Quiz time! How different are Joe Biden and Donald Trump, really?

Donald Trump and Joe Biden are pretty similar guys, and no, I’m not just talking about their age. Or their hair plugs. They’ve also shared world views. For instance, in 1975, while Trump was being forced into an agreement not to discriminate against renters of color, Biden was also fighting integration by sponsoring anti-busing legislation. In 1990, referencing the famously racist 1988 George HW Bush campaign ad, Biden said, “one of my objectives, quite frankly, is to lock Willie Horton up in jail.” On the other (same?) hand, that same year John O’Donnell was writing a book that quoted Trump as saying, “… laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.”

While they’ve both built successful careers by hurting Black people, and yes, they both have the fake hair and teeth and world view… And yes, both Trump and Biden have been accused multiple times of inappropriately touching women… And yes, both Trump and Biden never apologize for anything they do… And yes, somehow both Trump and Biden have even said some pretty inappropriate things in public about children, you’ve gotta ask yourself, well, who hasn’t, right? I mean, you could really say any of that about any random two people, right? They can’t really be that similar, right? Right? No? Well, let’s find out together in a game I call…

Decision 2020: Orange You Glad We’re Biden Our Time?

Each question is either referring to Trump or Biden—but can you guess which one?

Click on all the links for all the answers and good luck!

———-

Who started his 2020 campaign with a fundraiser filled with corporate lobbyists and GOP donors?

Trump

or

Biden

During a presidential primary, when asked about his college grades, guess who lost his temper, interrupted with, “I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do, I suspect!” and proceeded to brazenly lie about his grades only to get caught and then lie about lying about his grades?

Trump

or

Biden

W ho once said about his state, “You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent,” then, in case you thought this was only a terrible racist joke, added, “I’m not joking.”?

Trump

or

Biden

During a Fox News interview, when asked about his viability as a candidate in the South, as he could be seen as a “Northeastern liberal”, guess who defended himself by bragging that he lived in a “slave state”?

Trump

or

Biden

Who consistently spoke affectionately, admiringly, effusively and eventually even eulogized one of America’s most disgusting and cowardly racists?

Trump

or

Biden

Who bragged about strong-arming the Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor while also neglecting to mention that that prosecutor was also investigating this braggart’s son?

Trump

or

Biden

Civil Asset Forfeiture is the process by which the government is allowed to take possession of everything you own if you are arrested—not convicted— just arrested. Guess who bragged about creating policy that extended Civil Asset Forfeiture as well as limited judges’ discretion during sentencing and added sixty new death penalties.

Trump

or

Biden

————

How’d you do? Lemme know in the comments and remember, even though polling has Joe Biden in the lead right now, at this same point in 2007 Hilary Clinton held the lead and in 2003 it was Joe Lieberman, whoever the hell that is.

Thanks for playing!


If this piece or this blog resonates with you, please consider a one-time “tip” or become a monthly “patron”…this space runs on love and reader support. Want more BGIM? Consider booking me to speak with your group or organization.

Comments will close on this post in 60-90 days; earlier if there are spam attacks or other nonsense.

Photo by JE SHOOTS from Unsplash

What’s happening to truth in America? Let me tell you

The national conversation over impeachment is getting louder every day. The Mueller Report seems to have turned the volume all the way up to 11. The conservatives, of course, are against this, but so are some liberals. The liberal reason is a fear that an impeachment trial could rule the president not guilty, emboldening him to be even more destructive. Their point is proven by the president’s inevitable reaction to all problems, including the Barr summary: blame the democrats and the media, and promote his enemies list. He does this even when he thinks he’s winning.

The liberal alternative to impeachment is to wait until 2020 and vote him out. The obvious problem with that solution could be explained to you by any and all of the 3,000,000 Hilary voters whose voices were silenced by the electoral college. But even if we sorted out the problems with the electoral college and somehow managed to actually vote him out, all the evidence suggests that he would be quite unwilling to go. Should he be forced, the violence that would follow is at the very least predictable.

So, if impeachment isn’t the answer and voting him out isn’t the answer, what is?

Unfortunately, not all problems have solutions, but don’t worry. It’s so much worse than you think because we’re not even looking at the actual problem.

The problem is that the Mueller report is about seeking the truth, but our cultural understanding of truth has shifted, especially around politics.

