I've just read this on Feb. 22 after a week that was so jammed packed with patients, students, family members, and friends all of whom are horrified and / or terrified and / or enraged and / or hopeless, in light of the actions coming as a whim of either the occupant of the White House or one of his many substitutes wielding power to which they believe they're entitled, The Constitution notwithstanding. All those with whom I'm interacting are scrambling to figure out what to do that might make a difference, however small. Of course I knew about Trump's othering of the AP, about his attempts to silence those (you included) who insist on honoring the Constitution and the laws therein. Reading this installment of STEADY, though, I'm struck yet again by the narcissism, the temerity, the OUTRAGE of Trump's attempt to silence those who won't bow to his wishes. I am even more grateful to you, Elliot Kirschner, Heather Cox Richardson, Jay Kuo, Joyce Vance, and the MANY others to whose Substack accounts I subscribe. You all are keeping the faith, providing forums for those of us who knew well before Trump took office in 2016 that he was hell-bent on destroying our country. I just want to say THANK YOU once again for helping me regain a more STEADY attitude and increased hopefulness that somehow or other, at some point or other, democracy will survive and revive.
Brilliant, Dan, brilliant. If freedom of speech is in jeopardy, all that will remain is freedom of thought, with chainsaw-wielding Magaites threatening those who dare to think.
Thank you for articulating what we are seeing & feeling. I appreciate you & your dedication to truth and to calling out the total disregard for our rights. Steady on.
It's so good to have you and your wonderful mind hangin with the Mighty Dan! I know your love for music is great & especially like when you put songs of relevance in your writing. Rock on Dan we're with you!
The music I woke up with spinning my brain this week was "Abide with me, fast falls the eventide. The darkness deepens, Lord with me abide. When other helpers fail and comforts flee, help of the helpless, oh abide with me." I know this brings up images of the Titanic and Whitman's poetic response to Lincoln's death, but it is beginning to feel as if our ship of state is headed for number nine seas.
I am more than frightened at the steady unraveling of our democracy, the ruthless manner in which an unelected rich man and the shadow king is bulldozing our government systems and threatening anyone who dare question what they are doing. Let me say, we are now totally under an authoritarian regime. Many Americans know it in their hearts, the rest who voted for this evil, are pretending it isn't happening and holding onto their delusions. Someone had better stand up to this monster we are facing or we all perish.
Ileagal is an adjective, an adjective describes or modifies a noun; so the term ileagal immigrant(s) is perfectly acceptable. Aside from that I concur trump/ musk need to go
I wonder what the tipping point is among his supporters before they FINALLY start standing up to this madness?
On another note, I admit to being no expert on the electoral college, but I have heard many people since the 2024 presidential election say "over 1/2 the voters voted for Trump." That simply is not true.
I read this at the Brennan Center for Justice site:
"The discussion resonates even more this year (2024), since Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016 despite losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million."
I then went to NPR and read this (from 3 December 2024):
"President-elect Donald Trump got very close to a majority of the vote in this presidential election, but not quite. It is not exactly the "unprecedented and powerful mandate" Trump claimed on election night."
So I for one would like those who keep insisting he won the popular vote (especially on the Steady forum) to realize that is incorrect.
I am assuming that's what makes the "swing states" so key in the election process - the winner, even if just receiving 51% of the popular vote, gets ALL that state's electoral votes. In my mind is an area needing revision. Why we can't just elect on popular vote alone is beyond me.
Because those of us who live in sparsely populated states like Wyoming with a population of ½ million people could not compete with states like Arizona with almost 4 million in Phoenix alone, hence the electoral college.
I am not against the electoral college per se, but rather that some states give ALL their electoral votes to whomever won the majority of votes. That just seems wrong. I think there needs to be a way that the electoral votes in a state are divided up by % of votes won. How to deal with votes percentages that are not divisible by 10 would have to be figured out, but I think it certainly could be done and would be WAY better than how some states do it now. When someone AGAIN can be elected President of our country without having a majority of the votes, I think this points to a serious problem indeed. Just my take on it all.
That would be awesome and if something was in effect we probably wouldn't be where we are today, since trump won 49.8% with harris getting 48.3%. With a margin of only 1.9% I would almost bet it could be enough for a recount!
