Open Thread – Meryl Streep Crushed It & Ellison for DNC Chair

Filed in National by on January 8, 2017

Someone had to say it.

“There was one performance this year that stunned me. It sank its hooks in my heart. Not because it was good, there was nothing good about it, but it was effective and it did its job.
“It was that moment when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter. Someone he outranked in privilege, power and the capacity to fight back….It kind of broke my heart when I saw it and I still can’t get it out of my head because it wasn’t in a movie, it was real life…This instinct to humiliate when it’s modeled by someone in the public … by someone powerful, it filters down into everyone’s life because it kind of gives permission for other people to do the same….Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. And when the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose.

<<< & >>>

If you haven’t heard Keith Ellison explain why he is running for the DNC Chairmanship, you should listen to this.

streep

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (52)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. pandora says:

    Her speech was amazing and moving. Here’s a link to the speech.

  2. The man is a sociopath. No feeling for anyone else. And lies about everything, believing that it’s the truth.

    A sociopath will be the president. Any D capitulation to this guy is capitulating to a textbook sociopath. Do you understand that, Carper and Coons?

    And, on another angle from the Trump family:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/gun-silencers-are-hard-to-buy-donald-trump-jr-and-silencer-makers-want-to-change-that/2017/01/07/0764ab4c-d2d2-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?utm_term=.a404cbb35c8f

    The name is perfectly Orwellian: ‘The Hearing Protection Act’. Again, a blatant conflict-of-interest.

  3. chris says:

    Great line— ‘disrespect invites disrespect!!’ Go Meryl !

  4. mouse says:

    I’m a bit of a Facebook addict and seeing the responses about this from some folk truly frightens me. So many people have called her a liar and denied aspects that one can verify by looking at recordings. Not to sound too extreme, but I’ve often wondered how good people in Germany could stand by and watch the Nazis come to power and butcher innocent people. We have the exact same kind of people here today who deny objective verifiable reality without any sense of shame or embarrassment. Humans are ugly creatures. The average Trump supporter has no sense of dignity or basic human decency. Can’t believe this is happening.

  5. puck says:

    Have you heard about Indivisible: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda? It has gone somewhat viral on social media.

    Indivisible is a good common sense guide to exerting grassroots political influence, and it makes a hell of a lot of sense. Smack-my-forehead kind of sense. It reminds us of things we already knew: to call your congressman, or to show up at events where you can speak to him or her. Sounds simple right? But when was the last time you actually did either of those things? And if you did, did you bring any friends with you? The Tea Party did all this, and had some pretty good success.

    I don’t care that Indivisible was supposedly written by former Congressional staffers, or that it has “Trump” in the title. I don’t care if you read the whole thing or not (I haven’t). The main thing is to start talking about the ideas in it, and to put your version of it into action right now. The Indivisible guide is not a manifesto nor is it gospel; it is a touchstone.

    If you are going to read any of it, make sure you read Chapter 4: Four Local Advocacy Tactics That Actually Work.

    This isn’t about clicking a Like button or signing up online for some organization or a petition. This is about going out and doing it together in small informal groups. We’re always going on about “fighting” and “solidarity.” Okay then, let’s get started. Eighty percent of success is just showing up

    One comment on Daily Kos pointed out (emphasis mine):

    You can also go to the Democratic committee meetings at the state, county, and local levels, where if you go regularly and bring 10 friends you will own it.

    … Right on! except that I don’t think it takes more than four of five, especially in Delaware. And there are a lot better opportunities than “Dem committee meetings.” things like legislative hearings, meet-and-greets, school district meetings, or other public forums. Most of these meetings happen in small intimate rooms where you can buttonhole your targeted legislator, and a few people can have a big impact.

    Indivisible is about influencing your Federal representatives, but you can easily adapt it for state legislators. But most state legislators really only give weight to people in their districts. So the challenge for advocacy is to find a reliable group of like-minded individuals who live in your district.When you go to a forum to air your views with your representative, you need to go with a few other people from the district who are on the same page with you, at least for the targeted issue.

    Blogs can help people find each other. Facebook is probably a big part of the solution. Although in general I think Facebook is pernicious and leads to superficial and low-information discussions, that’s where the people are. Delaware United has some potential for this, but its online presence seems to be restricted to Facebook users only.

