by wj
It can be all too easy, it the flood of stuff happening these days, to overlook something which would be stunning in other times. I wonder what all there might be….
For example, consider these tweets from last week:
Events in Charlottesville unacceptable & musnt be tolerated @USNavy forever stands against intolerance & hatred…
— Admiral John Richardson, Chief of Naval Operations
No place for racial hatred or extremism in @USMC. Our core values of Honor, Courage, and Commitment frame the way Marines live and act.
— General Robert Neller, Commandant of the Marine Corps
The Army doesn't tolerate racism, extremism, or hatred in our ranks. It's against our Values and everything we've stood for since 1775.
— General Mark Milley, Army Chief of Staff
I stand with my fellow service chiefs in saying we're always stronger together-it's who we are as #Airmen.
— General Dave Goldfein, Air Force Chief of Staff
I stand with my fellow Joint Chiefs in condemning racism, extremism & hatred. Our diversity is our strength.
— General Joseph Lengyel, Chief of the National Guard Bureau
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was traveling (in Beijing), and so a bit late to the party. But he weighed in as well:
I can absolutely and unambiguously tell you there is no place — no place — for racism and bigotry in the U.S. military or in the United States as a whole.
— General Joe Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
Let's think about that for just a second. Every single one of the Joint Chiefs came out and rejected the comments of the President of the United States. They didn't denounce their commander-in-chief by name, of course, which they shouldn't — that would cross the line into insubordination. But there is absolutely no question what occasioned their statements.
I simply cannot remember a time when the leaders of the military, any of them, let alone all of them, stood up immediately and did something like this. Any other time, it would have been both headline news across the country and occasioned a huge uproar — not to mention the individual in question being fired instantly. This week? It did get mentioned, but it was a one day wonder at most. The times we live in!
What else has happened in the last week that would, in more normal times, have gotten big mention?
it illuminates a weak spot in our system of government.
it illuminates a weak spot in our system of government.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-trump-wants-part-ways-steve-bannon-170026442.html
https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-trump-wants-part-ways-steve-bannon-170026442.html
In boot camp, some of our DIs told us that there was no black or white in the Marine Corps. Only green. Then they would tell us, “OK, you light green Marines take a smoking break. You dark green Marines pick up butts.”
In boot camp, some of our DIs told us that there was no black or white in the Marine Corps. Only green. Then they would tell us, “OK, you light green Marines take a smoking break. You dark green Marines pick up butts.”
If you stop and think about it for maybe just another secons or two, you’ll realize that the Joint Chiefs all agreed with POTUS.
No, wait! I’m on Obsidian Wings. Y’all won’t figure it out.
If you stop and think about it for maybe just another secons or two, you’ll realize that the Joint Chiefs all agreed with POTUS.
No, wait! I’m on Obsidian Wings. Y’all won’t figure it out.
Y’all won’t figure it out.
Yup, it went right over my head.
Y’all won’t figure it out.
Yup, it went right over my head.
Clearly “agree” has a very different meaning there in the alternate reality. Very different . . . as in, 180 degrees removed.
Clearly “agree” has a very different meaning there in the alternate reality. Very different . . . as in, 180 degrees removed.
How does it feel when the stock market goes up because you got fired?
How does it feel when the stock market goes up because you got fired?
Trump has definitely said a sentence that agrees with all of those tweets. and if that was all there was to it, arcs would be totally right.
Trump has definitely said a sentence that agrees with all of those tweets. and if that was all there was to it, arcs would be totally right.
Somehow, reading a written statement, with visible reluctance, followed by enthusiastically repudiating it the next day, doesn’t much indicate that the former was real.
A competent actor, or politician, would at least make the statement look sincere. Just one of many things that Trump can’t manage.
Somehow, reading a written statement, with visible reluctance, followed by enthusiastically repudiating it the next day, doesn’t much indicate that the former was real.
A competent actor, or politician, would at least make the statement look sincere. Just one of many things that Trump can’t manage.
No, wait! I’m on Obsidian Wings…
So where do you hail from, arcs ?
And did you really believe that’s where your POTUS is coming from ?
If so, you genuinely have my sympathy; if not, you really need to sharpen up your windup act.
No, wait! I’m on Obsidian Wings…
So where do you hail from, arcs ?
And did you really believe that’s where your POTUS is coming from ?
If so, you genuinely have my sympathy; if not, you really need to sharpen up your windup act.
The last two sentences of this August 16th article: http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant
The last two sentences of this August 16th article: http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant
For some reason a scene from Disney’s the Sword in the Stone springs to mind. Merlin has disappeared, but then his disembodied voice says, “I’m goooooone, but then I am not gone.”
My take on this: DJT came the conclusion that having Bannon around is a net minus for him.
For some reason a scene from Disney’s the Sword in the Stone springs to mind. Merlin has disappeared, but then his disembodied voice says, “I’m goooooone, but then I am not gone.”
My take on this: DJT came the conclusion that having Bannon around is a net minus for him.
I don’t see Trump being that analytical. I think it was entirely about Bannon contradicting him over the folks in Charlottesville.
I don’t see Trump being that analytical. I think it was entirely about Bannon contradicting him over the folks in Charlottesville.
I appreciate – extremely – the joint chiefs making their positions clear.
Trump says Nazis and the KKK are evil, racism is evil, violence is evil.
Then he says the folks who were marching with the Nazis and KKK weren’t all bad, and that the alt-left (by whom I assume he means antifa) are just as much to blame.
Also that we are destroying our nation’s history and culture, and the beauty of our cities and parks, if we remove statues celebrating the CSA.
So, I get a mixed message from the man. Most of the words (in this case) are literally factual, but the overall meaning is less than clear.
Hard to know what he believes, if anything. Hard to know if “belief”, as we normally think of that word, is even part of his cognitive repertoire.
I appreciate – extremely – the joint chiefs making their positions clear.
Trump says Nazis and the KKK are evil, racism is evil, violence is evil.
Then he says the folks who were marching with the Nazis and KKK weren’t all bad, and that the alt-left (by whom I assume he means antifa) are just as much to blame.
Also that we are destroying our nation’s history and culture, and the beauty of our cities and parks, if we remove statues celebrating the CSA.
So, I get a mixed message from the man. Most of the words (in this case) are literally factual, but the overall meaning is less than clear.
Hard to know what he believes, if anything. Hard to know if “belief”, as we normally think of that word, is even part of his cognitive repertoire.
I believe what DJT believes in is DJT. Anything else is not even on the list. He may not know much, but he is very focused on and attentive to what he thinks is good for him.
He also seems to have a self-destructive streak. That, I cannot explain.
I believe what DJT believes in is DJT. Anything else is not even on the list. He may not know much, but he is very focused on and attentive to what he thinks is good for him.
He also seems to have a self-destructive streak. That, I cannot explain.
Also that we are destroying our nation’s history and culture, and the beauty of our cities and parks, if we remove statues celebrating the CSA.
I blame our minimal recollection of WWII on the dearth of Hitler statues in the United States.
Also that we are destroying our nation’s history and culture, and the beauty of our cities and parks, if we remove statues celebrating the CSA.
I blame our minimal recollection of WWII on the dearth of Hitler statues in the United States.
“I blame our minimal recollection of WWII on the dearth of Hitler statues in the United States.”
And statues of Kaiser Wilhelm also too.
“I blame our minimal recollection of WWII on the dearth of Hitler statues in the United States.”
And statues of Kaiser Wilhelm also too.
I blame our minimal recollection of WWII on the dearth of Hitler statues in the United States…
Maybe we need to better train our historians in monumental sculpture ?
I blame our minimal recollection of WWII on the dearth of Hitler statues in the United States…
Maybe we need to better train our historians in monumental sculpture ?
Fine post, wj.
“Though passion may have strained, it must not break the bonds of our affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as they surely will be, by the better angels our nature.”
Abraham Lincoln, First Inaugural, March 4 1861
Consider the date and what followed.
Still, thank you Joint Chiefs. Now remove the trouble.
Fine post, wj.
“Though passion may have strained, it must not break the bonds of our affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as they surely will be, by the better angels our nature.”
Abraham Lincoln, First Inaugural, March 4 1861
Consider the date and what followed.
Still, thank you Joint Chiefs. Now remove the trouble.
“Maybe we need to better train our historians in monumental sculpture ?”
I, for one, look forward to Trump being bronzed and set up as a statue on the National Mall, as a warning to later generations.
Next week would be good. Just tell He Trump that he’s got a appointment for “special” spray tan application.
“Maybe we need to better train our historians in monumental sculpture ?”
I, for one, look forward to Trump being bronzed and set up as a statue on the National Mall, as a warning to later generations.
Next week would be good. Just tell He Trump that he’s got a appointment for “special” spray tan application.
I wish I’d remembered this. Someone on Twitter had to remind me that He Trump and Mitch McConnell were known before they were born.
I wish I’d remembered this. Someone on Twitter had to remind me that He Trump and Mitch McConnell were known before they were born.
FAKE STATUE.
Fingers are too big.
FAKE STATUE.
Fingers are too big.
Hitler seems not to have been into statues (of himself). I believe I have never seen an original one anywhere. Heads and busts on the other hand were extremly common. Apart from that paintings and authorized photographs were the standard way he was depicted in the public.
As for Wilhelm II. I found a list of just 31 monuments (worldwide) dedicated to him, none initiated by himself* and not all with an actual depiction (as opposed to a mere inscription). And that includes some not in existence anymore.
*he had countless built for his family/ancestors though. That way he could bathe in their glory without the charge of vanity (fruitless, he had an ego not that dissimilar from The Donald).
Hitler seems not to have been into statues (of himself). I believe I have never seen an original one anywhere. Heads and busts on the other hand were extremly common. Apart from that paintings and authorized photographs were the standard way he was depicted in the public.
As for Wilhelm II. I found a list of just 31 monuments (worldwide) dedicated to him, none initiated by himself* and not all with an actual depiction (as opposed to a mere inscription). And that includes some not in existence anymore.
*he had countless built for his family/ancestors though. That way he could bathe in their glory without the charge of vanity (fruitless, he had an ego not that dissimilar from The Donald).
Good luck and stay safe to all ObWi people marching in Boston or elsewhere today. May the Force be with you.
Good luck and stay safe to all ObWi people marching in Boston or elsewhere today. May the Force be with you.
speaking of people who deserve statues…
Breitbart currently has a headline “‘Populist Hero’ Stephen K. Bannon Returns Home to Breitbart News”
it has 17,000+ comments.
a hero indeed.
speaking of people who deserve statues…
Breitbart currently has a headline “‘Populist Hero’ Stephen K. Bannon Returns Home to Breitbart News”
it has 17,000+ comments.
a hero indeed.
http://www.theonion.com/articleslideshow/onion-remembers-steve-bannon-trumps-most-encrusted-56697?utm_content=Main&utm_campaign=SF&utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing
http://www.theonion.com/articleslideshow/onion-remembers-steve-bannon-trumps-most-encrusted-56697?utm_content=Main&utm_campaign=SF&utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing
We’re all aware that the CEOs on Trump’s two Presidential advisory councils were resigning left and right. But in other news you may have missed, the members of the President’s Commission on the Arts and Humanities resigned en masse in a blistering letter :
And just to add to the fun, conspiracy theorists note that the first letters of each paragraph spell . . . RESIST.
However my first thought was “Trump appointed a commission on the arts???” Since when does he care? But no, turns out it was a holdover from the Obama administration, which he apparently hadn’t gotten around to disbanding.
P.Sent. The White House also announced this morning that the President and First Lady will be skipping the Kennedy Center honors this year. Couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that 3 of the 5 honorees have already announced that they wouldn’t attend if Trump was there….
We’re all aware that the CEOs on Trump’s two Presidential advisory councils were resigning left and right. But in other news you may have missed, the members of the President’s Commission on the Arts and Humanities resigned en masse in a blistering letter :
And just to add to the fun, conspiracy theorists note that the first letters of each paragraph spell . . . RESIST.
However my first thought was “Trump appointed a commission on the arts???” Since when does he care? But no, turns out it was a holdover from the Obama administration, which he apparently hadn’t gotten around to disbanding.
P.Sent. The White House also announced this morning that the President and First Lady will be skipping the Kennedy Center honors this year. Couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that 3 of the 5 honorees have already announced that they wouldn’t attend if Trump was there….
%$#@ autocomplete! That was, obviously, P.S. not P.Sent
%$#@ autocomplete! That was, obviously, P.S. not P.Sent
russell! (and Tony P.?)
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/19/544684355/bostons-free-speech-rally-organizers-deny-links-to-white-nationalists
russell! (and Tony P.?)
