Don't mock Marianne Williamson, Democrats need her spiritual politics in dark Trump era

[G_j]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/07/31/trump-era-calls-for-marianne-williamson-spiritual-politics-column/1878296001/

Williamson is not a dingbat interloper in the 2020 Democratic debates. It's been frustrating to see my brilliant friend caricatured based on ignorance.

It turns out Marianne Williamson isn’t just some kook who levitated into the presidential debates through the sheer force of love.  

On Tuesday night, she wowed the crowd with her well thought out expositions on race, the Flint water crisis, gun safety, reparations and the “dark psychic force of the collectivized hatred” that President Donald Trump has unleashed on this country.

Political observers seemed stunned to hear the best-selling author and teacher speaking so eloquently on issues near and dear to the average Democratic voter’s heart. They shouldn’t have been. A quick visit to her website or a Google search could have disabused them of the idea that she’s a dingbat interloper in the Democratic race.

..more..

[Bradshaw3]

1. No, we don't

She isn't getting mocked because she's a woman or because she's "spiritual" ( a word used a lot with little real meaning) or because people haven't done research on her. She's getting mocked because of her ridiculous views on a number of subjects and because she has no business being on the debate stage.

[Autumn]

2. Would you mock any other Democratic woman? nt

[Bradshaw3]

3. Don't try that BS

Surely you can see my presidential choice. As I said in my post it isn't about being a woman. It is about people who push BS (even if they are now playing down their anti-vaxx comments or if they are now anti-vaxx-ish) or any number of other problems I have with her on the stage. Nor do I care for billionaire men running vanity presidential campaigns. Got it now?

[Autumn]

6. I don't care who your choice is. So you are fine with mocking other Democratic women as long

as you don't support them? Got it.

[Bradshaw3]

8. You don't get anything

I clearly didn't say that so you are clearly fine with mischaracterizing what others say. Sorry if you got your feelings hurt because you believe in the woo. I don't want anti-science magical thinkers anywhere on sthis tage or in government. If that is too complicated or hurtful for your sensibilities you might try some crystals to ease the pain.

[Autumn]

9. You made yourself clear. nt

[Bradshaw3]

10. Thanks

[Autumn]

11. Don't thank me, it wasn't a complement. nt

[Bradshaw3]

12. Hahahaha! Complement?

Uh, you mean "compliment".

And you did mean it as a compliment. The spirits told me so.

[Autumn]

30. Wow. You got me there.

[Bradshaw3]

37. Thanks

[Clash City Rocker]

14. You made yourself clear, too, and that definitely isn't a compliment

You’re implying that if a candidate is a woman, we have to support her or we are misogynists. It is possible to dislike a female candidate for reasons other than her gender. And you sound ridiculous.

[Autumn]

16. No, I find the hypocrisy ridiculous. She's a Democratic woman mocked on a message board

for Democrats because she doesn't fit in your neat little box. I implied nothing. I didn't say she had to be supported. I asked if the poster would mock another Democratic woman. No implication at all.

[Clash City Rocker]

20. There's no hypocrisy involved

She hasn’t been criticized for being a woman, but for her views. Worse things have been said about pretty much every candidate, male and female. You can’t claim to support gender equality and then cry that “the boys were mean to me” every time you’re criticized. This is a competition for the most powerful job in the world. The people who run, and their supporters, need to be stronger than that.

[Autumn]

32. No she's being mocked for things she has said in her past lectures and books.

I've seen no criticisms on what she said last night. I didn't watch the debates, don't care to watch them. But I've not seen one thing posted about what she said on that stage. What I've seen is mocking of her and that if Harris can't control her talking they should have shut off her mic. Gender equality had nothing to do with it.

[MicaelS]

21. Gillibrand has been repeatedly criticized here...

For what she did to Franken.

Gabbard has been criticized here.

So do not try to play that card here.

[RhodeIslandOne]

23. She believed in praying AIDS away.

Now defend that and try again.

I also find it funny you support a man and are lecturing several posters supporting other women candidates.

[Autumn]

34. A lot of people believe prayer can heal. That's faith. What she did was co-found the

Los Angeles and Manhattan Centers for Living, where HIV/AIDS patients could connect with psychological and emotional resources. Something badly needed by people who are dying of AIDS and people who are HIV positive. That's action. I'm not lecturing anyone. I'm asking if it's okay to mock other Democratic women candidates. Obviously, it is. Since some seem to think if Harris can't control her talking her mic should be shut off. Never saw that suggested about any other candidates.

[brooklynite]

40. MY neat little box is: can she get elected?

With respect to Marianne Williamson, the answer is "no".

