Monday, April 26, 2021

The Three G’s

As one of the millions who plays and enjoys the Nintendo video game Animal Crossing: New Horizons, I have watched plenty of streams—both on YouTube and Twitch—from content creators. (In ACNH, you arrive on, and eventually build and establish, your own island in which you have animal villagers and human residents.) 

One such content creator’s name is Sam. He is the creator of “Crunchy Island.” Over the last year, not long after the March 20, 2020 debut of New Horizons, Sam created his island in which he invites other content creators to compete in mazes which ultimately lead one to winning a popular villager they want. (Related video appears below.) 

Once the contest ends, and a winner emerges, the other participants say, “GG.” 

GG is an acronym for Good Game! 


When it comes to Democratic Party politics, also good at playing their games, there are three Gs. 

GGG! 

They are:

• Gaslighting

• Gatekeeping

• Grifting


This is the case not only with people who make their living in Democratic Party politics. It is also applicable to establishment media which work with the Democratic Party. It is also applicable to political pundits. It is also getting more and more revealed nowadays with some sources in independent media.

They: 

• Gaslight

• Gatekeep

• Grift


Two recent Jimmy Dore Show videos give examples with his former boss, The Young Turks’s Cenk Uygur, along with his partner in GGG crime Ana Kasparian, and there is even the much-trusted and -revered intellectual Noam Chomsky. 

This is, in their current form, the Democratic Party.

• Gaslighters

• Gatekeepers

• Grifters 


The Three G’s.


Monday, April 19, 2021

Regarding Oscar and Chloé Zhao


Next Sunday, April 25, 2021, will be the 93rd Academy Awards for film achievements for the year 2020.

I have mentioned, in previous years, that I don’t tune in like I used to.

Part of the reason, and I’m sure this is how other regulars here feel, is that Hollywood is too much in bed with the Democratic Party. That what gets said—what gets expressed—comes across as an extension of the corrupt, corporate, Democratic Party Establishment and their neoliberalism and, of course, their propaganda. This means trying to influence how people think and feel—how they should live—when, in reality, they do not relate to most people. It is another example of the differences between the haves and the have-nots.

Another reason why I don’t feel so engaged is because the Oscars have become old. 

It feels like a lot of the productions and the people who end up winning were determined weeks, even months, ago. A website like GoldDerby, by awards expert Tom O’Neil (who has written books on the history of the Oscars, Emmys, and Grammys), follows this like sport. They’re very observant and have it pretty much figured months in advance.

This ends up coming across as pre-determined. Not all of it. Enough of it.

Since there has been much word of mouth, for months, I expect—and it has been expected—that the 2020 Best Director Oscar will go to Chloé Zhao, pictured above, for Nomadland. (She recently won the Directors Guild of America’s prize for film achievement. Usually, the DGA winner goes on to win the Oscar. And Zhao has won nearly every pre-Oscar prize along the way.)

Nomadland is about a woman—played by two-time Oscar winner Frances McDormand (who co-produced the film and is nominated on that count along with her performance)—who loses her job and travels in search of work. She also finds other people experiencing much of the same. It is based on the book Nomadland: Surviving America in the Twenty-First Century, by Jessica Bruder. (I have not seen Nomadland. It is available for streaming on Hulu. I may get to it. Subject matter is very relevant to this period in our history.)

While I expect Zhao to win, I also expect a narrative which has been pre-written will be reported. While Zhao would become the second woman in history to win the Oscar for directing (the first was Kathryn Bigelow, the 2009 winner, for The Hurt Locker), this narrative will point out that Zhao is a woman of color. Zhao is Chinese. She was born March 31, 1982, in Beijing, China.

This will, more than likely, become another example of identity politics. And the point of that will be to help enforce the narrative that Hollywood is enlightened. This of course means the same about the Democrats.

I think that is the wrong way to look at this.

Should Chloé Zhao win the 2020 Best Director Oscar, it bares in mind she may also win with each of her four nominations. As the director of Nomadland, Zhao is also nominated for Best Picture (as one of its producers), Best Adapted Screenplay, and Best Film Editing.

That is both uncommon and one hell of an achievement.

Achievement in excellence, not identity, is how we should regard the possibly Oscar winning Chloé Zhao.

Monday, April 12, 2021

‘Georgia and the GOP’ … ‘AOC and the Dems’

Recent news items call for me to respond in this blog topic.