In just thirty days, Donald Trump has unleashed the deadliest policy shift in modern history—not through incompetence, but intent. These are not routine policy changes or ideological maneuvers. They are calculated acts of destruction: the dismantling of healthcare, the gutting of public health and scientific research, the acceleration of climate disasters, and the destabilization of global security. Experts warn the consequences will be nothing short of catastrophic. Trump’s first-month policies have triggered a human catastrophe unlike anything seen in American governance.
President Clinton personally signed into law a law that states if a person who is a superior officer to another employee and they have sex it is considered rape. He himself signed the bill BEFORE he raped her. It's hard to believe that a clear thinking adult actually believes that was the right thing for a president to do IN the oval office. But then again orange man bad ALL democrats good is your philosophy
Bill Clinton didn't rape Monica, that was consensual. All you had do was look at her face, She was in love. Monica was an aide. Anywhere he went, she was there. Always touching him... Yep, she was in Love.
Please, don't believe me but before you show your lack of knowledge about the subject look it up
It does not matter if it was consensual or not. There is a federal law signed into law by Clinton himself, that ANY federal employee who is higher in rank, (military) or higher in job status, (civilian) who has sex with someone below them is guilty of rape. I did not sign the law into being, Bill Clinton did. So it was very very hard for him to say he didn't know about the law.
Also, do you really think having sex in the oval office with a young lady who is 30 years younger then you is right, even if it was not illegal
He had consensual oral sex with her. I agree it's definitely not an acceptable thing for a president to do in the Oval Office, but that's not what I'd categorize as rape.
You are correct that "orange man is bad" on so many levels.
You are incorrect that we think "ALL democrats good". We have enough common sense to know no one is perfect. We prefer to side with the party, though, that is not destroying our country.
A point of interest regarding Clinton's encounter with ML, he claimed he did not have sex because many men would not consider fellatio having sex. I know many may disagree, but I am just pointing out a fact.
No he did not. Please, don't believe t, just Google it. He person signed the law that made it rape. But 100 percent of the Democratic senators thought getting iral sex a dozen times in the oval office was a perfectly normal thing. And 100 percent of them voted not guilty, he did not do it. Even though he admitted in federal court that he did do it. He lost his law license and was fined 400,000 dollars but every Democrat said he did not do it
I don't know what you're referring to when you say "No he did not". Clinton was accused of sexual harassment. If he signed the law that categorized it as rape, then so be it, but it was sexual harassment. Democrats did not say he didn't do it. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice - which is what they acquitted him of.
It was not sexual harassment. And even if it was you must be so proud of the 100 percent of Democrats in Congress who said sexually harassing a young lady INSIDE the oval office is perfectly all right with them
And we’re so proud to have a convicted rapist in the White House along with some of his administration who also suffer from the same ailment. I’m sure Trump feels very comfortable around them, birds of a feather.
He was tried for rape and in a 12 to 0 count he was found innocent. Do t believe, please just Google it.
As for working with other rapists, please tell me who. I know I have made more mistakes then you ever will but I don't know if any rapists working in the White House.
Never said democrats said he didn't do it. They all admitted he did it. Clinton admitted in federal court he did it. What I actually said is that 100 percent of all Democrats in Congress said raping a young lady INSIDE the oval office was fine with them. They saw nothing wrong with that.
And what was the perjury for. Because he initially lied in federal court and said it did not happen. And again 100 percent of Democrats in Congress said that lying to a federal judge about raping a young lady was ok with them. Don't believe me please, just Google it. Why do you think he lost his law license and was fined 400,000 dollars, for telling the truth?
Okay, Mr. Velten, I'm going to end my participation in this discussion of something that happened 26 years ago. There's a whole lot more dangerous fuckery going on in the Oval Office right now that needs my attention. Have a good day.
Are only American citizens guaranteed free speech?
Something is wrong.I cannot share this to my facebook page
I've just read this on Feb. 22 after a week that was so jammed packed with patients, students, family members, and friends all of whom are horrified and / or terrified and / or enraged and / or hopeless, in light of the actions coming as a whim of either the occupant of the White House or one of his many substitutes wielding power to which they believe they're entitled, The Constitution notwithstanding. All those with whom I'm interacting are scrambling to figure out what to do that might make a difference, however small. Of course I knew about Trump's othering of the AP, about his attempts to silence those (you included) who insist on honoring the Constitution and the laws therein. Reading this installment of STEADY, though, I'm struck yet again by the narcissism, the temerity, the OUTRAGE of Trump's attempt to silence those who won't bow to his wishes. I am even more grateful to you, Elliot Kirschner, Heather Cox Richardson, Jay Kuo, Joyce Vance, and the MANY others to whose Substack accounts I subscribe. You all are keeping the faith, providing forums for those of us who knew well before Trump took office in 2016 that he was hell-bent on destroying our country. I just want to say THANK YOU once again for helping me regain a more STEADY attitude and increased hopefulness that somehow or other, at some point or other, democracy will survive and revive.