[BannonsLiver]

22. Which Democratic woman are you supporting?

I see the name of a billionaire white male in your sig. So much for practicing what we preach, eh?

[Hortensis]

29. Oh, so Steyer does have a supporter?! RCP says he's at 0%.

Just proves poll aggregators should never be trusted.

[Autumn]

33. I've been very open that I support Liz,Harris, Bernie and Inslee. It's kind of like

the undecided in your sig. Plus I like him.

[jberryhill]

27. I, for one, am happy to mock any deserving person regardless of gender

[brooklynite]

39. Depends, does she warrant mocking?

If it makes you feel better, I though Elizabeth Kucinich would be a much better candidate than Dennis would.

[srobertss]

4. I like her characterization of the "dark psychic force of the collectivized hatred"

Last edited Wed Jul 31, 2019, 11:22 PM - Edit history (1)

that Trump has supported. This follows the advice of Tim Wise following his experience on two campaigns against David Duke in California. Hearing the opposing candidate effectively call out Duke’s racism really galvanized the votes of people of color. That was a very vivid picture she drew. I expect/hope there will be more of this in the general election. So she’s providing a good model for this, though I can’t foresee ever voting for her in the primary. But she was the most googled candidate on that stage. So her message hit a nerve.

[uponit7771]

5. THANK YOU !!! Define Trump aligning himself with dark forces

[Skittles]

7. um........no

[OhZone]

13. My three Wiccan friends -

recommended I give her a listen.

I found I like a lot of what she says.

[bloom]

15. She came across well in the debate. That doesn't mean that she can be a serious candidate

Or someone we should take seriously.

Marianne Williamson is not a serious candidate for the presidency: She’s a self-help celebrity who openly disdained policy debate onstage Tuesday night. Worse than that, she looms as a menace to public health — someone who has attacked antidepressants and vaccination in a manner that “can literally kill people,” as my colleague German Lopez (who covers public health) put it. She has no business being on the debate stage; the more famous she gets, the more harm she can do.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/7/31/20748594/marianne-williamson-debate-democratic-july-2019-depression

[Grasswire2]

17. I don't think she came across well.

I hope to never see her again, anywhere.

[Clash City Rocker]

18. I don't think she'd be a good president, but I don't dislike her

I think she’s a little too new age-y for the country right now and probably wouldn’t get much accomplished if she was president. Plus I think someone should reach a certain level of office before running for President - Governor, Senator or Congressperson, preferably. Yes, I have the same concerns with Mayor Pete.

But she seems fairly bright. In the debates, she hasn’t fallen back on her talking points. She’s shifted back toward the center on some of her more extreme positions (notably vaccination, which is an important issue for me). She reminds me of a young Jerry Brown, someone who might inspire some people but isn’t ready for prime time.

[SharonAnn]

19. To my surprise, I am greatly impressed by some of her insights.

[Garrett78]

24. While correct about some things such as reparations, she's still a kook.

As another article pointed out, some of her positions are dangerously wrong. Woo-woo Williamson has no business being considered a candidate for POTUS. My psychic force says that she'll only cause us embarrassment if she manages to stay in the race much longer.

[NurseJackie]

25. Thank you!

she's still a kook.

Yes, she is. Thank you!

[samnsara]

26. i think we saw what happened when a chrismatic person gets the reins..

.....in my opinion they need more substance to run our country.

[Tarc]

28. We don't need an anti-vaxxer who thinks depression can be cured just by

thinking about it really really hard.

She does not belong on this stage.

[Paladin]

31. Yet another suspicious thread.

Be on guard, folks. Keep in mind what happened in 2016.

[jberryhill]

35. I do not prefer religious political leaders of any stripe

The world has had enough “spiritual politics”.

Rational decision making beats magic crystals every time.

[Autumn]

36. Neither do I. As a non believer I'm sick of religious shit.

In this climate of hate that Trump has created, I think someone talking about love and decency minus the religious preaching is a nice change. I can't even figure out how she made it to the debates.

[JudyM]

41. I agree with you. Speaking from the heart, to the heart, is different from talking policy.

We should be unafraid to speak of the absolute value of love and caring. The Republicans mock us for that but we should proudly own it. These are the most humanitarian, evolved and civilized values.

[GulfCoast66]

38. So you brought it up, I'm just responding...

Spiritual is just another word for superstitious.

Something that has no place in politics is the US.

I know and am fine that most Americans are religious. Most people are. Most of my friends are. But it has no place in politics. In my opinion.

Honorable people may disagree.