Georgia and the GOP

The Republicans in Georgia—with its governor Brian Kemp—want to stop the Democrats from being able to continue to win Georgia. 

In his 2020 Democratic pickup of the presidency of the United States, Joe Biden unseated Republican incumbent Donald Trump with among his pickups Georgia. 

It was the first time since 1992—also an election in which a Democratic challenger unseated a Republican incumbent U.S. president—that the Democrats carried Georgia. 

So, the Republicans want to stop their bleeding. That is what Brian Kemp and the Georgia GOP are trying to achieve. 

They won’t succeed. 

Since 1968, every U.S. presidential election which delivered a party switch—from Democratic to Republican or from Republican to Democratic—saw a given state realign to the party which won it over and, from that point forward, has not carried for the party which lost it. I touched on this in a previous blog topic. And I think the 2020 Democratic pickups from two states and a congressional district—this would be Arizona and Georgia (as well as Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District)—are applicable. 

The post-2020 Georgia GOP are foolish with this effort.


AOC and the Dems

The last week—maybe two weeks (not exactly sure)—have seen U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez (D–New York #14) expose herself as a sellout. 

#ForceTheVote—going back to December 2020—is when people finally looked to AOC, and her fellow “Squad” members, as fake. 

I am remembering, after she unseated Joe Crowley in the 2018 Democratic primaries, that Jared Beck—the plaintiff attorney in the DNC lawsuit—was tweeting that Ocasio–Cortez was not real. By then, Beck had given up on the Democrats—saying they are criminals—and summarized people’s belief in Ocasio–Cortez, and anyone affiliated with the Democrats, as naive. 

I give credit to Jared Beck. He has earned it. For me—I haven’t voted for a Democrat in a general election since 2014. The DNC rigging the 2016 primaries, Barack Obama orchestrating Joe Biden’s 2020 nomination, and the other rigged elections in between (like the 2017 California Democratic chairperson election) have done nothing but strengthen my resolve to not vote again in a general election for Team Blue.

At this point, the role Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez has is to continue to try to lure people—especially young people—to vote in general elections for the Democratic Party.

Monday, April 5, 2021

Graham Elwood On the China–Iran Deal and Smedley Butler





The above videos were published March 31 and April 3, 2021 to YouTube by Graham Elwood. 

The first is titled “China Makes Iran Deal While US Pushes War.” It is a good example of how China is demonstrating more intelligence than the United States when it comes to leadership—and the future.

The second is titled “Smedley Butler: The Original Anti War Marine.” It is about the U.S. Marine Corps officer (1881–1940) who doesn’t get mentioned much—even though he exposed imperialists who tried to overthrow 32nd U.S. president Franklin Roosevelt.

Monday, March 29, 2021

Lethal Weapon


Last week, I mentioned that with the Democratic Party there is “something—and someone—who [is/are] a distraction to the detriment to us all.”

That someone is Barack Obama.

(Given last week’s blog topic was about entertainment, I don’t mind borrowing from the 1987 film title.)


What is represented is history, image, prestige, and honor.

Recently, there was a YouGov/Economist poll in which Americans said Barack Obama is the best president in the history of the United States.

The nation has experienced 45 individuals and 46 U.S. presidents. This counts the non-consecutive cycles won by Grover Cleveland. This counts current U.S. president Joe Biden.

No. 1 by the polls’ participants was Obama. Never mind the likes of Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and Teddy Roosevelt. No. 1—Barack Obama.


Barack Obama—who turns 60 this year—made history, in 2008, as the first (and, so far, only) person who is black elected (and, in 2012, re-elected) to the presidency of the United States.

The image is that the people of the United States, in 2008, were finally willing to experience something many thought would never happen—or not happen in their lifetime—and that is, of course, the election of a black person to the presidency of the United States. Amazing.

The prestige is with the office itself. The No. 1 leader in the Free World.

The honor is with the noble tradition of welcoming, by election, a new leader and, of course, the promise of a new period that would be good for the American people and their lives.

That was depicted with the United States presidential election of Barack Obama in 2008.


The presidency of Barack Obama was something else.

After a year or two of Obama’s presidency, I came across a comment by Ralph Nader. He said he does not respect Obama. Nader considers Obama a “con man.”

Nader said, back in 2008, that Obama is—as it has been the case for some time with the Democratic Party—just another “corporate Democrat.”