Political lies used to work very simply: politicians lie to their constituents in order to gain their votes, then the constituents who believe the lies would vote for those politicians. It still mostly works that way, but the president is changing that. His reasons for lying aren’t necessarily to get votes, as he probably never intended to win the presidency. The stunning frequency with which he lies suggest that he’s flatly incapable of anything else.

The shift is that his supporters don’t actually believe his lies. They know he’s lying, but they enjoy it. They enjoy it because they don’t see his lies as attempts to deceive them. Instead they see his lies as weapons he’s wielding for them, directed at their perceived enemies.

They’re just psyched to be owning the libs. Unfortunately, schadenfreude as a political platform will only destroy your society.

Truth only exists to the individual; everything else is consensus. The perceived weaponization of lies not only destroys the perception of truth, but the ability and desire to form consensus as well. Without those things society devolves and cruelty reigns. Power stays in the hands of worst and weakest among us. What should be a shared reality becomes a distorted and didactic performance. Things that are objectively normal become wrong and things that are objectively wrong become normal.

It’s easy to believe in American exceptionalism. It’s easy to think that that none of that could happen here, but ask yourself what if it could? What if your reality just came apart? What if something so seemingly undeniable as science could become fantasy with the sole purpose of defining you as inferior? What if you could be refused employment not because of a lack of education, experience or ability, but because of something as non sequitur as the hair that grows naturally from your body? What if simply pronouncing in public that your life matters could result in extensive government surveillance? What if things like this went on for so long that it became socially acceptable for the police to routinely and publicly execute people who they think look like you?

What if this had actually been happening all along, but just not to you?

What would you do?


If this piece or this blog resonates with you, please consider a one-time “tip” or become a monthly “patron”…this space runs on love and reader support. Want more BGIM? Consider booking me to speak with your group or organization.

Comments will close on this post in 60-90 days; earlier if there are spam attacks or other nonsense.

Photo by John Hain from Pixabay

Good faith isn’t always enough to close the gap

My father had a saying: “You wanna talk to somebody, you gotta meet them where they are… But some muthafuckas are just too far away.”

This saying applies to a lot of situations, but he would use it most often when it came to talking to white people about race.

Talking to white people about race is a hard thing to do. The main reason is that it’s not always clear just how far away some muthafuckas are. It can be difficult to tell if a white person is speaking in good or bad faith. If you discover they are speaking in bad faith, then they’re too far away and it seems easy to just not engage…

But it’s not necessarily that easy. There could be other white people involved who don’t recognize the bad faith and question you as to why you’ve ceased engagement. Suddenly you’re in a debate about the intentions of a person with bad faith while that person remains unaccountable and all the other white people just think you’re overly sensitive or paranoid.

But even if you can manage to successfully navigate all of that, stay away from those with bad faith and end up communicating with a white person who is speaking in good faith, there is still no guarantee you will be able to get them to understand.

It’s like the difference between the current president and Joe Biden. Obviously, the president is a man of bad faith. Joe Biden, on the other hand, has all the markings of a man of good faith. He always seems to have a kind word to say. He seems friendly and optimistic. Plus, he’s got that Black friend we all know about!

Unfortunately, there was that time he said of that Black friend, “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” Naturally, he later non-apologized saying, “And I really regret that some have taken totally out of context my use of the world ‘clean,’” as if that were the problem.

I know right now some of you are thinking So what? He said some bad stuff a long time ago, but he’s learned and he’s better. To you I say, first of all, if his current situation in being told not to touch people who don’t want to be touched is any sort of signifier—which I think it is—he hasn’t learned anything. He was publicly mocking the entire idea and then non-apologizing again just last Friday.

The problem isn’t that people just say some “bad stuff.” The problem is that if we accept that “bad stuff” from each other, then we also accept it from our leaders. In Biden’s case, some of that “bad stuff” he said in the 1970s was against integration and nearly 20 years later he was a leading proponent of mass incarceration. There’s a high cost to be paid for saying that “bad stuff” for such a long time, but Joe Biden doesn’t have to pay it. Countless Black men—or “predators,” as he called them—paid and will continue to pay.

Meanwhile, voters are just hoping Uncle Joe gets through this one OK. And I think that’s because we can all tell that he more or less operates in good faith. Unfortunately, good faith alone still leaves some muthafuckas too far away.


If this piece or this blog resonates with you, please consider a one-time “tip” or become a monthly “patron”…this space runs on love and reader support. Want more BGIM? Consider booking me to speak with your group or organization.

Comments will close on this post in 60-90 days; earlier if there are spam attacks or other nonsense.

Photo by David Zawila on Unsplash