    Before you comment, just go read Chapter Four.

  6. meatball says:

    What’s your beef with gun silencers? Do you even understand when and why they became subject to special tax and oversight?

    From your article:
    “In the 1930s, to curtail gang violence, Congress passed the National Firearms Act, putting restrictions and special taxes on machine guns and other high-powered weapons. Though they hadn’t been used frequently in crimes, silencers were included anyway, reportedly out of concern that poachers would use them to steal food during the Great Depression.”

  7. mouse says:

    I go to Senator Lopez’s coffee’s and after the old bitter clingers are done asking questions about homosexuals, welfare and resentment social issues, I usually ask about protection of the inland bays or the like

  8. bamboozer says:

    Dear Meatball, silencers have only one function and that is to conceal the use of a gun, specifically to kill people. Feel free to post an NRA link.

  9. puck says:

    mouse: “I go to Senator Lopez’s coffee’s and after the old bitter clingers are done asking questions about homosexuals, welfare and resentment social issues, I usually ask about protection of the inland bays or the like”

    Great! But you can’t do it alone. Do we have three other readers in Lopez’s district who are willing to go with mouse?

  10. Thanks, Puck. This is absolutely the way to go.

    So, to all of you out there who are aware of events, town meetings, planned protests, marches, etc., please share them here with everyone.

    We have to build and build this ongoing grassroots opposition to, well, not just Trump, but to the actions of public officials that consistently hurt the public.

    BTW, this listing of events is one of the strengths of the Delaware Way blog:

    http://delawareway.blogspot.com/

  11. puck says:

    Maybe it’s just me but I’m not so interested in protests and marches. The biggest bang for the buck is at legislative hearings on specific bills, school district meetings, or any public meeting where you get to speak on a specific issue. Be knowledgable and avoid slogans. Follow up with short but articulate emails or phone calls.

  12. mouse says:

    To be honest, I have never thought of asking anyone to go with me. I will next time. Certainly if you know anyone who would, I would be glad to pick them up. There clearly is an impact of having lots of people focused on an issue. Surprisingly, most of the blue haired bitter clingers agreed with the premise of my questions. I could see by the expression on his face that he was uncomfortable with having to address the legislator’s responsibility for a state wide resource when the local county council neglectfully abdicate their responsibility

  13. puck says:

    The more specific the “ask,” the better. For example, when/if a minimum wage bill is introduced, no legislator should appear anywhere without at least three people demanding that he/she support the bill.

  14. mouse says:

    I can do that. I usually focus on environmental and infrastructure issues though since it seems no one else does. The deforestation in the inland bays drainage basing, the degradation of the steams from development runoff, bacteria in the bays and such are ignored. It would help if update legislators heard about these issues too since I suspect 100% of them either vacation or own property here

  15. RE Vanella says:

    If I can take the contrarian position on the Meryl Steep speech, I really wish everyone would stop paying attention to this type of thing. It was admittedly elegant and sincere and I have no issue with her saying it, but can we not pretend it’s productive and great. It is not.

    http://fredrikdeboer.com/2017/01/09/pretty-simple-choice-for-democrats/

    This stuff is a waste of time. I know everyone like hearing someone famous say what you are thinking, but politically it’s unhelpful. Since, you know, politics…

  16. liberalgeek says:

    This stuff is a waste of time. I know everyone like hearing someone famous say what you are thinking, but politically it’s unhelpful. Since, you know, politics…

    You’re funny.

  17. RE Vanella says:

    Did you read the deboer? I know we’re suppose to fawn all over it because Streep is a national treasure, Trump is bad, we love viral videos, etc, But politically it’s either neutral or negative.

    Again, I have no problem with what she said. I agree with it. But I’m not going to get orgasmic about it. It’s a waste of time and actually that’s not funny.

    Maybe respond to the idea rather than trying a clever left handed insult.

  18. meatball says:

    @Bamboozer, did you read the article?

  19. anon says:

    @mouse – Did the bitter clingers read Senator Lopez’s op’ed in the Cape Gazette a few weeks ago? I interpreted his op’ed as he’s evolved and now accepts same sex marriage.

  20. RE Vanella says:

    So, LG, may we assume that was the extent of your thoughts on this matter? If that’s the case thanks so much. Very valuable comment. I appreciate you taking the time. High quality thinking, that.