In 2010, Barack Obama presided over devastating Democratic Party losses not only in the U.S. House but also state legislatures. They were made possible because he—but not so much the Democratic-majority U.S. House and U.S. Senate—deliberately did not deliver an “Affordable Care Act” bill which would solve our generations’-long, poor health-insurance system. Obama delivered, knowingly, an inadequate and terrible bill which was meant to herd people into the system—whether or not they could afford it—and impose a mandate; with no mechanism to compete with private insurance; and no re-importation of drugs, for lower costs, from another country like Canada.

Obama, during campaign season, spoke of his mother Ann Dunham’s battles with at least one ruthless health-insurance provider while she was likewise battling, and eventually succumbed, to cancer. (She died in 1995.) And he spoke righteously of the urgency to deliver a health-insurance bill that would be the solution we needed.

That was Campaigner Obama.

President Obama got the health-insurance bill he intended. 


One month after winning re-election, Obama had this to say of his presidency: “The truth of the matter is that my policies are so mainstream that if I had set the same policies that I had back in the 1980s, I would be considered a moderate Republican.” (Did the people voted Obama the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination—and/or voted for him to win his 2008 first-term election and/or win his 2012 re-election—do that because they wanted Republican policies?)

During the 2016 general election, to elect the 45th president of the United States, Obama went all out for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, with an over-the-top and breathless declaration. With Hillary Clinton, “there has never been any man or woman more qualified.”

Not long after Clinton lost that election, in what was a 2016 Republican pickup of the presidency of the United States to Donald Trump, Obama’s post-presidency was spent not helping The People—he used to be a community organizer—but in hanging with a billionaire like Richard Branson, giving six-figure paid speeches to wealthy people, and further enriching himself.

In 2017, Obama—knowing of the fractious relations in the Democratic Party as a whole—maneuvered behind the scenes and made sure the supposedly competitive DNC chairperson election was won by Tom Perez who, after working against Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries, conspired to make sure more corporatist candidates won the primaries in 2018 in preparation for the Democrats winning back the U.S. House. (Perez also violated his position by making a high-profile endorsement: Andrew Cuomo for re-nomination—not Tony and Emmy winning actress Cynthia Nixon—for Governor of New York.)

In his speeches, Obama scolded people who supported his 2008 presidential campaign who are yearning for change, change that they need, and told them they need to stop complaining about the Democratic Party and join the Democratic Party to bring the change they need.

In 2020, as the Iowa Democratic caucuses were a corrupt affair clearly engineered by Obama’s DNC chairman pick, and other behind-the-scenes players, the popular vote in the first three scheduled states—the other two were New Hampshire and Nevada—were won by Bernie Sanders. Just before the South Carolina primary, Obama had that state’s sole Democratic congressman Jim Clyburn—who is in the pocket of the health-insurance industry—endorse Joe Biden. Obama contacted fellow Democratic presidential candidates Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg—who invested in that Shadow app—to drop out simultaneously and endorse Biden. The nomination for Biden was orchestrated by Obama.


The best comment I came across with anyone sharing his understanding and with describing the Democratic Party came from a YouTube member responding to a video by one of this site’s recommended sources, Unapologetic. It was by a person named “Captain Obvious.”

“My stance is that the [Democrats] are no longer a real political party at all…they don’t function as one. What the Dems are is a fundraising corporation and a mechanism of control designed to flush away all of the [actual] Left’s efforts to obtain progressive policy. The main function of the Dems is simply to maximize fundraising profits which therefore makes them, first and foremost, a fundraising corporation.”


The Democratic Party, in its current form, is empty. It can only project—project image along with expressing rhetoric of being the so-called political party, of these times, which is moral and good. (Really—have you seen the Republicans?!) To act like they are the political party which is…enlightened.


When one considers which individual is most influential in the Democratic Party in its current form—a “fundraising corporation”—one may figure Bill Clinton. He brought Wall Street into the party in the 1990s. That is a very good guess. But, I think his party successor is more pernicious. 

Reason for this is because of timing. 

Bill Clinton was the only two-term Democratic-affiliated U.S. president during the realigning period of 1968 to 2004, in which the Republican Party won the presidency of the United States with 7 of 10 cycles. Clinton was to that period’s Democrats what Dwight Eisenhower was to his period’s Republicans. The Democrats won 7 of 9 cycles beginning with the realigning period of 1932 and with their last in 1964. Dwight Eisenhower was the only Republican U.S. president from that period. Both Eisenhower and Clinton were that one candidate their then-minority parties needed for their particular times. 