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/19/544684355/bostons-free-speech-rally-organizers-deny-links-to-white-nationalists
This is the headline, btw: “Boston Right-Wing ‘Free Speech’ Rally Dwarfed By Counterprotesters”
This is the headline, btw: “Boston Right-Wing ‘Free Speech’ Rally Dwarfed By Counterprotesters”
This is the headline, btw: “Boston Right-Wing ‘Free Speech’ Rally Dwarfed By Counterprotesters”
Yay! Fingers crossed that all of those good people stay safe.
This is the headline, btw: “Boston Right-Wing ‘Free Speech’ Rally Dwarfed By Counterprotesters”
Yay! Fingers crossed that all of those good people stay safe.
the report from the barricades:
the venue of the rally was the Parkman bandstand, which is basically a large gazebo toward the south end of the common.
the cops used barrier fence to cordon off maybe a half acre around the bandstand, then set up another barrier fence probably another 150 feet outside the first ring.
so, two sort concentric barrier fences around the bandstand, with a no-go area in betwwen. free speech ralliers inside the inner fence, including the bandstand itself. protestors outside the outer fence. cops, and only cops, in the middle.
well done, boston PD.
the turnout for the free speech crew was probably a couple dozen. maybe 50, probably fewer. they just about filled the bandstand. the rest of their designated area was empty.
the protestors numbered in thousands, maybe tens of thousands.
the free speech rally permit was for noon to 2:00 PM. at about 12:45, they packed it in and went home.
and that was that.
nobody got hurt, weather was good, cops kept it all safe. a good day.
boston has its issues, but i am kind of pleased to be here today.
as a bonus, got a selfie with vermin supreme.
the report from the barricades:
the venue of the rally was the Parkman bandstand, which is basically a large gazebo toward the south end of the common.
the cops used barrier fence to cordon off maybe a half acre around the bandstand, then set up another barrier fence probably another 150 feet outside the first ring.
so, two sort concentric barrier fences around the bandstand, with a no-go area in betwwen. free speech ralliers inside the inner fence, including the bandstand itself. protestors outside the outer fence. cops, and only cops, in the middle.
well done, boston PD.
the turnout for the free speech crew was probably a couple dozen. maybe 50, probably fewer. they just about filled the bandstand. the rest of their designated area was empty.
the protestors numbered in thousands, maybe tens of thousands.
the free speech rally permit was for noon to 2:00 PM. at about 12:45, they packed it in and went home.
and that was that.
nobody got hurt, weather was good, cops kept it all safe. a good day.
boston has its issues, but i am kind of pleased to be here today.
as a bonus, got a selfie with vermin supreme.
good job, Boston.
you’ll always be my favorite city.
good job, Boston.
you’ll always be my favorite city.
“as a bonus, got a selfie with vermin supreme.”
FAME!
We’ll make sure to capture that moment on your statue, you betcha.
“as a bonus, got a selfie with vermin supreme.”
FAME!
We’ll make sure to capture that moment on your statue, you betcha.
looks like the final tally, numbers-wise, was 50 free speechers, about 15,000 counterprotestors.
so, 300 to 1.
and yeah, i was hilariously excited to get a selfie with vermin. there was line. he is an extremely chill dude, it was fun to meet him.
looks like the final tally, numbers-wise, was 50 free speechers, about 15,000 counterprotestors.
so, 300 to 1.
and yeah, i was hilariously excited to get a selfie with vermin. there was line. he is an extremely chill dude, it was fun to meet him.
I don’t get it. Why counter-demonstrate against free speech?
I don’t get it. Why counter-demonstrate against free speech?
nobody was demonstrating against free speech.
the organizers of the rally style themselves as advocates of free speech, rather than any particular political ideology. i’m not really interested in debating their motives, i’m fine with giving them the benefit of the doubt.
the people they invited to speak were primarily from the “alt-right” stew of white supremacists, neo-fascists, and general right-wing wackos.
a week after charlottesville, folks felt like they to demonstrate their resistance to those views.
not the freedom to speak, but the content of (at least some of) the speech.
nobody was demonstrating against free speech.
the organizers of the rally style themselves as advocates of free speech, rather than any particular political ideology. i’m not really interested in debating their motives, i’m fine with giving them the benefit of the doubt.
the people they invited to speak were primarily from the “alt-right” stew of white supremacists, neo-fascists, and general right-wing wackos.
a week after charlottesville, folks felt like they to demonstrate their resistance to those views.
not the freedom to speak, but the content of (at least some of) the speech.
so, 300 to 1.
Probiotic effect! We can win this!
so, 300 to 1.
Probiotic effect! We can win this!
Why counter-demonstrate against free speech?
and weren’t the Nazis actually socialist?
Why counter-demonstrate against free speech?
and weren’t the Nazis actually socialist?
On the other hand, kill me now.
On the other hand, kill me now.
Oh frabjous day! Calloo, callay! I’m so glad a) nobody got hurt and b) they were so dramatically outnumbered. Nice work, y’all. Onward and upward!
Oh frabjous day! Calloo, callay! I’m so glad a) nobody got hurt and b) they were so dramatically outnumbered. Nice work, y’all. Onward and upward!
So there’s now a meme reading
“WE DEMAND THIS SCULPTURE TO BE TORN DOWN
BECAUSE WE ALL HATE LAUNDRY”
superimposed on a photo of the clothespin in Philly. I did not create it.
So there’s now a meme reading
“WE DEMAND THIS SCULPTURE TO BE TORN DOWN
BECAUSE WE ALL HATE LAUNDRY”
superimposed on a photo of the clothespin in Philly. I did not create it.
who among us does not hate laundry?
final tally for boston was about 40,000 to maybe 50.
one older woman who was waving an american flag was knocked down when some antifas dudes tried to pull the flag out of hands.
the antifas kiddos yelled at a guy who was being interviewed as he was trying to join the free speechers. other counterprotestors intervened and helped the guy get past the barrier fence and go join the free speechers.
don’t have details, but the BLM folks seemed to have some conflicts with the cops.
antifas, please stay home. BLM, I support your message but maybe figure out more skillful ways to negotiate your issues with the cops.
but that’s me, an old straight white guy with a day job and a nice little ranch house in the burbs talking.
the antifas thing needs some attention. i appreciate what they think they are trying to do, but they’re handing the supremacists and nazis everything they want, on a plate.
skillful means, y’all.
a big thank you to the Boston PD, they kept a lid on it. from all sides. well done.
who among us does not hate laundry?
final tally for boston was about 40,000 to maybe 50.
one older woman who was waving an american flag was knocked down when some antifas dudes tried to pull the flag out of hands.
the antifas kiddos yelled at a guy who was being interviewed as he was trying to join the free speechers. other counterprotestors intervened and helped the guy get past the barrier fence and go join the free speechers.
don’t have details, but the BLM folks seemed to have some conflicts with the cops.
antifas, please stay home. BLM, I support your message but maybe figure out more skillful ways to negotiate your issues with the cops.
but that’s me, an old straight white guy with a day job and a nice little ranch house in the burbs talking.
the antifas thing needs some attention. i appreciate what they think they are trying to do, but they’re handing the supremacists and nazis everything they want, on a plate.
skillful means, y’all.
a big thank you to the Boston PD, they kept a lid on it. from all sides. well done.
from the day.
if you hear or read right wingers going on about people who were “prevented from joining the rally”, this is from immediately after that incident.
the dude that starts talking about halfway through is pretty much central casting boston.
a heads up: he says a bad word.
from the day.
if you hear or read right wingers going on about people who were “prevented from joining the rally”, this is from immediately after that incident.
the dude that starts talking about halfway through is pretty much central casting boston.
a heads up: he says a bad word.
The flag incident is being touted to the heavens by the right-wing echo chamber as a brutal leftist assault. They have a lot of experience at working the refs.
It sounds as if for the most part BLM was trying its damnedest to keep the counter-protest peaceful, including forming cordons for the Nazis to get away peacefully and preventing counter-protesters from escalating. With 40,000 people in one place there are going to be some incidents.
The flag incident is being touted to the heavens by the right-wing echo chamber as a brutal leftist assault. They have a lot of experience at working the refs.
It sounds as if for the most part BLM was trying its damnedest to keep the counter-protest peaceful, including forming cordons for the Nazis to get away peacefully and preventing counter-protesters from escalating. With 40,000 people in one place there are going to be some incidents.
Since this is an open thread, a query that’s a couple of days past due —
“Blood and soil”, I know about. Actually I don’t perceive it as specifically Nazi, but a pretty generally shared bit of European right-wing nationalism. But the number of generic right-wing nationalists at Charlottesville from, say. the relics of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, can be safely overlooked. Here and now, it’s Nazi, duh.
But “Jews will not replace us?” WTF is that about? The association is beyond clear, but the specific slogan is new and bizarre to me. I can only conjecture that there is some brand-new fascist meme, probably related to the Hungarian anti-Semitic anti-Soros campaign, and it just hasn’t got to where I am yet. But that seems kinda lame, even for White Nationalists.
Anybody know where it comes from?
Since this is an open thread, a query that’s a couple of days past due —
“Blood and soil”, I know about. Actually I don’t perceive it as specifically Nazi, but a pretty generally shared bit of European right-wing nationalism. But the number of generic right-wing nationalists at Charlottesville from, say. the relics of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, can be safely overlooked. Here and now, it’s Nazi, duh.
But “Jews will not replace us?” WTF is that about? The association is beyond clear, but the specific slogan is new and bizarre to me. I can only conjecture that there is some brand-new fascist meme, probably related to the Hungarian anti-Semitic anti-Soros campaign, and it just hasn’t got to where I am yet. But that seems kinda lame, even for White Nationalists.
Anybody know where it comes from?
“Jews will not replace us”?
I hate it when people misplace quote marks, especially when it’s me.
BTW does anyone else get a kick out of hearing really nasty Republicans (e.g., Lindsey Graham) responding about all those Fine People by explaining what fine people actually do when they find themselves marching with people who wear Nazi and Fascist symbolism and are shouting “Blood and soil” and the like?
Shorter GOP: Be somewhere else. Immediately.
Couldn’t say it better myself, though I might improve on the lack of obscenity in the quoted statements.
“Jews will not replace us”?
I hate it when people misplace quote marks, especially when it’s me.
BTW does anyone else get a kick out of hearing really nasty Republicans (e.g., Lindsey Graham) responding about all those Fine People by explaining what fine people actually do when they find themselves marching with people who wear Nazi and Fascist symbolism and are shouting “Blood and soil” and the like?
Shorter GOP: Be somewhere else. Immediately.
Couldn’t say it better myself, though I might improve on the lack of obscenity in the quoted statements.
7. While it is not true that all participants in the demonstration were neo-Nazis, some clearly were as evidenced by their Roman salutes and displays of the swastika. The organizers of the rally screwed up by allowing groups with this orientation at the rally, and allowing this kind of behavior by those who were present. Neo-Nazis are freaks and losers with a dangerous philosophy that can only detract from any serious political event. [Update: It has been claimed that the organizers of the rally specifically invited neo-Nazi organizations to attend the rally, or made no effort to exclude them when they knew they would be showing up. This indeed seems to be true, as I previously suspected, and was a very severe lapse of judgment by the organizers of “Unite the Right.”]
Some Initial Thoughts on Charlottesville
7. While it is not true that all participants in the demonstration were neo-Nazis, some clearly were as evidenced by their Roman salutes and displays of the swastika. The organizers of the rally screwed up by allowing groups with this orientation at the rally, and allowing this kind of behavior by those who were present. Neo-Nazis are freaks and losers with a dangerous philosophy that can only detract from any serious political event. [Update: It has been claimed that the organizers of the rally specifically invited neo-Nazi organizations to attend the rally, or made no effort to exclude them when they knew they would be showing up. This indeed seems to be true, as I previously suspected, and was a very severe lapse of judgment by the organizers of “Unite the Right.”]
Some Initial Thoughts on Charlottesville
From CharlesWT’s link
The psychology of the Left is aptly described in the “Mass Psychology of Leftism” section of Ted Kaczynski’s “The Industrial Society and Its Future” (this not to say that Kaczynski is an admirable person or that his wider anti-tech ideology is correct).
Kaczynski accurately characterizes the Left as follows: (followed by usual drek, emph. mine)
I usually don’t click on your links, and I’m reminded why I don’t…
From CharlesWT’s link
The psychology of the Left is aptly described in the “Mass Psychology of Leftism” section of Ted Kaczynski’s “The Industrial Society and Its Future” (this not to say that Kaczynski is an admirable person or that his wider anti-tech ideology is correct).
