time.
But. It's also evidence that the media structure is broken. Big time.
Contemplate what it means that the media have decided that, in an election in which one candidate has put forth virtually unassailable policy, and the other has put forth virtually no policy at all, no less any workable policy, policy is simply irrelevant.
We are one week out from the first presidential debate. For a very long time, the narrative has been that Clinton will crush Trump in the debates—but that calculus is rooted in the presumption that the debates will, as per tradition, center on policy.
There is no guarantee of that in these debates. To the absolute contrary, every indication is that the debates, like the vast majority of the campaign coverage, will focus on "optics." Which will oblige Clinton to debate the moderators more than she will even be debating Trump, as they put her on the defensive and necessitate her providing explanations for "things that look bad."
If this is how the debates go down, they will be a shitshow. And it could meaningfully impact the election. All because Hillary Clinton's policies are so solid that the media can't even be bothered with them.
That is incredible.
We have one week. And I strongly encourage you, if you are on Twitter, to contact the moderators to #DemandFairDebates.
Monday, September 26: Lester Holt | @lesterholtnbc
Tuesday, October 4 (veep debate): Elaine Quijano | @elaine_quijano
Sunday, October 9: Martha Raddatz and Anderson Cooper | @martharaddatz and @andersoncooper
Wednesday, October 19: Chris Wallace | @foxnewssunday
President Obama Lays Out the Stakes
[Content Note: Incitement of violence.]
On Saturday night, at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation dinner in Washington, President Obama gave an amazing speech during which he didn't hold back about what's at stake in this election:
"Ending mass incarceration, that's on the ballot right now." --Barack Obama #really? #huhpic.twitter.com/EOSViHTxz0
— Aaron Bady (@zunguzungu) September 18, 2016
So if I hear anybody saying their vote does not matter, that it doesn't matter who we elect, read up on your history. It matters. We've gotta get people to vote. In fact, if you want to give Michelle and me a good send-off, and that was a beautiful video, but don't just watch us walk off into the sunset now. Get people registered to vote!
If you care about our legacy, realize everything we stand for is at stake. All the progress we've made is at stake in this election. My name may not be on the ballot, but our progress is on the ballot! Tolerance is on the ballot! Democracy is on the ballot! Justice is on the ballot! Good schools are on the ballot! Ending mass incarceration—that's on the ballot right now!
And there is one candidate who will advance those things. And there is another candidate whose defining principle, the central theme of his candidacy, is opposition to all that we've done. There's no such thing as a vote that doesn't matter. It all matters.
And after we have achieved historic turnout in two-thousand and eight and two-thousand-twelve, especially in the African American community, I will consider it a personal insult—an insult to my legacy!—if this community lets down its guard and fails to activate itself in this election. You wanna give me a good sendoff? GO VOTE!
And I'm gonna be working as hard as I can these next seven weeks to make sure folks do. [sustained cheers and applause]
LRT it is incredible that the sitting US president just had to say that, in this election, "Democracy is on the ballot." And he's not wrong.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) September 18, 2016
This, of course, was one day after Donald Trump, for the second time in two months, invoked Hillary Clinton's assassination. Friday night, at a campaign event, he said: "She's very much against the Second Amendment. She wants to destroy your Second Amendment. Guns, guns, guns, right? I think what we should do is— She goes around with armed bodyguards like you have never seen before. I think that her bodyguards should drop all weapons. They should disarm. Right, right? I think they should disarm immediately. What do you think? Yes? Yeah. Take their guns away! She doesn't want guns. Let's see what happens to her. Take their guns away, okay? It would be very dangerous."
Emphasis mine.
The President is angry. Everything he believes in is at stake. Everything he has accomplished is at stake. Our very democracy is at stake. And the person positioned to grab the baton from him, his friend Hillary—her very life is at stake. You're goddamn right he's angry.
So am I. Should should we all be. Especially because Trump continues to get away with it, because our media, who have covered Clinton's emails for 451 consecutive days, have already moved on from Trump inciting violence against her for the second time.
Funny how the media don't seem nearly as concerned about Hillary's health when violence is being incited against her. #InterrogateTrump
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) September 16, 2016
Mr. President, thank you. I'm with you. And I plan to leave it all on the field making sure I do everything any one person can in the days we have left before the election. Because I'm angry, too.
Back |