Barack Obama, with his first election in 2008, was the presiding president of a realigning period favoring his Democratic Party. From 2008 to 2020, the Democrats have won 3 of 4 cycles. And in history, no party which went 3-for-4 failed to experience a realigning period in their favoring. (At this time, I would estimate the Democrats win again in 2024, which would up them to 4-for-5. That would run an exact 40-year parallel experienced by the 1968 to 1984 Republicans.) 

Let us also remember that, during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary season, Clinton was verbally dismissive of Obama’s chances for nomination and general-election victory. That Jesse Jackson also had wins. The comment backfired badly on the 42nd U.S. president.

Last week, at least one reader thought I would cite Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez. No! “AOC” is formulaic. She is what the Democrats offer up these days to get people to think their incumbents are pretty cool people—who hold elected office—who are in tune and care. “AOC” is a…star. But, stars fade. And more stars rise.


This brings it back to Barack Obama. 

Obama is the first—and, so far, only—person who is black to be elected (and re-elected) president of the United States. He chose his prevailing Democratic-affiliated successor. And, just when it looks like people may rise up for something that is progressive and in need for improvement, he is there to help oppress them. To get them to not fight when fighting is what they need to do. Obama did this against Black Lives Matter. Obama did this against the players in the National Football League. And it is, highly likely, that anything more which surfaces will reveal Obama once again yielding his influence.

When Obama suffers embarrassment, it’s nothing that sticks for long.


There is no one from the Democratic Party who is more a distraction—and who is more harmful while supposedly coming across as highly trustworthy—than 44th U.S. president Barack Obama.

Monday, March 22, 2021

Let Us Entertain You

Spring arrives this week. After a winter that I personally look forward to ending, I am encouraged. Here in Metro Detroit, Michigan, we have been getting some March temperatures in the 60s. The Winter 2020/2021 season has been difficult for me, and understandably so, but I have found some relief with sources of entertainment.

Two months after it premiered on Netflix, I played catch-up and streamed Bridgerton. This period drama is from Shonda Rhimes’s Shondaland. And when I first watched a preview of it, with a voice narration by legendary Julie Anderews, I was immediately thinking of Downton Abbey (which, by the way, premiered on PBS ten years ago!). I thoroughly enjoyed Bridgerton. Based on Julia Quinn’s novels, Bridgerton is set in the Regency era and is about two supposed opposites—played by Phoebe Dynevor and Regé–Jean Page (above)—who fall in love after pretending they’re in love. 

I also streamed on Netflix a small-budget film, which could have been on my beloved Hallmark Channel, titled Love, Guaranteed. (I enjoy Hallmark Channel because it is, well, comfy.) This romantic comedy stars Rachael Leigh Cook, who has been the leading lady in numerous Hallmark productions (she co-produced this one), and Damon Wayans Jr. Love, Guaranteed is about a man who hired an online dating service which said it would deliver his love match within 1,000 dates. Wayans’s character is on No. 986. He senses fraud and the need to sue—and he hires Cook’s attorney character. Guess what happens next.

Having come across it on TV One (or was it VH1?), I also was enjoying reruns of the 1993–1998 Fox comedy series Living Single. It premiered one year before NBC’s immediate hit Friends. It starred Queen Latifah, Kim Coles, Kim Fields, and Erika Alexander. Timing was good because I have also been watching The Equalizer, a peculiar CBS reboot of the dark 1985–1990 CBS series which starred Edward Woodward. This also stars Queen Latifah. And something dawns on me: Queen Latifah is not only entertaining but she is really talented. She can turn nothing into something. In other words: I would not have bothered with a single rerun of Living Single if it were not for Queen Latifah. And I would not bother with The Equalizer if it did not star Queen Latifah. 

Being entertained, no matter by what or by who, may or may not be worthy of one’s time. But, we are human beings. It can be of use. It can be a nice distraction. Especially if that distraction can help.

Being entertained can also be a distraction to the detriment of all who are affected.

This was true with Donald Trump.

This has been going on, and for some time, with the Democratic Party.

It is happening in more than one form.

I will write more about this with my blog topic for next week, scheduled for Monday, March 29, 2021. It will also address something—and someone—who [is/are] a distraction to the detriment to us all. 

Monday, March 15, 2021

Justin Jackson Has His ‘Takeover’


NFL running back Justin Jackson has his own YouTube channel, The Takeover.

It is now among Progressives Chat’s “Recommendations.”


The Takeover with Justin Jackson

Disqus for progressiveschat-blogspot-com