Kaczynski accurately characterizes the Left as follows: (followed by usual drek, emph. mine)
I usually don’t click on your links, and I’m reminded why I don’t…
the dude that starts talking about halfway through is pretty much central casting boston
Speaking purely for myself, I love that dude. Righteous anger, righteous actions.
the dude that starts talking about halfway through is pretty much central casting boston
Speaking purely for myself, I love that dude. Righteous anger, righteous actions.
“Jews will not replace us” (a reference to the view that it is Jewish political power that is fostering mass immigration as a strategy to replace the white majority with immigrants).
Porlock Junior, this is from CharlesWT’s link at attackthesystem.com. I have no idea if this is correct, but it’s the only explanation I have seen.
“Jews will not replace us” (a reference to the view that it is Jewish political power that is fostering mass immigration as a strategy to replace the white majority with immigrants).
Porlock Junior, this is from CharlesWT’s link at attackthesystem.com. I have no idea if this is correct, but it’s the only explanation I have seen.
I usually don’t click on your links, and I’m reminded why I don’t…
Well, the author is a left-anarchist, more or less, with some conspiracy theory thrown in apparently. For example, the quote in #44 which he seems to agree with.
But, I think he does a pretty good job describing the Charlottesville situation.
I usually don’t click on your links, and I’m reminded why I don’t…
Well, the author is a left-anarchist, more or less, with some conspiracy theory thrown in apparently. For example, the quote in #44 which he seems to agree with.
But, I think he does a pretty good job describing the Charlottesville situation.
russell,
I am not familiar with the antifa movement in the US, but in Europe, they have been traditionally violent anarchists. People who actively seek violent confrontation with extreme right wing lunatics. In Finland, the term has been hijacked successfully by Putinists. “The antifascist committee” is the name used by the local Putinist fringe who were courting extreme left in early 2000’s before turning to extreme right.
So, as European, I am quite sceptic of anyons calling themselves antifa. In the best case, they are violent rabble who will ruin your peaceful demonstration, trying to turn it into a riot. In the worst case, they are doing this knowingly serving foreign interests.
russell,
I am not familiar with the antifa movement in the US, but in Europe, they have been traditionally violent anarchists. People who actively seek violent confrontation with extreme right wing lunatics. In Finland, the term has been hijacked successfully by Putinists. “The antifascist committee” is the name used by the local Putinist fringe who were courting extreme left in early 2000’s before turning to extreme right.
So, as European, I am quite sceptic of anyons calling themselves antifa. In the best case, they are violent rabble who will ruin your peaceful demonstration, trying to turn it into a riot. In the worst case, they are doing this knowingly serving foreign interests.
antifas, please stay home. BLM, I support your message but maybe figure out more skillful ways to negotiate your issues with the cops.
Posted by: russell | August 19, 2017 at 09:51 PM
Co-sign. I understand the frustrations of those on the left who are tired of “losing” and want more aggressive and strident tactics, but I tend to hold my team to a higher standard than the other side. Antifas frequently fall below that standard and BLM occasionally has (but had been better since the primaries).
I am not familiar with the antifa movement in the US, but in Europe, they have been traditionally violent anarchists. People who actively seek violent confrontation with extreme right wing lunatics.
Posted by: Lurker | August 20, 2017 at 07:44 AM
I view the American Antifas as an outgrowth of their European forebears which I don’t hold in high regard. Although to be fair, I assume some of the younger folks claiming to be Antifa may not appreciate the baggage associated with the movement.
antifas, please stay home. BLM, I support your message but maybe figure out more skillful ways to negotiate your issues with the cops.
Posted by: russell | August 19, 2017 at 09:51 PM
Co-sign. I understand the frustrations of those on the left who are tired of “losing” and want more aggressive and strident tactics, but I tend to hold my team to a higher standard than the other side. Antifas frequently fall below that standard and BLM occasionally has (but had been better since the primaries).
I am not familiar with the antifa movement in the US, but in Europe, they have been traditionally violent anarchists. People who actively seek violent confrontation with extreme right wing lunatics.
Posted by: Lurker | August 20, 2017 at 07:44 AM
I view the American Antifas as an outgrowth of their European forebears which I don’t hold in high regard. Although to be fair, I assume some of the younger folks claiming to be Antifa may not appreciate the baggage associated with the movement.
If someone is writing about the rally, and thinks that
The most reasonable response thus far has come from, ironically, President Trump himself for daring to point out that violent street fighting involving “hatred, bigotry and violence” actually occurred on “many sides” during the course of this disaster, rather than merely taking one side as if violent Communists and other left-wing extremists are not dangerous and undesirable in a manner that parallels their fascist/Nazi rivals
I really doubt they have a grasp of what was going on. You really ought to do better than this.
If someone is writing about the rally, and thinks that
The most reasonable response thus far has come from, ironically, President Trump himself for daring to point out that violent street fighting involving “hatred, bigotry and violence” actually occurred on “many sides” during the course of this disaster, rather than merely taking one side as if violent Communists and other left-wing extremists are not dangerous and undesirable in a manner that parallels their fascist/Nazi rivals
I really doubt they have a grasp of what was going on. You really ought to do better than this.
a heads up: he says a bad word.
I found his apology toward the end to be amusing. I would totally hang out with that dude.
a heads up: he says a bad word.
I found his apology toward the end to be amusing. I would totally hang out with that dude.
from my limited exposure to them, i would say that antifa tends to be young folks – 18 to maybe 30 – with a highly romantic vision of themselves as undersung heroes fighting the imminent advent of a truly fascist regime.
they are provocateurs, really, and are generally looking for physical confrontation. if they don’t find it, they may create it.
i affirm their resistance to undemocratic economic institutions, and to political authoritarianism. i think the tactics they employ are naive, self-indulgent, and counterproductive.
they mostly strike me as kind of dilletante anarchists, in love with their image of themselves as “sticking it to the man”, but with no real understanding of the consequences of their actions.
that said, their medic corps are pretty solid.
there is also a much broader and more diverse anarchist community in the US, who run the gamut as far as their embrace of forcible means. a lot of them are basically pacifist.
in any public setting, when i see someone dressed in black with a masked face, i avoid them. some kind of mess is likely on its way.
from my limited exposure to them, i would say that antifa tends to be young folks – 18 to maybe 30 – with a highly romantic vision of themselves as undersung heroes fighting the imminent advent of a truly fascist regime.
they are provocateurs, really, and are generally looking for physical confrontation. if they don’t find it, they may create it.
i affirm their resistance to undemocratic economic institutions, and to political authoritarianism. i think the tactics they employ are naive, self-indulgent, and counterproductive.
they mostly strike me as kind of dilletante anarchists, in love with their image of themselves as “sticking it to the man”, but with no real understanding of the consequences of their actions.
that said, their medic corps are pretty solid.
there is also a much broader and more diverse anarchist community in the US, who run the gamut as far as their embrace of forcible means. a lot of them are basically pacifist.
in any public setting, when i see someone dressed in black with a masked face, i avoid them. some kind of mess is likely on its way.
also – ted kaczynski was a paranoid schizophrenic who isolated himself from the world and expressed his paranoia by blowing people up.
i would take his analyses with a grain of salt.
also – ted kaczynski was a paranoid schizophrenic who isolated himself from the world and expressed his paranoia by blowing people up.
i would take his analyses with a grain of salt.
from the Statement Of Purpose page on the attack the system site CharlesWT linked to:
that’s…. a lot of -isms.
one wouldn’t expect anarchists to be so hung up on categorization.
from the Statement Of Purpose page on the attack the system site CharlesWT linked to:
that’s…. a lot of -isms.
one wouldn’t expect anarchists to be so hung up on categorization.
anarchism is great until you have to pay rent.
I know some folks who pursue an anarchist path, sincerely and peacefully, into adult life. It requires some sacrifice on their part. it’s not for amateurs.
most of the antifa folks are kids.
anarchism is great until you have to pay rent.
I know some folks who pursue an anarchist path, sincerely and peacefully, into adult life. It requires some sacrifice on their part. it’s not for amateurs.
most of the antifa folks are kids.
a friend of mine shared a funny video with me. it’s a clip of zigaboo modeliste, great drummer for the Meters, on some gig or other. he wasn’t happy with somebody’s playing, or general vibe, or whatever.
he turns to the guy and says:
“You’re messing with my ism!”
Words to live by.
a friend of mine shared a funny video with me. it’s a clip of zigaboo modeliste, great drummer for the Meters, on some gig or other. he wasn’t happy with somebody’s playing, or general vibe, or whatever.
he turns to the guy and says:
“You’re messing with my ism!”
Words to live by.
they mostly strike me as kind of dilletante anarchists, in love with their image of themselves as “sticking it to the man”, but with no real understanding of the consequences of their actions.
These sorts, on both the left and right, are the embodiment of why sophomores got that label. It’s relatively easy to get enthused about a nonsense philosophy, based on its abstract beauty and ability to explain everything, while someone else is paying your bills. Most outgrow it once they get jobs and have to start living in the real world. Some do not.
Until now, the most visible current examples have been from the libertarians. Including of those who don’t grow up and accept reality — cf Congressman Ryan.
When I was in college, most were still Marxists. Real ones, not fans of Russian communism. They put a lot of energy into their philosophical disagreements with the “Trots” (Trotskyites). I never did figure out how to break thru their rose tinted glasses to show them reality, and eventually decided it would just take time and life smacking them on the nose repeatedly.
they mostly strike me as kind of dilletante anarchists, in love with their image of themselves as “sticking it to the man”, but with no real understanding of the consequences of their actions.
These sorts, on both the left and right, are the embodiment of why sophomores got that label. It’s relatively easy to get enthused about a nonsense philosophy, based on its abstract beauty and ability to explain everything, while someone else is paying your bills. Most outgrow it once they get jobs and have to start living in the real world. Some do not.
Until now, the most visible current examples have been from the libertarians. Including of those who don’t grow up and accept reality — cf Congressman Ryan.
When I was in college, most were still Marxists. Real ones, not fans of Russian communism. They put a lot of energy into their philosophical disagreements with the “Trots” (Trotskyites). I never did figure out how to break thru their rose tinted glasses to show them reality, and eventually decided it would just take time and life smacking them on the nose repeatedly.
what wj said.
what wj said.
The Berlin district of Spandau saw a failed Neo-Nazi demonstration on Saturday. It intended to march to the place where the prison was where Rudolf Hess was imprisoned until he committed suicide in August 1987 (aged 93). (The prison got torn down immediately afterwards in order not to create a place of pilgrimage).
They failed because counter-protesters blocked all routes until the guys (about 800) gave up in desperation. It stayed peaceful since the usual suspects (black bloc etc.) were absent and the police thoroughly checked the nazis in advance for weaponry.
The Berlin district of Spandau saw a failed Neo-Nazi demonstration on Saturday. It intended to march to the place where the prison was where Rudolf Hess was imprisoned until he committed suicide in August 1987 (aged 93). (The prison got torn down immediately afterwards in order not to create a place of pilgrimage).
They failed because counter-protesters blocked all routes until the guys (about 800) gave up in desperation. It stayed peaceful since the usual suspects (black bloc etc.) were absent and the police thoroughly checked the nazis in advance for weaponry.
I suppose its my age but I find myself feeling really contemptuous of antifa. I think violence is self-indulgent. And counter-productive. That’s probably my real objection–I dont like assholes who show up and turn some kind of public event into a story about them getting into fights. I dont buy them as heors for getting into fights I see them as saboteurs, intentionally or otherwise.
I suppose its my age but I find myself feeling really contemptuous of antifa. I think violence is self-indulgent. And counter-productive. That’s probably my real objection–I dont like assholes who show up and turn some kind of public event into a story about them getting into fights. I dont buy them as heors for getting into fights I see them as saboteurs, intentionally or otherwise.
What wonkie said. “Self-indulgent” is exactly right.
What wonkie said. “Self-indulgent” is exactly right.
I see them as saboteurs, intentionally or otherwise.
I agree. I’m not sure whether things will deteriorate into a full scale civil war (and I’m very worried that they might), but street fights aren’t the way to go in any case.
I see them as saboteurs, intentionally or otherwise.
I agree. I’m not sure whether things will deteriorate into a full scale civil war (and I’m very worried that they might), but street fights aren’t the way to go in any case.
what everybody said
what everybody said
The US doesn’t have enough young people for a full-scale civil war.
The US doesn’t have enough young people for a full-scale civil war.
Not enough? How do you figure?
Or maybe my question is How many do you think it would take?
Not enough? How do you figure?
Or maybe my question is How many do you think it would take?
I should have said the ratio of young/old people is too low.
A TL;DR argument for the need for youthful populations for civil wars.
