HRC Article:

WASHINGTON — Last night, President Biden signed the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law, which includes a provision inserted by Speaker Mike Johnson blocking healthcare for the transgender children of military servicemembers. This provision, the first anti-LGBTQ+ federal law enacted since the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, will rip medically necessary care from the transgender children of thousands of military families – families who make incredible sacrifices in defense of the country each and every day. The last anti-LGBTQ+ federal law that explicitly targeted military servicemembers was Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which went into effect in 1994.

Biden’s press release:

No service member should have to decide between their family’s health care access and their call to serve our Nation.

  • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is not, in general, true, or else everyone would be doing it. Trump is a right-wing populist who’s taking advantage of people’s dissatisfaction with the status quo and the Democrats’ unwillingness to change it. You need both sides for this equation to make sense.

    • _core@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Exactly. The Ds wanted to keep things the way they were, to the point they threw Biden in last minute in 2020 for the Ds to rally around. The Ds had a supermajority with Obama and they did jack shit with it. Unless they abandon the status quo stance they have they will continue to lose, which with Pelosi pushing the old guy over AOC shows they haven’t learned yet and will cling to the way things are until we boot them out with prejudice.

      • Tinidril@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes. Neoliberalism fails wherever it is tried, and the US managed to export it across the western world. What’s going on in the US isn’t unique and the same dynamics apply.

          • Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            It’s absolutely the takeaway. Did you even read your own link? It’s not about “incumbents” it’s about “establishments”.

            Mexico also had an aging president who named a younger woman as his successor in a 2024 election, and she won in a landslide. The difference was that Obrador and Sheinbaum are left populist. That is despite the fact that Mexico is less educated, more religious, and more culturally conservative.

              • Tinidril@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                What do you think western establishment political philosophy is? You can pick from neoliberalism or neoconservativism. There’s not much difference.

                • just_another_person@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  The article has nothing to do with “western establishment politics”.

                  Also, you just played your idiotic hand right there by even making this comment. Take your shit back to Magacialist territory.

                  • Tinidril@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    Since the pandemic hit in 2020, incumbents have been removed from office in 40 of 54 elections in Western democracies

                    This is what happens. Neoliberals trap voters between two nearly identical parties. They try punching blue and life gets worse. Then they try punching red and life gets worse. Then they try punching blue…

                    Eventually a populist movement rises up. The more conservative party gets swept up and the neoliberal party resists. Left populists threaten power, and right populists don’t, so neoliberals risk defeat by ignoring populism altogether. The populist movement therefore shifts right where it gets traction and fascism breaks out again. That’s how fascism gains a foothold every single time, going all the way back to the French revolution.

                    The fact that Mexico was the great exception this time around with it’s left wing populist government should tell you something, but apparently it’s something you don’t want to know.