Brilliant, Dan, brilliant. If freedom of speech is in jeopardy, all that will remain is freedom of thought, with chainsaw-wielding Magaites threatening those who dare to think.
Thank you for articulating what we are seeing & feeling. I appreciate you & your dedication to truth and to calling out the total disregard for our rights. Steady on.
It's so good to have you and your wonderful mind hangin with the Mighty Dan! I know your love for music is great & especially like when you put songs of relevance in your writing. Rock on Dan we're with you!
The music I woke up with spinning my brain this week was "Abide with me, fast falls the eventide. The darkness deepens, Lord with me abide. When other helpers fail and comforts flee, help of the helpless, oh abide with me." I know this brings up images of the Titanic and Whitman's poetic response to Lincoln's death, but it is beginning to feel as if our ship of state is headed for number nine seas.
I am more than frightened at the steady unraveling of our democracy, the ruthless manner in which an unelected rich man and the shadow king is bulldozing our government systems and threatening anyone who dare question what they are doing. Let me say, we are now totally under an authoritarian regime. Many Americans know it in their hearts, the rest who voted for this evil, are pretending it isn't happening and holding onto their delusions. Someone had better stand up to this monster we are facing or we all perish.
Dan,
We need your clear and passionately eloquent voice now more than ever. Thank you!
When is Congress going to stand up to this Musk & Trump.
Musk wasn't elected to anything.
Trump is going to lead us into War.
Ileagal is an adjective, an adjective describes or modifies a noun; so the term ileagal immigrant(s) is perfectly acceptable. Aside from that I concur trump/ musk need to go
I wonder what the tipping point is among his supporters before they FINALLY start standing up to this madness?
On another note, I admit to being no expert on the electoral college, but I have heard many people since the 2024 presidential election say "over 1/2 the voters voted for Trump." That simply is not true.
I read this at the Brennan Center for Justice site:
"The discussion resonates even more this year (2024), since Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016 despite losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million."
I then went to NPR and read this (from 3 December 2024):
"President-elect Donald Trump got very close to a majority of the vote in this presidential election, but not quite. It is not exactly the "unprecedented and powerful mandate" Trump claimed on election night."
So I for one would like those who keep insisting he won the popular vote (especially on the Steady forum) to realize that is incorrect.
I am assuming that's what makes the "swing states" so key in the election process - the winner, even if just receiving 51% of the popular vote, gets ALL that state's electoral votes. In my mind is an area needing revision. Why we can't just elect on popular vote alone is beyond me.
Insights welcome.
Because those of us who live in sparsely populated states like Wyoming with a population of ½ million people could not compete with states like Arizona with almost 4 million in Phoenix alone, hence the electoral college.
I am not against the electoral college per se, but rather that some states give ALL their electoral votes to whomever won the majority of votes. That just seems wrong. I think there needs to be a way that the electoral votes in a state are divided up by % of votes won. How to deal with votes percentages that are not divisible by 10 would have to be figured out, but I think it certainly could be done and would be WAY better than how some states do it now. When someone AGAIN can be elected President of our country without having a majority of the votes, I think this points to a serious problem indeed. Just my take on it all.
That would be awesome and if something was in effect we probably wouldn't be where we are today, since trump won 49.8% with harris getting 48.3%. With a margin of only 1.9% I would almost bet it could be enough for a recount!
Lets hope we survive the next 4 years.
Well. He’s definitely succeeding. He’ll go down in history alright. But not the way he thinks!!😡
Well. Hes
Thank you, Dan, for your words. We must protect and defend our democracy for our children and grandchildren.
In just thirty days, Donald Trump has unleashed the deadliest policy shift in modern history—not through incompetence, but intent. These are not routine policy changes or ideological maneuvers. They are calculated acts of destruction: the dismantling of healthcare, the gutting of public health and scientific research, the acceleration of climate disasters, and the destabilization of global security. Experts warn the consequences will be nothing short of catastrophic. Trump’s first-month policies have triggered a human catastrophe unlike anything seen in American governance.