Even after controlling for the fact that more youthful countries are less developed and have more vulnerable political regimes, my research finds that a large difference in the number of young adults compared to the number of older adults—“relative cohort size”—can help predict civil war, particularly insurgent-based civil wars.
The Young and the Restless: Population Age Structure and Civil War (.pdf)
I should have said the ratio of young/old people is too low.
A TL;DR argument for the need for youthful populations for civil wars.
Even after controlling for the fact that more youthful countries are less developed and have more vulnerable political regimes, my research finds that a large difference in the number of young adults compared to the number of older adults—“relative cohort size”—can help predict civil war, particularly insurgent-based civil wars.
The Young and the Restless: Population Age Structure and Civil War (.pdf)
Antifa/black bloc relate to protesters like hooligans to football(soccer) fans. Both disguise their desire for vandalism as something ‘noble’. The former just sport (pun unintended) a pdeudo-intellectual veneer and lack a regular timetable.
Antifa/black bloc relate to protesters like hooligans to football(soccer) fans. Both disguise their desire for vandalism as something ‘noble’. The former just sport (pun unintended) a pdeudo-intellectual veneer and lack a regular timetable.
From cleek’s link: “We work towards a cultivation of harmony ……..”
So much for anarchy.
I’m working my way towards the totality of the solar eclipse near Grand Island, Nebraska. It crosses I-70 smack dab down the centerline.
Got my NASA certified eclipse glasses ready.
Great finish to the road trip, lest it’s cloudy.
From cleek’s link: “We work towards a cultivation of harmony ……..”
So much for anarchy.
I’m working my way towards the totality of the solar eclipse near Grand Island, Nebraska. It crosses I-70 smack dab down the centerline.
Got my NASA certified eclipse glasses ready.
Great finish to the road trip, lest it’s cloudy.
I read that rump and true believers believe the eclipse is a hoax.
Either that or Obama is conspiring to blacken the sun. Sun God rump’s staff is awaiting the parsing and reading of rump’s morning toilet for their public strategy.
I read that rump and true believers believe the eclipse is a hoax.
Either that or Obama is conspiring to blacken the sun. Sun God rump’s staff is awaiting the parsing and reading of rump’s morning toilet for their public strategy.
This from this link
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/bannon-departure-white-house-timeline
Bannon frequently butt heads with Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, and national security adviser H.R McMaster.
How does one conjugate ‘to butt heads’?
This from this link
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/bannon-departure-white-house-timeline
Bannon frequently butt heads with Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, and national security adviser H.R McMaster.
How does one conjugate ‘to butt heads’?
Bannon frequently butt
Who can argue with that ?
Bannon frequently butt
Who can argue with that ?
I read that rump and true believers believe the eclipse is a hoax.
It is. It was perpetrated to distract people so Confederate graves could be dug up. Didn’t you get the memo?
I read that rump and true believers believe the eclipse is a hoax.
It is. It was perpetrated to distract people so Confederate graves could be dug up. Didn’t you get the memo?
How does one conjugate ‘to butt heads’?
The same way you conjugate “I text [sic] him yesterday to say I’d be there at 2:00.”
I think in the heads of people who say this it’s “tex-ed,” or they just can’t wrap their heads around the double sound of tex-t-ed.
How does one conjugate ‘to butt heads’?
The same way you conjugate “I text [sic] him yesterday to say I’d be there at 2:00.”
I think in the heads of people who say this it’s “tex-ed,” or they just can’t wrap their heads around the double sound of tex-t-ed.
they just can’t wrap their heads around the double sound of tex-t-ed.
Which goes for “butt-ed” too, of course. And maybe there’s an unconscious echo of irregular bite/bit.
I bet Language Log has something about it, but I don’t have time to check right now.
But “bet” is an even better example. “Butt/butt” is just like “bet/bet” (present/past).
🙂 I do love language in the morning.
they just can’t wrap their heads around the double sound of tex-t-ed.
Which goes for “butt-ed” too, of course. And maybe there’s an unconscious echo of irregular bite/bit.
I bet Language Log has something about it, but I don’t have time to check right now.
But “bet” is an even better example. “Butt/butt” is just like “bet/bet” (present/past).
🙂 I do love language in the morning.
There are lots of things that happen where I just say “but but?” and sometimes a few more buts.
There are lots of things that happen where I just say “but but?” and sometimes a few more buts.
I’m guessing that they hear “butted” and think that they heard “butt head”. Although that does turn “butted heads” into something repetitively redundant….
I’m guessing that they hear “butted” and think that they heard “butt head”. Although that does turn “butted heads” into something repetitively redundant….
One of those “just have to share” items:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/08/21/daily-202-the-elites-strike-back-getting-under-trump-s-skin/599a4e1230fb0435b8208f3a/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_daily202-8a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
On Trump’s reaction to elites fleeing him. I was particularly taken by the description of the wannabe kid from Queens’ reaction to the honorees at the Kennedy Center refusing to meet with him. More than anything else, I wouldn’t be surprised if that is the sort of thing that drives him to resign. Eventually.
One of those “just have to share” items:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/08/21/daily-202-the-elites-strike-back-getting-under-trump-s-skin/599a4e1230fb0435b8208f3a/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_daily202-8a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
On Trump’s reaction to elites fleeing him. I was particularly taken by the description of the wannabe kid from Queens’ reaction to the honorees at the Kennedy Center refusing to meet with him. More than anything else, I wouldn’t be surprised if that is the sort of thing that drives him to resign. Eventually.
wj, I can’t believe he will ever resign. Or: what mountain range of excuses would it take for him to decide that his glorious gloriousness would be more served by going than by staying?
wj, I can’t believe he will ever resign. Or: what mountain range of excuses would it take for him to decide that his glorious gloriousness would be more served by going than by staying?
I don’t see Trump resigning, for any reason. If he goes it will not be by his own choice.
I don’t see Trump resigning, for any reason. If he goes it will not be by his own choice.
I can see him resigning if he decides that the alternative (staying) would be worse.
For example, if he became convinced that he would be impeached (let alone removed), I think he would resign — while claiming victory. Specifically, claiming that he had accomplished what he promised, indeed more than any President in history in so short a time (or maybe even at all), and so didn’t need to stay. Because, after all, if he got removed by Congress, that would make him (look like) a “loser”, which he cannot abide.
Could he be convinced of that? In particular, that a majority of Congress, including members of his own party, would vote against him. Hard to say. But he does have a history (see his CEO advisory councils) of noticing something bad coming and attempting to preempt it.
The other possibility is that he gets a subpoena for his tax records. Or just gets told that Congress, which isn’t bound by the IRS’s confidentiality constraints, has order a copy to look at — which, obviously, his enemies there might then make public. Given how panicky he gets on the subject, it seems possible that the mere threat could motivate him to arrange to resign rather than have it happen.
I can see him resigning if he decides that the alternative (staying) would be worse.
For example, if he became convinced that he would be impeached (let alone removed), I think he would resign — while claiming victory. Specifically, claiming that he had accomplished what he promised, indeed more than any President in history in so short a time (or maybe even at all), and so didn’t need to stay. Because, after all, if he got removed by Congress, that would make him (look like) a “loser”, which he cannot abide.
Could he be convinced of that? In particular, that a majority of Congress, including members of his own party, would vote against him. Hard to say. But he does have a history (see his CEO advisory councils) of noticing something bad coming and attempting to preempt it.
The other possibility is that he gets a subpoena for his tax records. Or just gets told that Congress, which isn’t bound by the IRS’s confidentiality constraints, has order a copy to look at — which, obviously, his enemies there might then make public. Given how panicky he gets on the subject, it seems possible that the mere threat could motivate him to arrange to resign rather than have it happen.
I suppose I could vaguely see one of those scenarios happening.
What would he pillage on the way out? Would there be anything left in the White House?
I suppose I could vaguely see one of those scenarios happening.
What would he pillage on the way out? Would there be anything left in the White House?
he’s currently trying to bankrupt the Secret Service.
he’s currently trying to bankrupt the Secret Service.
This one has the best headline on that subject:
The Secret Service Is Out of Money Because of Trump’s Big Stupid Family
This one has the best headline on that subject:
The Secret Service Is Out of Money Because of Trump’s Big Stupid Family
RIP Brian Aldiss.
RIP Brian Aldiss.
RIP Brian Aldiss.
One of the greats.
“Civilization is the distance man has placed between himself and his excreta.” —Brian Aldiss
RIP Brian Aldiss.
One of the greats.
“Civilization is the distance man has placed between himself and his excreta.” —Brian Aldiss
I guess I could maybe see him resigning if the alternative was crossing one of his Russian mafia buddies.
Better a loser than to sleep with the fishes.
Other than that, I think he’d prefer to burn the place down than go peacefully.
We’ll see. It could be that he’ll do his whole four years. Maybe eight.
I’m all out of predictions these days.
I guess I could maybe see him resigning if the alternative was crossing one of his Russian mafia buddies.
Better a loser than to sleep with the fishes.
Other than that, I think he’d prefer to burn the place down than go peacefully.
We’ll see. It could be that he’ll do his whole four years. Maybe eight.
I’m all out of predictions these days.
Since this is an open thread, and I’m too damned lazy to go start a new one:
What the hell is going on with the Navy? Two collisions in two months, plus another ship run aground in Tokyo?
Are we just having a bad year?
Since this is an open thread, and I’m too damned lazy to go start a new one:
What the hell is going on with the Navy? Two collisions in two months, plus another ship run aground in Tokyo?
Are we just having a bad year?
i like the Russian GPS spoofing theory (because it ties in with the driverless cars thing).
i like the Russian GPS spoofing theory (because it ties in with the driverless cars thing).
I’m all out of predictions these days.
My sister has embraced an old family tradition, and started a “ship’s pool” on when he’ll be gone. Still waiting for all the selections to come in. I’ll be interested to see how my guess (April Fool’s Day 2018) compares to the rest of the family.
I’m all out of predictions these days.
My sister has embraced an old family tradition, and started a “ship’s pool” on when he’ll be gone. Still waiting for all the selections to come in. I’ll be interested to see how my guess (April Fool’s Day 2018) compares to the rest of the family.
Two collisions this year, one last year, and one in 2014. Before that? 2004, 2000 and 1989. So a troubling pattern emerging.
You can see why the CNO has ordered a world-wide Operational pause* and a sweeping review of safety procedures and training. Something is seriously not right.
* Not sure exactly what an “operational pause” amounts to. But having all commanders stand down for a couple of days is not something trivial.
Two collisions this year, one last year, and one in 2014. Before that? 2004, 2000 and 1989. So a troubling pattern emerging.
You can see why the CNO has ordered a world-wide Operational pause* and a sweeping review of safety procedures and training. Something is seriously not right.
* Not sure exactly what an “operational pause” amounts to. But having all commanders stand down for a couple of days is not something trivial.
GPS spoofing would account for running aground, if that was what was happening. But for running into other ships, you need to have radar problems and/or nobody looking at the screen or out the window (although the latest one was while it was still dark).
GPS spoofing would account for running aground, if that was what was happening. But for running into other ships, you need to have radar problems and/or nobody looking at the screen or out the window (although the latest one was while it was still dark).
Adam Silverman at BJ had a post about the Navy collisions — and the spoofing theory — last night.
Adam Silverman at BJ had a post about the Navy collisions — and the spoofing theory — last night.
GPS spoofing would account for running aground, if that was what was happening.
the idea here is that the GPS satellites transmit at such low power that it is possible to mask their signal with local, low-power transmitters. you don’t need to fool every ship on the earth, you just need to get near the ones you want to confuse. so, get a little boat, get it near a Navy ship, turn on your spoofer and watch the fun.
this would be easy to verify, if we knew the merchant ships involved had GPS problems at the same time.
GPS spoofing would account for running aground, if that was what was happening.
the idea here is that the GPS satellites transmit at such low power that it is possible to mask their signal with local, low-power transmitters. you don’t need to fool every ship on the earth, you just need to get near the ones you want to confuse. so, get a little boat, get it near a Navy ship, turn on your spoofer and watch the fun.
this would be easy to verify, if we knew the merchant ships involved had GPS problems at the same time.
yikes
yikes
Sounds like they need something like encrypted keys from the satellites and inertial navigation to guard against spoofing.
Sounds like they need something like encrypted keys from the satellites and inertial navigation to guard against spoofing.
I am a bit ashamed to say that I never paid much attention to the “war” part of “cyberwar.” As flaming p-o-ed as I can get about scammy spoofed phone calls, I never consciously sat up and imagined ongoing cyberwar as much more than an ongoing low-level irritant.
Sailors have died. That’s otherwise known as plain old war, isn’t it?