  21. Emma says:

    Personally I hope the “old bitter clingers,” otherwise known as citizens, continue to plague Lopez for the rest of his career.

  22. liberalgeek says:

    I work for a living, so I may not reply to your quips on your schedule. I suppose you’ll have to adjust your expectations accordingly.

    I read the link. It wasn’t a deep-think piece. It’s some sort of 5 minute, off-the-cuff opinion pretending to be some sort of political road sign.

    My comment is about how vacuous your statement is. We just witnessed a campaign that did EXACTLY what you told us is not politically sound, and you did it from a holier than thou perspective. A famous person told a bunch of people with latent -isms exactly what they wanted to hear.

    “It’s cool to make fun of the disabled”
    “It’s valid to question foreign looking people”
    “Muslims are violent people that need to be watched”
    “Hey, as long as you’re laughing when you say it, THEY shouldn’t be offended”

    So now a well-spoken person that most of America wants to believe that they know explains how her art gives voice to people that are living lives that the rest of us can’t understand otherwise, and all you can post is This shit isn’t helpful.

  23. anonymous says:

    @RE: I see a lot of this at liberal sites these days. “Trump said this! One of his supporters said that! Can you believe how racist and sexist these people are?”

    Yes, yes I can, because outside of the liberal safe-space bubble this has never not been the case. I go to Salon and read a bunch of safe-space yammering, right next to a bunch of clickbait shots of women wearing very little.

    Taking umbrage at every ignorant, racist, sexist thing these people will say for the next four years isn’t going to get us very far. It didn’t get Hillary elected, and it won’t stop the Republicans and/or Trump. Cheering everyone who agrees with you won’t help, either, unless you’re doing it together in a physical space.

  24. anonymous says:

    @LG: Well, as a point of fact, it isn’t helpful. You might disagree with that, but then your analysis of what happened shows why your position is also unhelpful. People who voted for Trump already held those opinions. Some of them held those very opinions even when they voted for Obama. They didn’t vote for him for president because he held those opinions. They voted for him because they gave him permission to voice them.

    What Meryl Streep said, on the other hand, I hear dozens if not hundreds of times a day. Show me where it’s been helpful.

  25. anonymous says:

    @Emma: Just a reminder, KKK members are “also known as citizens.” You might want to raise your bar off the ground, as all citizens do not deserve respect just for being alive.

  26. anonymous says:

    Again @LG: Took a quick run through several left/prog site cover pages — not personal blogs but the usual aggregators — and the Streep stuff dominates the headlines. That’s why it’s not helpful.

  27. RE Vanella says:

    @LG Most of the analysis I’ve read says that the Trump voter ignored all that. It was a rejection of wealthy movie stars and cultural elites who swoon over the chops of the likes of Meryl Streep. (I feel this rejection because I am in the cohort that was rejected.)

    The Trump voter simply didn’t believe that stuff or that stuff just didn’t matter (or as Anonymous said, they already believed it which rendered it basically moot). The point is the getting the liberal internet to fawn over a celebrity “takedown” or a famous person “completely eviscerating” so-and-so or how so well know liberal “crushed” somebody on social media is not helpful. If you’ve determine that the fight needs to be fought on those terms I humbly suggest you missed a trick.

    If you think we just got beat because of the things you listed in your comment I think you’re wrong. I think it’s a big distraction, just like this Streep thing.

    And for the record I didn’t call it “shit” did I? I actually complimented it and said I agree with it. What I am arguing is that politically it’s not productive and it’s likely a big distraction. It’s doing the same thing we just did that yielded a poor result. So maybe you’re missing my point. Fair enough.

  28. Jason330 says:

    I only excerpted a bit because I was rushed this morning. Here is the helpful part, in case you missed it:

    Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. When the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose. OK, go on with that thing. OK, this brings me to the press. We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call them on the carpet for every outrage.

    That’s why our founders enshrined the press and its freedoms in our constitution. So I only ask the famously well-heeled Hollywood foreign press and all of us in our community to join me in supporting the Committee to Protect Journalists, ’cause we’re going to need them going forward and they’ll need us to safeguard the truth.

    If you want to dislike Streep’s comments because you have a knee jerk reaction to “celebrities” saying things… I think you are just being lazy. These comments on the first amendment and the Committee to Protect Journalists have been left unsaid for too long.