💀 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝗺𝗽’𝘀 𝗪𝗮𝗿 𝗼𝗻 𝗛𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆: 𝗛𝗶𝘀 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗪𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗞𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗠𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀
https://patricemersault.substack.com/p/trumps-war-on-humanity-his-policies?r=4d7sow
President Clinton personally signed into law a law that states if a person who is a superior officer to another employee and they have sex it is considered rape. He himself signed the bill BEFORE he raped her. It's hard to believe that a clear thinking adult actually believes that was the right thing for a president to do IN the oval office. But then again orange man bad ALL democrats good is your philosophy
Bill Clinton didn't rape Monica, that was consensual. All you had do was look at her face, She was in love. Monica was an aide. Anywhere he went, she was there. Always touching him... Yep, she was in Love.
Val,
Please, don't believe me but before you show your lack of knowledge about the subject look it up
It does not matter if it was consensual or not. There is a federal law signed into law by Clinton himself, that ANY federal employee who is higher in rank, (military) or higher in job status, (civilian) who has sex with someone below them is guilty of rape. I did not sign the law into being, Bill Clinton did. So it was very very hard for him to say he didn't know about the law.
Also, do you really think having sex in the oval office with a young lady who is 30 years younger then you is right, even if it was not illegal
He had consensual oral sex with her. I agree it's definitely not an acceptable thing for a president to do in the Oval Office, but that's not what I'd categorize as rape.
You are correct that "orange man is bad" on so many levels.
You are incorrect that we think "ALL democrats good". We have enough common sense to know no one is perfect. We prefer to side with the party, though, that is not destroying our country.
A point of interest regarding Clinton's encounter with ML, he claimed he did not have sex because many men would not consider fellatio having sex. I know many may disagree, but I am just pointing out a fact.
Mr. Kravetz,
Sorry for the delay in answering, I must have skipped right over your answer. My fault.
I agree that many men might not consider oral sex as sex but I truly believe you would find many women, if any, with that same view point.
And yes, president Clinton did use that excuse
I understand your point. And I'm not defending Clinton, but there is a difference between sexual harassment, consensual oral sex, and rape.
No he did not. Please, don't believe t, just Google it. He person signed the law that made it rape. But 100 percent of the Democratic senators thought getting iral sex a dozen times in the oval office was a perfectly normal thing. And 100 percent of them voted not guilty, he did not do it. Even though he admitted in federal court that he did do it. He lost his law license and was fined 400,000 dollars but every Democrat said he did not do it
I don't know what you're referring to when you say "No he did not". Clinton was accused of sexual harassment. If he signed the law that categorized it as rape, then so be it, but it was sexual harassment. Democrats did not say he didn't do it. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice - which is what they acquitted him of.
It was not sexual harassment. And even if it was you must be so proud of the 100 percent of Democrats in Congress who said sexually harassing a young lady INSIDE the oval office is perfectly all right with them
And we’re so proud to have a convicted rapist in the White House along with some of his administration who also suffer from the same ailment. I’m sure Trump feels very comfortable around them, birds of a feather.
Lisa,
He was tried for rape and in a 12 to 0 count he was found innocent. Do t believe, please just Google it.
As for working with other rapists, please tell me who. I know I have made more mistakes then you ever will but I don't know if any rapists working in the White House.
Never said democrats said he didn't do it. They all admitted he did it. Clinton admitted in federal court he did it. What I actually said is that 100 percent of all Democrats in Congress said raping a young lady INSIDE the oval office was fine with them. They saw nothing wrong with that.
And what was the perjury for. Because he initially lied in federal court and said it did not happen. And again 100 percent of Democrats in Congress said that lying to a federal judge about raping a young lady was ok with them. Don't believe me please, just Google it. Why do you think he lost his law license and was fined 400,000 dollars, for telling the truth?
Okay, Mr. Velten, I'm going to end my participation in this discussion of something that happened 26 years ago. There's a whole lot more dangerous fuckery going on in the Oval Office right now that needs my attention. Have a good day.
First, thank you for your very civil texts. Most of what I received is far from it
Second, I truly hope you have a wonderful day and life.
Sincerely
Jack