/rant
I am a bit ashamed to say that I never paid much attention to the “war” part of “cyberwar.” As flaming p-o-ed as I can get about scammy spoofed phone calls, I never consciously sat up and imagined ongoing cyberwar as much more than an ongoing low-level irritant.
Sailors have died. That’s otherwise known as plain old war, isn’t it?
/rant
It’s arguably an act of war. IF that’s actually what happened — and all we have so far is speculation bouncing around the web.
Also, these kinds of low level sparring events, complete with casualties, happen from time to time, without escalating into anything bigger.
It’s arguably an act of war. IF that’s actually what happened — and all we have so far is speculation bouncing around the web.
Also, these kinds of low level sparring events, complete with casualties, happen from time to time, without escalating into anything bigger.
I can see him resigning if he decides that the alternative (staying) would be worse.
For example, if he became convinced that he would be impeached (let alone removed), I think he would resign — while claiming victory.
I’ve always thought there was a chance he might resign. Apart from the plausible possibilities mentioned above, I also think if he saw a possibility of his businesses (money!) suffering longterm, he’d find a way to go. Also, if it was nothing but pain, i.e. no fun, longterm, that might do it. But nothing but pain and no fun from his point of view means almost continuous criticism at the same time as no more rallies with worshipful crowds, no media approval (even Fox), etc etc. And constantly looming and advancing legal problems. And yes, particularly looking like a loser, that would do it.
I saw the play Girl from the North Country tonight. Contrary to the fairly rave reviews, Mr GftNC and I were not that impressed, at least by the play itself. The songs of course were great, and the singers and musicians were excellent, but in a way that’s what sunk the play. It takes place in Duluth in 1934, times are extremely hard and there are many tragic storylines wending their way toward some kind of ending. But we were unmoved, which can only have been the fault of the play. FWIW and in case any others in London are considering it, or if it comes to the US, we think it was completely unbalanced by the songs and vocal performances, and that the play was almost like a first draft, or a work in progress, compared to the musical side. If it gets substantially reworked, that might make a big difference.
I can see him resigning if he decides that the alternative (staying) would be worse.
For example, if he became convinced that he would be impeached (let alone removed), I think he would resign — while claiming victory.
I’ve always thought there was a chance he might resign. Apart from the plausible possibilities mentioned above, I also think if he saw a possibility of his businesses (money!) suffering longterm, he’d find a way to go. Also, if it was nothing but pain, i.e. no fun, longterm, that might do it. But nothing but pain and no fun from his point of view means almost continuous criticism at the same time as no more rallies with worshipful crowds, no media approval (even Fox), etc etc. And constantly looming and advancing legal problems. And yes, particularly looking like a loser, that would do it.
I saw the play Girl from the North Country tonight. Contrary to the fairly rave reviews, Mr GftNC and I were not that impressed, at least by the play itself. The songs of course were great, and the singers and musicians were excellent, but in a way that’s what sunk the play. It takes place in Duluth in 1934, times are extremely hard and there are many tragic storylines wending their way toward some kind of ending. But we were unmoved, which can only have been the fault of the play. FWIW and in case any others in London are considering it, or if it comes to the US, we think it was completely unbalanced by the songs and vocal performances, and that the play was almost like a first draft, or a work in progress, compared to the musical side. If it gets substantially reworked, that might make a big difference.
at the same time as no more rallies with worshipful crowds
This is part of why I’m skeptical of the possibility that he’ll leave. Worshipful crowds will be conjurable for a long time to come, if not forever. I suspect he’s mind-bogglingly insulated from the full force of his unpopularity.
Ditto losing money: he has always lost money. No one knows what his net worth actually is (“That beggar is worth $8 billion more than me” or whatever he is supposed to have said to his daughter once on the street in NYC.) It dawned on me during the campaign that his “genius” isn’t for making money, it’s for making money flow through him to create the illusion that he has a lot of it. That seems to me, in fact, to be a defining image of our era.
So he’s totally used to his businesses being in flux.
The legal stuff….maybe that’s different. Maybe finally he won’t be able to intimidate his enemies with lawsuits.
at the same time as no more rallies with worshipful crowds
This is part of why I’m skeptical of the possibility that he’ll leave. Worshipful crowds will be conjurable for a long time to come, if not forever. I suspect he’s mind-bogglingly insulated from the full force of his unpopularity.
Ditto losing money: he has always lost money. No one knows what his net worth actually is (“That beggar is worth $8 billion more than me” or whatever he is supposed to have said to his daughter once on the street in NYC.) It dawned on me during the campaign that his “genius” isn’t for making money, it’s for making money flow through him to create the illusion that he has a lot of it. That seems to me, in fact, to be a defining image of our era.
So he’s totally used to his businesses being in flux.
The legal stuff….maybe that’s different. Maybe finally he won’t be able to intimidate his enemies with lawsuits.
Of course, I suppose it could get to the point where he fears that no one will play with him (in the money-flowing game) any more, not even the Russians. But it then seems like he won’t really realize that until it’s too late.
Of course, I suppose it could get to the point where he fears that no one will play with him (in the money-flowing game) any more, not even the Russians. But it then seems like he won’t really realize that until it’s too late.
Well, at the rate that charities and other organizations are cancelling previously planned events for Mar-a-Lago, the financial impact is starting to show. Just one of those events, as I read the reports, would have been worth upwards of $700,000 NET. Even if you’re rich, that ain’t chicken feed.
Well, at the rate that charities and other organizations are cancelling previously planned events for Mar-a-Lago, the financial impact is starting to show. Just one of those events, as I read the reports, would have been worth upwards of $700,000 NET. Even if you’re rich, that ain’t chicken feed.
It is most likely he will essentially retreat to the White House and sulk until his term is up.
It is most likely he will essentially retreat to the White House and sulk until his term is up.
It is most likely he will essentially retreat to the White House and sulk until his term is up.
No. If it comes down that way, he will retreat to his fantasies, his penthouse, the golf courses. He doesn’t really like being “in” the White House. He’s made this pretty clear.
I predict he will finally shoot somebody on 5th avenue. It will be him.
It is most likely he will essentially retreat to the White House and sulk until his term is up.
No. If it comes down that way, he will retreat to his fantasies, his penthouse, the golf courses. He doesn’t really like being “in” the White House. He’s made this pretty clear.
I predict he will finally shoot somebody on 5th avenue. It will be him.
Trump’s Afghan speech,
More of the same, but with his shit smeared on the same old policy. 6th grade bullying tactics posing as grown up policy. A blunder, wrapped in a utterly failed view of the world that he previously denigrated, and now shares.
Such imagination!
Tilt toward India…..(not really wise).
He owns it, now. Just like his predecessors and their similarly pointless pronouncements.
Trump’s Afghan speech,
More of the same, but with his shit smeared on the same old policy. 6th grade bullying tactics posing as grown up policy. A blunder, wrapped in a utterly failed view of the world that he previously denigrated, and now shares.
Such imagination!
Tilt toward India…..(not really wise).
He owns it, now. Just like his predecessors and their similarly pointless pronouncements.
Ditto losing money
as far as I can tell, he and his family are making shitloads from his being POTUS.
if they’re not, it’s not for lack of trying.
Ditto losing money
as far as I can tell, he and his family are making shitloads from his being POTUS.
if they’re not, it’s not for lack of trying.
one of those events is worth $700K.
the price of a club membership went up $100K.
my guess is he came out ahead. plus, next year he’ll get all the CSA nostalgia trade.
one of those events is worth $700K.
the price of a club membership went up $100K.
my guess is he came out ahead. plus, next year he’ll get all the CSA nostalgia trade.
Tilt toward India…..(not really wise).
Well, given that the alternative is tilting towards Pakistan…. Can you honestly say that seems like a superior choice.
Tilt toward India…..(not really wise).
Well, given that the alternative is tilting towards Pakistan…. Can you honestly say that seems like a superior choice.
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch is taking a stand regarding the grift, I see.
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch is taking a stand regarding the grift, I see.
Wonder if it will occur to him to recuse himself when the emolluments cases arrive at the Supreme Court.
Wonder if it will occur to him to recuse himself when the emolluments cases arrive at the Supreme Court.
not mentioned in sapient’s cite – Trump operates the DC hotel in violation of the terms of his lease.
he’s a greedy crook.
not mentioned in sapient’s cite – Trump operates the DC hotel in violation of the terms of his lease.
he’s a greedy crook.
So, open thread and all:
Do not share this recipe past anyone who reads this blog:
Take 2 cups blended Scotch (Chivas or Johnnie Walker) and one cup honey (get unheated honey from a local beekeeper) and muddle a few sprigs of tarragon. Take the tarragon out in about a week. Leave the concoction alone for a couple of months or maybe a few months. Results will vary depending on the honey. Obviously, make more. Drink it.
Never tell anyone where you got this.
So, open thread and all:
Do not share this recipe past anyone who reads this blog:
Take 2 cups blended Scotch (Chivas or Johnnie Walker) and one cup honey (get unheated honey from a local beekeeper) and muddle a few sprigs of tarragon. Take the tarragon out in about a week. Leave the concoction alone for a couple of months or maybe a few months. Results will vary depending on the honey. Obviously, make more. Drink it.
Never tell anyone where you got this.
if they’re not, it’s not for lack of trying.
That’s certainly true. But it’s possible it may eventually turn out to be a bad (financial) move for him as time goes by. Of course, this could just be wishful thinking. I get JanieM’s point about having been in negative equity before, but I’m hoping he was relieved when that ended, and doesn’t want to go there again. Plus, he’s older now. And possibly partially blind, after yesterday….
if they’re not, it’s not for lack of trying.
That’s certainly true. But it’s possible it may eventually turn out to be a bad (financial) move for him as time goes by. Of course, this could just be wishful thinking. I get JanieM’s point about having been in negative equity before, but I’m hoping he was relieved when that ended, and doesn’t want to go there again. Plus, he’s older now. And possibly partially blind, after yesterday….
I don’t care how much money he does or does not make long term.
The man is abusing his office to enrich himself. Whether that nets out positive for him or not is beside the point.
I don’t care how much money he does or does not make long term.
The man is abusing his office to enrich himself. Whether that nets out positive for him or not is beside the point.
Oh, and have we discussed the Secret Service self-dealing scam yet?
Of course, the agents’ expenses are all being paid to Trump properties.
Oh, and have we discussed the Secret Service self-dealing scam yet?
Of course, the agents’ expenses are all being paid to Trump properties.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4781714/Is-Russia-developing-GPS-spoofing-system.html
Daily Mail. but, it does link to the report mentioned in the article, which does confirm the report.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4781714/Is-Russia-developing-GPS-spoofing-system.html
Daily Mail. but, it does link to the report mentioned in the article, which does confirm the report.
The man is abusing his office to enrich himself. Whether that nets out positive for him or not is beside the point.
Maybe it’s beside your point, but it wasn’t beside mine, which was to argue with wj over whether he’d ever leave office voluntarily.
The man is abusing his office to enrich himself. Whether that nets out positive for him or not is beside the point.
Maybe it’s beside your point, but it wasn’t beside mine, which was to argue with wj over whether he’d ever leave office voluntarily.
which was to argue with wj over whether he’d ever leave office voluntarily.
In case that isn’t clear: whether he nets out positive or negative is, IMO, very much to the point of what might or might not motivate him to leave on his own.
Granted it’s just an abstract discussion, maybe of no interest to some people, maybe of no practical use in/to the world, unlike the rest of what gets said here.
which was to argue with wj over whether he’d ever leave office voluntarily.
In case that isn’t clear: whether he nets out positive or negative is, IMO, very much to the point of what might or might not motivate him to leave on his own.
Granted it’s just an abstract discussion, maybe of no interest to some people, maybe of no practical use in/to the world, unlike the rest of what gets said here.
I don’t care how much money he does or does not make long term.
The man is abusing his office to enrich himself. Whether that nets out positive for him or not is beside the point.
What JanieM said. The point of the comment was that if HE thinks he’s going to lose out financially in the long term, it might make him resign.
I don’t care how much money he does or does not make long term.
The man is abusing his office to enrich himself. Whether that nets out positive for him or not is beside the point.
What JanieM said. The point of the comment was that if HE thinks he’s going to lose out financially in the long term, it might make him resign.
I don’t think that Trump is his own man. Just a reminder: “I’m not a puppet. You’re a puppet.”
I don’t think that Trump is his own man. Just a reminder: “I’m not a puppet. You’re a puppet.”
“I’m not a puppet. You’re a puppet.”
Yup, maybe Putin could make him resign. But at this stage, it’s rather hard to imagine why he would want to. He’s no good to Putin at the moment, hasn’t been able to repay P’s investment, but would Pence be any better? Of course, you may be saying that even if he wanted to resign, Putin wouldn’t let him, and that’s an interesting speculation…
“I’m not a puppet. You’re a puppet.”
