It is too early in the tread to strike up the ‘well I never!’ rage machine b/c someone expressed disagreement. We need at least four more pages and some wine first.

I haven’t read or seen them but I’m inclined to check them out. I think, in general, some of the pop culture references won’t age as well as other bits but that’s her point of reference right now and it totally makes sense. She is a phenomenal talent tho and has tremendous potential.

I did think the poem could use a bit of editing. It’s not the best representation of that style I’ve ever seen or heard but, for her age and given the time constraints, I thought she did a remarkable job. She was poised and confident on an international stage. I immediately heard the echoes of Angelou, Miranda, and pop culture in it. The references to ‘shade’, history having its eyes on us, Christianity, Ms. Angelou’s epic poem about the rock, tree, and river inviting us to do and be better because the price has been paid. There was a lot to like in it for those inclined to do so. She’s the in

We had an ‘Underground Cafe” where jazz greats played with music students and poetry was recited on the USC campus 25 years ago, both boring limericks and biting free verse. I hope it’s still there. My friends and I loved that place.

If we have learned nothing else these last four years it’s that the president sets a tone that is replicated/followed locally by his/her party members. The last four years has been characterized by the nationalization of local races/positions in an unprecedented way. We have witnessed state and local officials abuse their authority to champion the cause of federal officials.

I hear ya but I’m skeptical. I’ve been referred to disparagingly as ‘that gal’ too many times to consider it benign. I do not suppose that everyone is as sensitive to these slights as I am.

I don’t think so. I’m very willing to put up with crud but we’ve seen a level of antagonism toward female leadership, nationally, that’s off the charts in the last few years. That comes from people who believe, based on biblical teaching, that women shouldn’t be the head of any men, and people who believe, based on cultural experience, that women are incapable/inferior vs. men. I do think that spills over into commercial (advertorial) treatment of women. In my professional life, I only permitted people to call me by my first name when we were colleagues/equals.

Perhaps. I don’t think she’s any more approachable than Biden tho, who is known for spending way too much time with everyday folks (and being late as a result). The idea that it’s a sales tactic, however, is supported by the uproar over the unauthorized use of a casual vs. professional photo by Vanity Fair. https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/1955388/vogues-cover-featuring-kamala-harris-is-being-widely-criticized/amp/

I think the decision to be spoken to on a first name basis is a calculated one. Strong women in politics are often seen as ^*#{s and unapproachable. Granting permission to use your first name is disarming and an attempt, I think, to charm people who don’t recognize these biases. We can look at what happened when Dr. Biden chose to use her well-earned title and the hullabaloo that caused for insight too.

If I don’t say this I will explode so... DISENCHANTED/DISSATISFIED IS NOT DISENFRANCHISED! Phew, ok, that’s out.🤣

Women are typically referred to by their first names while men are referred to by their last names. Trump. Pence. Hillary. Kamala. Biden. Nikki. I've flexed this conditioned muscle too. It's still denigrating.

We hashed this out during the primaries. Sanders didn't have enough support among core Democratic Party voters after ACTIVELY participating in creating the primary rules. If you cannot win a plurality of your 'own' party's voters, you do not get their nomination. This, again, goes back to which voters matter. He largely lost the primary because he did not have a deep base of support among non-white voters. There is a significant portion of the population, however, that believes white votes are the only ones that count.

They are very entertaining.

Aside from the fact that I didn’t cite any evidence, because it’s impossible to prove a negative, I have nothing against you, personally. I have beef with your IDEAS which reasonable adults should be able to discuss impartially. The fact is that no credible evidence has been presented in a court of law in support of widespread election fraud and that wasn’t the claim four years ago. The claim was that foreign interference influenced PEOPLE, not vote tabulation. I’m sorry that’s not possible for you to discuss right now. Maybe it will be in time.

It also absolves people of the obligation to atone for wrongdoing. Nothing is purposefully wrong or objectively wrong therefore nothing requires atonement. It’s an odd position for Christians, especially, to take.