  29. Emma says:

    @anonymous Every human being deserves respect just for being alive.

    Also, it’s odd to compare people who care about social justice to Klan supporters.

  30. liberalgeek says:

    There is value in providing the language for why one is offended to others. One of the problems that I have seen has been that there is SO MUCH to be offended by, that we are unable to focus on any particular offense. Streep defended “Hollywood” admirably. It is made up of people from diverse backgrounds whose job is literally to put themselves in the mindset and position of other people. She defended the press in a way that ordinary people that are chatting with their uncle can use. And she chose a specific act that Trump committed that she found egregious and explained why it was offensive. Her statement that “Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. And when the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose.” is simple, non-partisan and easily digestible.

    Dismissing her because she is a famous person is stupid. We are gearing up to battle a reality TV character that thinks that he has a been proven right by a popularity contest. I’m not going to start turning away volunteers that are taking up whatever form of arms they have at their disposal against him.

  31. RE Vanella says:

    Again, I am not dismissing her because she’s famous. Again, I didn’t dislike her remarks. In fact I said the opposite explicitly. What I said was the fixation and swooning and elevating Streep to overnight hero status will not help us politically. Moving trending videos will not help us. In fact they very likely will harm the political cause.

    You seem to be disagreeing with a position I don’t hold. I am arguing that we pay far, far to much attention to this kind of thing.

    Dissecting and challenging Trump’s dirty statements was a loser for us this time round. Let’s try another way and win one.

  32. anonymous says:

    @Emma: Read it again. Those people are AGAINST the things you stand for, not in favor of them. They are AGAINST social justice. Apparently you’re so busy being respectful you’ve neglected your reading comprehension.

    And no, not everybody deserves respect for being alive. Very few deserve any respect at all IMO, so we’re going to have to disagree on that one.

  33. anonymous says:

    @jason: No, the problem is exactly was RE said — focusing on “takedowns” of Trump by famous people or Twitter users not only accomplishes nothing, it gobbles up the media’s attention. More investigations of the cabinet nominees, since they’re not going to bother doing it before confirming them, springs to mind as a more helpful use of resources.

    We helped elect Trump by blaring all his offenses — which gave him free advertising, because (as you noted) most of his supporters saw his positions as features, not bugs. Focusing on his statements, or statements in opposition to him, is a mistake. It’s just like a magic show — focus not on their mouths but on their hands.

  34. nemski says:

    I found it interesting that Streep never mentioned his name.

  35. Emma says:

    @anonymous: This sentence — “I go to Senator Lopez’s coffee’s and after the old bitter clingers are done asking questions about homosexuals, welfare and resentment social issues, I usually ask about protection of the inland bays or the like” — could be read either way.

    Like I said, they’re citizens and entitled to bring their concerns to their senator.

  36. mouse says:

    Yes, they are but when all the senator hears is a bunch of mean old people bitching about laws that protect homosexuals and the like, he get’s the idea that this is what the electorate wants to focus on. It’s not and even these folk for whom I have much contempt, seemed to take interest and agree with my positions directed as questions for the senator. I believe that specific environmental issues like protecting the state’s premiere coastal bays from parasitic developers is an issue that has legs among a broad spectrum of the population. None of the people in the room would have asked the questions I asked but they agreed with my positions and I’m a hard core environmentalist. If I had several other to push follow up questions rather than being the only one, he would have had to address the issue and not just blow them off saying land use is a local issue.

  37. Emma says:

    Good point.

    Like @anon asked above, I wonder what the homophobic contingent thinks of Lopez coming out for marriage equality.

  38. mouse says:

    I think this is a small group of retirees that show up to every meeting. Sure they won’t be happy. They are easily distracted though. Look a pony..

  39. mouse says:

    It’s been a couple months since I have been to one of his open meetings

  40. anonymous says:

    @Emma: Sorry, you’re right, it could be read either way, particularly if you’re more inclined to like people than I am.

    I suppose I read it my way because of my experiences with some of the conservatives down there, who would be more at home in Appalachia. And before you scold me for looking down on the rubes, realize that Appalachia as a whole voted more heavily for Trump than California did for Clinton.