Yup, maybe Putin could make him resign. But at this stage, it’s rather hard to imagine why he would want to. He’s no good to Putin at the moment, hasn’t been able to repay P’s investment, but would Pence be any better? Of course, you may be saying that even if he wanted to resign, Putin wouldn’t let him, and that’s an interesting speculation…
Of course, you may be saying that even if he wanted to resign, Putin wouldn’t let him
I don’t think he wants to resign, but he’s also very good for Putin, IMO. Also oligarchs, who probably have an interests in Trump’s wealth. I don’t think he’s an independent actor by any means. Obviously, we don’t know all the details.
Of course, you may be saying that even if he wanted to resign, Putin wouldn’t let him
I don’t think he wants to resign, but he’s also very good for Putin, IMO. Also oligarchs, who probably have an interests in Trump’s wealth. I don’t think he’s an independent actor by any means. Obviously, we don’t know all the details.
Well, Putin’s goal, I believe, was to have Trump disrupt our system just by being a candidate. I don’t think he had any more expectation of Trump actually winning than anyone else did.
Of course, once Trump did win, there may have seemed a possibility for additional benefits. Temporarily. But by now, it’s pretty clear that those won’t happen. In fact, Putin’s getting more sanctions (written into law, where they’re much harder to change) precisely because Congress feels the need to make sure Trump won’t do Putin a favor.
So at this point, the question for Putin becomes, what will cause the maximum further disruption? And Trump resigning under pressure (which is how Trump fans would see it) would seem to be a good bet.
Well, Putin’s goal, I believe, was to have Trump disrupt our system just by being a candidate. I don’t think he had any more expectation of Trump actually winning than anyone else did.
Of course, once Trump did win, there may have seemed a possibility for additional benefits. Temporarily. But by now, it’s pretty clear that those won’t happen. In fact, Putin’s getting more sanctions (written into law, where they’re much harder to change) precisely because Congress feels the need to make sure Trump won’t do Putin a favor.
So at this point, the question for Putin becomes, what will cause the maximum further disruption? And Trump resigning under pressure (which is how Trump fans would see it) would seem to be a good bet.
I repeat, rump will not resign or recognize any impeachment proceedings to oust him.
bobbyp is on the money with his pronouncements regarding the Afghanistan debacle.
I would add that in his well-enunciated projectile vomit speech on the subject, rump raised the specter of India increasing its involvement in Afghanistan. While elements in nuclear Pakistan’s paranoid military and government are villainous, involving their mortal enemy, nuclear India, on their western flank will be a disaster and could lead to nuclear war on the Indian sub-Continent.
They despise each other.
But rump wants to use nuclear weapons. When he stared into the sun yesterday, take it as his willingness to stare into the flash of a million suns given off by nuclear conflagration.
Look what the republican party and their fucking vermin base are doing to us.
They must be destroyed as soon as possible.
I repeat, rump will not resign or recognize any impeachment proceedings to oust him.
bobbyp is on the money with his pronouncements regarding the Afghanistan debacle.
I would add that in his well-enunciated projectile vomit speech on the subject, rump raised the specter of India increasing its involvement in Afghanistan. While elements in nuclear Pakistan’s paranoid military and government are villainous, involving their mortal enemy, nuclear India, on their western flank will be a disaster and could lead to nuclear war on the Indian sub-Continent.
They despise each other.
But rump wants to use nuclear weapons. When he stared into the sun yesterday, take it as his willingness to stare into the flash of a million suns given off by nuclear conflagration.
Look what the republican party and their fucking vermin base are doing to us.
They must be destroyed as soon as possible.
So at this point, the question for Putin becomes, what will cause the maximum further disruption?
there’s [always] another election coming up.
So at this point, the question for Putin becomes, what will cause the maximum further disruption?
there’s [always] another election coming up.
Maybe it’s beside your point, but it wasn’t beside mine
Yes, quite right. Sorry about that, the last couple of days have kind of pegged my crank-o-meter to new and previously unknown levels.
Which, given my normal state of mind, takes some doing.
Maybe it’s beside your point, but it wasn’t beside mine
Yes, quite right. Sorry about that, the last couple of days have kind of pegged my crank-o-meter to new and previously unknown levels.
Which, given my normal state of mind, takes some doing.
A month ago:
“Over nearly two hours in the situation room, according to the officials, Trump complained about NATO allies, inquired about the United States getting a piece of Afghan’s mineral wealth [sic] and repeatedly said the top U.S. general there should be fired. He also startled the room with a story that seemed to compare their advice to that of a paid consultant who cost a tony New York restaurateur profits by offering bad advice.”
But listen to the dupes and shitheads buy the fake pivot.
Not awesome.
Bullshit.
A month ago:
“Over nearly two hours in the situation room, according to the officials, Trump complained about NATO allies, inquired about the United States getting a piece of Afghan’s mineral wealth [sic] and repeatedly said the top U.S. general there should be fired. He also startled the room with a story that seemed to compare their advice to that of a paid consultant who cost a tony New York restaurateur profits by offering bad advice.”
But listen to the dupes and shitheads buy the fake pivot.
Not awesome.
Bullshit.
Count, perhaps the question is to wonder: since this latest announcement was scripted and read off a telepromoter (albeit without the massive visible reluctance of the words about Charlottesville), how long until there is a tweet that goes in an entirely different direction?
Although I suppose it’s possible that tonight’s fan club meeting in Arizona will keep him distracted for a while….
Count, perhaps the question is to wonder: since this latest announcement was scripted and read off a telepromoter (albeit without the massive visible reluctance of the words about Charlottesville), how long until there is a tweet that goes in an entirely different direction?
Although I suppose it’s possible that tonight’s fan club meeting in Arizona will keep him distracted for a while….
russell — no worries. In case it wasn’t obvious, I responded out of crankiness myself. I can’t even blame you-know-who, or at least not totally; I am building up a debt of not-quite-long-enough nights of sleep. Going on a few days of vac tomorrow, hopefully that will fix me right up! In Canada, no less!
russell — no worries. In case it wasn’t obvious, I responded out of crankiness myself. I can’t even blame you-know-who, or at least not totally; I am building up a debt of not-quite-long-enough nights of sleep. Going on a few days of vac tomorrow, hopefully that will fix me right up! In Canada, no less!
inquired about the United States getting a piece of Afghan’s mineral wealth
From here:
They’re gonna wish nobody had ever heard of them.
inquired about the United States getting a piece of Afghan’s mineral wealth
From here:
They’re gonna wish nobody had ever heard of them.
Another opinion:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/07/27/dear-president-trump-afghanistans-minerals-arent-very-valuable-theyre-really-not/#2e93bd242615
Don’t ask me who’s right. I have no friggin’ idea.
Another opinion:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/07/27/dear-president-trump-afghanistans-minerals-arent-very-valuable-theyre-really-not/#2e93bd242615
Don’t ask me who’s right. I have no friggin’ idea.
Russell, so the “right” course forward might be to carve out a new country** (like the Kurds did?) in the area of the lithium reserves. Something small enough to actually take and hold. Then make them all rich enough from mining that their interest in the Taliban disappears.
** I confess this seems unlikely. If we thought that way, we would have long since extended diplomatic recognition to Somaliland (which is peaceful, stable, and relatively well run), instead of wasting time on the chaos which is Somalia.
Russell, so the “right” course forward might be to carve out a new country** (like the Kurds did?) in the area of the lithium reserves. Something small enough to actually take and hold. Then make them all rich enough from mining that their interest in the Taliban disappears.
** I confess this seems unlikely. If we thought that way, we would have long since extended diplomatic recognition to Somaliland (which is peaceful, stable, and relatively well run), instead of wasting time on the chaos which is Somalia.
Don’t ask me who’s right. I have no friggin’ idea.
Tim Worstall pops up from time to time to comment at Crooked Timber. He has … an agenda. Who doesn’t, of course, but I doubt it would be my agenda if I understood the subject matter better.
Don’t ask me who’s right. I have no friggin’ idea.
Tim Worstall pops up from time to time to comment at Crooked Timber. He has … an agenda. Who doesn’t, of course, but I doubt it would be my agenda if I understood the subject matter better.
Your hourly update of the republican stupid:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trumps-monumentally-stupid-gift-to-maduro/
Your hourly update of the republican stupid:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trumps-monumentally-stupid-gift-to-maduro/
Mein Kampf is OK for a Texas prison coffee KKklatch book club but not James Balwin:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/reading-texas-prison
Why has the Texas State Government not been incinerated by nuclear weapons?
Mein Kampf is OK for a Texas prison coffee KKklatch book club but not James Balwin:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/reading-texas-prison
Why has the Texas State Government not been incinerated by nuclear weapons?
open thread abuse continues:
A good piece about the whole freaking mess we’re soaking in.
The author is a friend of mine, he and his family were at the Great Big Thing in Boston on Saturday with my wife and I.
Part of what Max talks about here is the experience of living in a different America than the one you thought you were living in, and the creepy disturbing feeling that maybe you’ve been living in that not-so-nice America all along.
Pretty much where I’m at these days.
open thread abuse continues:
A good piece about the whole freaking mess we’re soaking in.
The author is a friend of mine, he and his family were at the Great Big Thing in Boston on Saturday with my wife and I.
Part of what Max talks about here is the experience of living in a different America than the one you thought you were living in, and the creepy disturbing feeling that maybe you’ve been living in that not-so-nice America all along.
Pretty much where I’m at these days.
Too good not to share. Just now on KCBS (the local all news station), at the end of a story on “Just say no to drugs” and abstinence only education:
What over 3 decades has shown that abstinence only education is really good for: making babies.
Too good not to share. Just now on KCBS (the local all news station), at the end of a story on “Just say no to drugs” and abstinence only education:
What over 3 decades has shown that abstinence only education is really good for: making babies.
That’s a good piece, russell, your friend sounds like an excellent guy (even if he does say “wrote memorization” when he presumably means “rote”). His evolving attitude reminds me of mine; I too was brought up in a pretty secular way, and used to dismiss friends of my parents, in Israel, who would warn me that widespread anti-semitism was never going away, and that I might think I had gentile friends, or even marry a gentile, but that, to quote P G Wodehouse about aunts, sooner or later out would pop the cloven hoof. I pitied them for their closed-mindedness, but excused it because of what they or their relatives had gone through in the Holocaust. The thing I never did was believe them. They thought that Israel had to exist, and be strong, because when push came to shove, jews needed a country to run to if they had to. I’m not saying I believe this stuff now, but I have been so astounded by the kind of anti-semitism, islamophobia, and other kinds of racism now openly, proudly on show (in Europe, the UK, and the US) that some of their words are coming back to haunt me. It doesn’t make me feel especially vulnerable as a jew, but, like you, it makes me feel that the world is not as I once thought it. These are dark times indeed.
That’s a good piece, russell, your friend sounds like an excellent guy (even if he does say “wrote memorization” when he presumably means “rote”). His evolving attitude reminds me of mine; I too was brought up in a pretty secular way, and used to dismiss friends of my parents, in Israel, who would warn me that widespread anti-semitism was never going away, and that I might think I had gentile friends, or even marry a gentile, but that, to quote P G Wodehouse about aunts, sooner or later out would pop the cloven hoof. I pitied them for their closed-mindedness, but excused it because of what they or their relatives had gone through in the Holocaust. The thing I never did was believe them. They thought that Israel had to exist, and be strong, because when push came to shove, jews needed a country to run to if they had to. I’m not saying I believe this stuff now, but I have been so astounded by the kind of anti-semitism, islamophobia, and other kinds of racism now openly, proudly on show (in Europe, the UK, and the US) that some of their words are coming back to haunt me. It doesn’t make me feel especially vulnerable as a jew, but, like you, it makes me feel that the world is not as I once thought it. These are dark times indeed.
russell, Interesting viewpoint in the article.
I suppose all of us grow up with myth’s and idealistic views of the world to some extent. I really believe though that the number of overt violent racists, let’s call them Nazi’s to avoid having to make unimportant distinctions, is really small. Ultimately there are very few, where one is too many, racial domestic terrorist attacks and they are roundly decried by all but an infinitesimal minority of people in the US.
All to say that it is depressing that Max and others, including you in a different way, are forced to deal with this in a way that is likely out of proportion to the risk or the size of the threat, reality being closer to the view he had growing up.
But certainly the success of the terrorists has been that he has to deal with it.
russell, Interesting viewpoint in the article.
I suppose all of us grow up with myth’s and idealistic views of the world to some extent. I really believe though that the number of overt violent racists, let’s call them Nazi’s to avoid having to make unimportant distinctions, is really small. Ultimately there are very few, where one is too many, racial domestic terrorist attacks and they are roundly decried by all but an infinitesimal minority of people in the US.
All to say that it is depressing that Max and others, including you in a different way, are forced to deal with this in a way that is likely out of proportion to the risk or the size of the threat, reality being closer to the view he had growing up.
But certainly the success of the terrorists has been that he has to deal with it.
I have been so astounded by the kind of anti-semitism, islamophobia, and other kinds of racism now openly, proudly on show (in Europe, the UK, and the US) that some of their words are coming back to haunt me. It doesn’t make me feel especially vulnerable as a jew, but, like you, it makes me feel that the world is not as I once thought it. These are dark times indeed.
Disgusting as these people are, I think that the level of their emotion is actually a hopeful sign for our nation(s). They are in an absolute panic, in no small part, because they know deep down that they are losing. (Perhaps even, have lost already.) The world has changed, their views, which were once unremarkable, are now denounced by most of the population.
It doesn’t matter whether their particular boogeyman is Jews, blacks, Muslims, gays or any other group. Most of the population doesn’t share their view these days. And many, if not most, of the population is actively hostile. Half a century or so ago, that wasn’t true.
Is it bad that they are still out there? Yes. Is it bad that we have a President who is encouraging them? Yes. Do we need to continue to make the point that their views are unacceptable. Also yes.
But we fail ourselves if we do not also acknowledge that, imperfect as things are today, they are hugely better than they were, in the lifetime of people still living. Progress, even when incomplete, needs to be celebrated as well. The times are not all sweetness and light. But they are a damn sight less dark than they were.
I have been so astounded by the kind of anti-semitism, islamophobia, and other kinds of racism now openly, proudly on show (in Europe, the UK, and the US) that some of their words are coming back to haunt me. It doesn’t make me feel especially vulnerable as a jew, but, like you, it makes me feel that the world is not as I once thought it. These are dark times indeed.
Disgusting as these people are, I think that the level of their emotion is actually a hopeful sign for our nation(s). They are in an absolute panic, in no small part, because they know deep down that they are losing. (Perhaps even, have lost already.) The world has changed, their views, which were once unremarkable, are now denounced by most of the population.
It doesn’t matter whether their particular boogeyman is Jews, blacks, Muslims, gays or any other group. Most of the population doesn’t share their view these days. And many, if not most, of the population is actively hostile. Half a century or so ago, that wasn’t true.
Is it bad that they are still out there? Yes. Is it bad that we have a President who is encouraging them? Yes. Do we need to continue to make the point that their views are unacceptable. Also yes.
But we fail ourselves if we do not also acknowledge that, imperfect as things are today, they are hugely better than they were, in the lifetime of people still living. Progress, even when incomplete, needs to be celebrated as well. The times are not all sweetness and light. But they are a damn sight less dark than they were.
I hope you are right, Marty and wj.
The thing is, situations can devolve, and historically they often have. So we don’t know, right now, whether these people, having been egged on and facilitated by Trump, are on their last gasp, or are the first sign of a reversal of direction that is going to unwind the gains that have been made in the past few decades. (For that matter, many of what I would consider to be gains have already been unwound, and unwinding others is the top agenda item for a certain majority party in Congress. E.g. voting rights, for just one example.)
As a gay person, I have never been complacent about whether “we” will do a u-turn and I, or the next generation, will be forced to make a hard choice about risks and the closet. I have occasionally had dreams about darker scenarios to come, which I hope do not in fact come.
I’m not saying we’re doomed, I’m just saying it’s not a given that we’re going to be fine.
wj: The times are not all sweetness and light. But they are a damn sight less dark than they were.
Depends, I think, on when “were” was. 😉
But that’s just another way of saying we don’t know yet whether the current mess is a blip or the first step in a longer term change in direction.
I hope you are right, Marty and wj.
The thing is, situations can devolve, and historically they often have. So we don’t know, right now, whether these people, having been egged on and facilitated by Trump, are on their last gasp, or are the first sign of a reversal of direction that is going to unwind the gains that have been made in the past few decades. (For that matter, many of what I would consider to be gains have already been unwound, and unwinding others is the top agenda item for a certain majority party in Congress. E.g. voting rights, for just one example.)
As a gay person, I have never been complacent about whether “we” will do a u-turn and I, or the next generation, will be forced to make a hard choice about risks and the closet. I have occasionally had dreams about darker scenarios to come, which I hope do not in fact come.
I’m not saying we’re doomed, I’m just saying it’s not a given that we’re going to be fine.
wj: The times are not all sweetness and light. But they are a damn sight less dark than they were.
Depends, I think, on when “were” was. 😉
But that’s just another way of saying we don’t know yet whether the current mess is a blip or the first step in a longer term change in direction.
“Last gasp” is overdoing it in any case. We are human. There will always be issues and hatreds. We can manage that human tendency better or worse, keep it de-fanged or have it run amok around us, but it’s not going away.
“Last gasp” is overdoing it in any case. We are human. There will always be issues and hatreds. We can manage that human tendency better or worse, keep it de-fanged or have it run amok around us, but it’s not going away.
My major volunteer work is for a land trust. I love the work and the people who do it, but I cringe every time they go on about how some parcel of land has been protected “forever.”
Never mind that nothing is “forever,” all it needs is a change in the tax laws to make the work start to unravel.
Cynic, me. And somewhat of a pessimist.
My major volunteer work is for a land trust. I love the work and the people who do it, but I cringe every time they go on about how some parcel of land has been protected “forever.”
Never mind that nothing is “forever,” all it needs is a change in the tax laws to make the work start to unravel.
Cynic, me. And somewhat of a pessimist.
Think of the blood and treasure, and the Jews, gays, and Gypsies that could have been spared if Antifa had successfully smashed European Fascism in the 1930s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fascism
Maybe not the best of people now, but probably too nice back then.
Think of the blood and treasure, and the Jews, gays, and Gypsies that could have been spared if Antifa had successfully smashed European Fascism in the 1930s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fascism
Maybe not the best of people now, but probably too nice back then.
And by the way, JanieM and others, when I listed my deplorable attitudes (antisemitism, islamophobia etc), I meant to include homophobia and other prejudiced hatreds too, but didn’t want to go back in just to add another post. And I also agree with JanieM in her response to wj and Marty, I hope you two are right, but the fact that these arseholes feel so safe and entitled now, in several countries and for the first time in my memory, has me much more pessimistic than you. The enabling effects of social media and fascist stuff on the internet, in particular, strike me as a new and sinister development compared to anytime from about the sixties onwards.
And by the way, JanieM and others, when I listed my deplorable attitudes (antisemitism, islamophobia etc), I meant to include homophobia and other prejudiced hatreds too, but didn’t want to go back in just to add another post. And I also agree with JanieM in her response to wj and Marty, I hope you two are right, but the fact that these arseholes feel so safe and entitled now, in several countries and for the first time in my memory, has me much more pessimistic than you. The enabling effects of social media and fascist stuff on the internet, in particular, strike me as a new and sinister development compared to anytime from about the sixties onwards.
Depends, I think, on when “were” was.
I was thinking mid-50s. Not a good time to be black in America. (Not as bad at the 1920s, perhaps, but not good.) Entering an interracial marriage was no longer illegal in much of the country, but still was some places. But legal or not, people who did so were potentially looking at being expelled from their family — it happened; people who would neither hear from nor see their family for decades as a result.
And being gay was likely to get you killed; badly beaten at an absolute minimum.
But perhaps there was a “when” that was as good as today? Somewhere that I’ve never heard of…. 😉
Depends, I think, on when “were” was.
I was thinking mid-50s. Not a good time to be black in America. (Not as bad at the 1920s, perhaps, but not good.) Entering an interracial marriage was no longer illegal in much of the country, but still was some places. But legal or not, people who did so were potentially looking at being expelled from their family — it happened; people who would neither hear from nor see their family for decades as a result.
And being gay was likely to get you killed; badly beaten at an absolute minimum.
But perhaps there was a “when” that was as good as today? Somewhere that I’ve never heard of…. 😉
But perhaps there was a “when” that was as good as today? Somewhere that I’ve never heard of…. 😉
This time last year?
But perhaps there was a “when” that was as good as today? Somewhere that I’ve never heard of…. 😉
This time last year?
The thing is, situations can devolve, and historically they often have..
Canaries in the coal mine…Brexit, Hungary, Poland? The electoral losses of the right wing in Netherlands and France notwithstanding.
All to say that it is depressing that Max and others, including you in a different way, are forced to deal with this in a way that is likely out of proportion to the risk or the size of the threat
An astute observation that, for some strange reason, has not been deemed particularly applicable by our government since the first PLO airliner hijacking.
The thing is, situations can devolve, and historically they often have..
Canaries in the coal mine…Brexit, Hungary, Poland? The electoral losses of the right wing in Netherlands and France notwithstanding.
All to say that it is depressing that Max and others, including you in a different way, are forced to deal with this in a way that is likely out of proportion to the risk or the size of the threat
An astute observation that, for some strange reason, has not been deemed particularly applicable by our government since the first PLO airliner hijacking.
Entering an interracial marriage was no longer illegal in much of the country, but still was some places. But legal or not, people who did so were potentially looking at being expelled from their family — it happened; people who would neither hear from nor see their family for decades as a result.
In my lifetime, most everyone has paid lip service to going forward. There have been some exceptions, of course. Affirmative action comes to mind. But everyone proclaimed “Of course, I’m not racist!” Neo-Nazis and neo-Confederates were hidden. “Decent” people, like the folks who post here, don’t understand white privilege. They’ve had to work hard for a living, and that concept doesn’t square with “privilege”.
But now, the demons are out. Especially with guns. The difference between C’ville and Boston were the weapons. People knew they could come to Charlottesville fully armed and dangerous. Why go to Boston to make trouble if you can’t carry weapons and intimidate people? A total bust for the neo’s.
Entering an interracial marriage was no longer illegal in much of the country, but still was some places. But legal or not, people who did so were potentially looking at being expelled from their family — it happened; people who would neither hear from nor see their family for decades as a result.
In my lifetime, most everyone has paid lip service to going forward. There have been some exceptions, of course. Affirmative action comes to mind. But everyone proclaimed “Of course, I’m not racist!” Neo-Nazis and neo-Confederates were hidden. “Decent” people, like the folks who post here, don’t understand white privilege. They’ve had to work hard for a living, and that concept doesn’t square with “privilege”.
But now, the demons are out. Especially with guns. The difference between C’ville and Boston were the weapons. People knew they could come to Charlottesville fully armed and dangerous. Why go to Boston to make trouble if you can’t carry weapons and intimidate people? A total bust for the neo’s.
sapient: This time last year?
This time last year, Trump was holding rallies of his adoring fans. This year, he holds rallies and masses of protestors show up. Seems like a bit of progress to me….
sapient: This time last year?
This time last year, Trump was holding rallies of his adoring fans. This year, he holds rallies and masses of protestors show up. Seems like a bit of progress to me….
Seems like a bit of progress to me….
Dead counter-protestors in my town doesn’t seem like progress. Nor did it seem like progress with those Oregon killings. Nor did it seem like progress when I went campaigning on Sunday for our D candidate for governor and some of my “neighbors” (folks I didn’t actually know) were openly hostile (before I actually started talking, so it wasn’t about my a-holeness). That kind of thing hasn’t happened before – people who answer the door have always said something like, “No, thanks. I’m a Republican.” It’s uglier now. (Let’s not even mention what it must be like to be an undocumented immigrant.)
The contradictions are heightened.
Seems like a bit of progress to me….
Dead counter-protestors in my town doesn’t seem like progress. Nor did it seem like progress with those Oregon killings. Nor did it seem like progress when I went campaigning on Sunday for our D candidate for governor and some of my “neighbors” (folks I didn’t actually know) were openly hostile (before I actually started talking, so it wasn’t about my a-holeness). That kind of thing hasn’t happened before – people who answer the door have always said something like, “No, thanks. I’m a Republican.” It’s uglier now. (Let’s not even mention what it must be like to be an undocumented immigrant.)
The contradictions are heightened.
I am by nature an optimist, so I tend to agree with wj’s analysis. I have to say, though, quoting Tom Lehrer, “the out patients are out in force.”
It seems like DJT has made it OK to be out in this way. I hope it doesn’t lead to worse than we have already seen.
I am by nature an optimist, so I tend to agree with wj’s analysis. I have to say, though, quoting Tom Lehrer, “the out patients are out in force.”
It seems like DJT has made it OK to be out in this way. I hope it doesn’t lead to worse than we have already seen.