  41. anonymous says:

    @mouse: This develops in every “coffee with” session I know of, in every field of endeavor (church groups, for example). The regulars get to know each other and dominate the discourse, and if the number isn’t big enough it gets too clubby. Sort of like comments sections.

  42. Paula says:

    Re El Som & Puck: So, to all of you out there who are aware of events, town meetings, planned protests, marches, etc., please share them here with everyone.

    There’s a Delaware United event at Saint Francis Hospital on Friday (701 North Clayton St. 19805) at 4 pm (one announcement said 4:30). From the FB page: “Stand with Senator Carper to say that there can be no cuts to Medicaid, Medicare or Social Security! Let’s not repeal the ACA while it’s not perfect improving it should be the priority.” [sic]

    The Indivisible website has a place to register local groups. There’s one registered in Lewes, but no others in Delaware. I think the way to go is to register for a larger area first, then if enough people join, it can split up into election districts. Is anyone interested in, say, a Brandywine Hundred group?

  43. ModernProgressive says:

    Anyone want to fact check this Drumpf-loving wing nut on YouTube? I seem to have been blocked.

    Thank you.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m7iA7QZBi4

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_LgpvpKtxM

  44. puck says:

    I think we should start with a roll call right here on DL, maybe in its own post in the morning and running all day.

    OK, everybody – Who is your representative and senator?

    My Delaware rep is Joe Miro and my Senator is Greg Lavelle.

  45. Mine are Bryon Short and Cathy Cloutier. And, yes, I’m all for a Brandywine Hundred group.

  46. anonymous says:

    Puck, I’m with you in northwestern GOPLand.

    Here’s a story worth a moment of your time. The Financial Times has done some digging on Trump’s finances, and someone has connected the dots. Upshot: It’s pretty clear the Russian connection to Trump is more about business than politics, or at least was at first:

    http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1/9/1618540/-Was-Donald-Trump-bailed-out-of-bankruptcy-by-Russia-crime-bosses

  47. Catherine Ciferni says:

    Paul Baumbach, and Dave Sokola

  48. Paula says:

    Mine are Debra Heffernan and Catherine Cloutier.
    Re a Brandywine Hundred group:
    Last night I created a new e-mail address and will see if I can create a new freestanding WordPress site as a contact page (I’d like to keep it separate from my business persona — everything feels too integrated to me lately). I’m thinking something like Brandywine Hundred Patriots for Progressive Policy — one reason is that BHPPP.wordpress.com available, but mainly to take the word patriot back from the tea party.
    I’ll let you know how I make out by reporting back to this thread. But don’t hold your breath(s).

  49. jason330 says:

    That sounds awesome. Let me know if I can help out in anyway.

    Mine are Hensley (r) and Ennis (R-ish)

  50. Democrat2017 says:

    https://bhppp.wordpress.com/
    Heh heh. Now what?

    I have this set to be “invisible” which means everyone can see it, but it won’t be indexed by web crawlers. At least for now. I hope someone, some people, with more experience organizing (that is, *any* experience organizing) want to be added as blog administrators.

    All I had in mind for a wordpress site was to create a resource site to try to hook people up with existing organizations and events, or maybe something on the order of “We’re his problem now” but for local issues. Certainly not anything to compete with DL or Blue Delaware.

    What I can offer to do is set up a page of resources — like the “We’re his problem now” page, the Indivisible page, and other how-to pages and primers for people like me who are just realizing we better do something more than shout into our own personal echo chambers. Also links to the Delaware elections website that lets you find your representatives, and links to the “big three” — Coons, Carper, and Blunt Rochester. Another idea, and I don’t know if this is possible, is to have a page of RSS feeds for press releases or even Twitter feeds of some of these people. There must be a way to do that. As well as links to existing organizations like Delaware United, and all the others that must exist up and down the state.

    I wonder if one page can simply be a running conversation of comments and suggestions from visitors. I’m not tied to this theme at all — I just picked one that looked uncomplicated.

    Once there’s something up, we can register it at Indivisibleguide.com.

    I’ll be signing off because I finally have to get some paying work done tonight…

  51. mouse says:

    Schwartzkoph Rep, Lopez Senator Cole county Council

  52. Elaine Smith says:

    Senator – Senate District 1
    Harris B. McDowell

    Representative – House District 7
    Bryon H. Short