“No, thanks. I’m a Republican.”
his support among Republicans went up last week.
some have tried claiming that it’s because some people have stopped admitting to be Republicans. i’d like to see that data. but even if true, it does nothing good for the label “Republican”. morally good, that is. electorally, who knows. this country is broken.
—
i think i saw this on a FB repost of a tweet from someone i don’t know… but it was regarding black folks and Confederate statues, and it was to the effect:
imagine you’re a Jew and every morning you have to drive by a statue of Hitler or Mengele on your way to work. heritage?
“No, thanks. I’m a Republican.”
his support among Republicans went up last week.
some have tried claiming that it’s because some people have stopped admitting to be Republicans. i’d like to see that data. but even if true, it does nothing good for the label “Republican”. morally good, that is. electorally, who knows. this country is broken.
—
i think i saw this on a FB repost of a tweet from someone i don’t know… but it was regarding black folks and Confederate statues, and it was to the effect:
imagine you’re a Jew and every morning you have to drive by a statue of Hitler or Mengele on your way to work. heritage?
overt violent racists
Three overlapping circles in the big American Venn diagram. One not so big, one pretty small, one actually pretty large.
Between the three of them, they cover more ground than you might think.
I invite you to look at the Facebook page of Boston Free Speech, the group that put on the rally. Interesting comments, remarkable not so much for flaming bloodthirsty racist vigor, more as a record of two groups of people who look at the same set of facts and see utterly different realities.
Utterly different.
We’re not all on the same planet anymore. Jews, Black Lives Matter, antifa, apparently all rule the world now. Much to their surprise. And 40,000 people came out for the express purpose of defeating free speech.
Never mind getting to something like consensus, just getting to an approximately common understanding of the basic facts on the ground is utterly beyond us.
The difference between C’ville and Boston were the weapons.
My first reaction to this was to think no, it was the behavior of the cops. But in C’ville the cops were outgunned.
So yes, weapons.
forced to deal with this in a way that is likely out of proportion to the risk or the size of the threat
Since 9/11, radical Islamists have killed 119 people in 23 incidents. Domestic white supremacists have killed 106, in 62 incidents.
That’s since 9/11, it excludes the WTC and Pentagon attacks, which is quite the outlier. Then again, it excludes the Murrah building, ditto.
Compare and contrast how we respond to the threat of radical Islamic terror, as compared to that of domestic white supremacists.
Yes, the absolute number of overt violent racists is small in proportion to the overall population. It’s still probably in the very low tens of thousands.
That’s a lot of people running around intent on murder and mayhem.
The most worrisome thing, to me, in all that I’ve come across in coming up to speed with the modern hipster racists is the degree to which it’s all kind of a joke to them.
Actually, the most worrisome thing is probably the existence of a dude named Augustus Sol Invictus, former libertarian candidate for the US Senate from FL, who espouses eugenics to keep the sick and diseased from breeding, and who went on some weird pagan vision quest in the Mojave Desert, where it was apparently revealed to him that he was to lead the 2nd American Civil War. In gratitude for not dying in that adventure, he sacrificed a live goat and drank his blood.
The man ran for the US Senate.
Invictus aside, the most worrisome thing to me is the number of young dudes who think this bullshit is just one big joke.
We didn’t really mean it with the nooses and the goose step and the Hitler salute. Just pranking the normies.
overt violent racists
Three overlapping circles in the big American Venn diagram. One not so big, one pretty small, one actually pretty large.
Between the three of them, they cover more ground than you might think.
I invite you to look at the Facebook page of Boston Free Speech, the group that put on the rally. Interesting comments, remarkable not so much for flaming bloodthirsty racist vigor, more as a record of two groups of people who look at the same set of facts and see utterly different realities.
Utterly different.
We’re not all on the same planet anymore. Jews, Black Lives Matter, antifa, apparently all rule the world now. Much to their surprise. And 40,000 people came out for the express purpose of defeating free speech.
Never mind getting to something like consensus, just getting to an approximately common understanding of the basic facts on the ground is utterly beyond us.
The difference between C’ville and Boston were the weapons.
My first reaction to this was to think no, it was the behavior of the cops. But in C’ville the cops were outgunned.
So yes, weapons.
forced to deal with this in a way that is likely out of proportion to the risk or the size of the threat
Since 9/11, radical Islamists have killed 119 people in 23 incidents. Domestic white supremacists have killed 106, in 62 incidents.
That’s since 9/11, it excludes the WTC and Pentagon attacks, which is quite the outlier. Then again, it excludes the Murrah building, ditto.
Compare and contrast how we respond to the threat of radical Islamic terror, as compared to that of domestic white supremacists.
Yes, the absolute number of overt violent racists is small in proportion to the overall population. It’s still probably in the very low tens of thousands.
That’s a lot of people running around intent on murder and mayhem.
The most worrisome thing, to me, in all that I’ve come across in coming up to speed with the modern hipster racists is the degree to which it’s all kind of a joke to them.
Actually, the most worrisome thing is probably the existence of a dude named Augustus Sol Invictus, former libertarian candidate for the US Senate from FL, who espouses eugenics to keep the sick and diseased from breeding, and who went on some weird pagan vision quest in the Mojave Desert, where it was apparently revealed to him that he was to lead the 2nd American Civil War. In gratitude for not dying in that adventure, he sacrificed a live goat and drank his blood.
The man ran for the US Senate.
Invictus aside, the most worrisome thing to me is the number of young dudes who think this bullshit is just one big joke.
We didn’t really mean it with the nooses and the goose step and the Hitler salute. Just pranking the normies.
Clarification – Invictus drank the goat’s blood, not his own.
Let’s not get carried away!
Clarification – Invictus drank the goat’s blood, not his own.
Let’s not get carried away!
Never mind getting to something like consensus, just getting to an approximately common understanding of the basic facts on the ground is utterly beyond us.
That really is the core problem in today’s America: one side (or, to be more precise, a significant and possibly controlling segment of one side) simply rejects any inconvenient facts which don’t support their preexisting views. It makes it impossible to find agreement on how to deal with anything, because there is, and can be, no agreement on reality.
Never mind getting to something like consensus, just getting to an approximately common understanding of the basic facts on the ground is utterly beyond us.
That really is the core problem in today’s America: one side (or, to be more precise, a significant and possibly controlling segment of one side) simply rejects any inconvenient facts which don’t support their preexisting views. It makes it impossible to find agreement on how to deal with anything, because there is, and can be, no agreement on reality.
“Compare and contrast how we respond to the threat of radical Islamic terror, as compared to that of domestic white supremacists.”
Here is the thing most worrisome to me. Within the Constitutional limits, that are pretty widely accepted, the distinction in these two things is quite similar. FBI keeps files on people here, VIA and FBI watch external groups, phones are tapped, plots identified.
The only perceived difference is that there a slim possibility that,acting on intelligence, you could stop an attack at the border. An opportunity you just don’t have with domestic terrorists.
The other difference is simply the legal status of the perpetrators, but mostly people I deal with think we should treat foreign born terrorist more like citizens, not less.
Last, foreign terrorists recruit all over the world and field armies. They’re just not the same.
Today, for the first time in my life, we have reasonable people approving of vigilante justice in our society. That isn’t the America I grew up in, or believe in. That worries me more than a few thousand angry people blowing up stuff.
“Compare and contrast how we respond to the threat of radical Islamic terror, as compared to that of domestic white supremacists.”
Here is the thing most worrisome to me. Within the Constitutional limits, that are pretty widely accepted, the distinction in these two things is quite similar. FBI keeps files on people here, VIA and FBI watch external groups, phones are tapped, plots identified.
The only perceived difference is that there a slim possibility that,acting on intelligence, you could stop an attack at the border. An opportunity you just don’t have with domestic terrorists.
The other difference is simply the legal status of the perpetrators, but mostly people I deal with think we should treat foreign born terrorist more like citizens, not less.
Last, foreign terrorists recruit all over the world and field armies. They’re just not the same.
Today, for the first time in my life, we have reasonable people approving of vigilante justice in our society. That isn’t the America I grew up in, or believe in. That worries me more than a few thousand angry people blowing up stuff.
You wanna convince a guy to bring the overwhelming force, show him the T&A:
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/22/mcmaster-learns-to-speak-trumps-language/
It’s the Murdoch/Ailes news strategy: reveal the decolletage and get the beaver shots in conservative faces and we report and you, uh, decide.
The Christian Right and Pence are bombing Afghanistan to restore the miniskirt. But they won’t dine with them because something might happen, a rapey thing, which they can’t help.
American conservatives are vermin, you little minxes.
You wanna convince a guy to bring the overwhelming force, show him the T&A:
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/22/mcmaster-learns-to-speak-trumps-language/
It’s the Murdoch/Ailes news strategy: reveal the decolletage and get the beaver shots in conservative faces and we report and you, uh, decide.
The Christian Right and Pence are bombing Afghanistan to restore the miniskirt. But they won’t dine with them because something might happen, a rapey thing, which they can’t help.
American conservatives are vermin, you little minxes.
Marty, you forget the outcry from the people with the big megaphones when the authorities are caught even just looking into domestic, non-islamist, non-leftist terrorist matters.
Marty, you forget the outcry from the people with the big megaphones when the authorities are caught even just looking into domestic, non-islamist, non-leftist terrorist matters.
the distinction in these two things is quite similar
nobody is calling for the rounding up of white supremacists. no comments about the threat of white supremacist terror in campaign speeches of the POTUS, or anyone else for that matter.
foreign terrorists recruit all over the world and field armies.
white supremacists recruit in our very own communities. i’d say that’s worse.
They’re just not the same.
among the differences – organized white supremacists have been active in this country for 120+ years.
we have reasonable people approving of vigilante justice in our society
unclear what you refer to here. can you expand?
the distinction in these two things is quite similar
nobody is calling for the rounding up of white supremacists. no comments about the threat of white supremacist terror in campaign speeches of the POTUS, or anyone else for that matter.
foreign terrorists recruit all over the world and field armies.
white supremacists recruit in our very own communities. i’d say that’s worse.
They’re just not the same.
among the differences – organized white supremacists have been active in this country for 120+ years.
we have reasonable people approving of vigilante justice in our society
unclear what you refer to here. can you expand?
Marty’s referring to Batman, I think. People think he’s pretty cool.
Marty’s referring to Batman, I think. People think he’s pretty cool.
i assume he’s talking about the armed ‘conservatives’ who show up to wave their guns at people who think honoring slavery is beyond the pale.
i assume he’s talking about the armed ‘conservatives’ who show up to wave their guns at people who think honoring slavery is beyond the pale.
Is Justin Moore reasonable? He was good with James Alex Fields, Jr.’s version of justice.
Is Justin Moore reasonable? He was good with James Alex Fields, Jr.’s version of justice.
Today, for the first time in my life, we have reasonable people approving of vigilante justice in our society.
You mean these people?
Well, of course you don’t.
Today, for the first time in my life, we have reasonable people approving of vigilante justice in our society.
You mean these people?
Well, of course you don’t.
Marty, ‘compare and contrast’ doesn’t mean ‘let’s string those guys up’. At least not to me. So equating it with ‘vigilante justice’ is bizarre.
One of the points several people have made is that the protestors at Standing rock were greeted with rubber bullets and firehoses. Why so nice to these guys? It’s not vigilante justice, it is pointing out that these guys (and they are guys) are _still_ benefiting from white privilege. If not, what justifies the difference in treatment?
Marty, ‘compare and contrast’ doesn’t mean ‘let’s string those guys up’. At least not to me. So equating it with ‘vigilante justice’ is bizarre.
One of the points several people have made is that the protestors at Standing rock were greeted with rubber bullets and firehoses. Why so nice to these guys? It’s not vigilante justice, it is pointing out that these guys (and they are guys) are _still_ benefiting from white privilege. If not, what justifies the difference in treatment?
9/11 was one of the greatest days on the history of the Republican Party. Nothing gave them the leverage to push through their authoritarian domestic agenda like that day of infamy.
The threat of Islamic terrorism on the “homeland” keeps defense and law enforcement budgets flush, while providing cover for cutting the social safety net and demolishing the tax code for high earners.
The President of the United States, that republican conservative lout who represents all republican conservative louts, just yesterday again threatened to shut down the federal government unless his wall is built.
Nothing like vigilantism from the top to achieve their malign ends.
The Bundy vigilantes were treated with kid gloves by law enforcement despite threatening deadly force against law enforcement and federal employees.
They should have been butchered on the first day of the standoff.
rump is a piece of vigilante filth who has his own private vigilante security detail, consisting of thugs, on my meal ticket.
He prompted vigilante action from the dais against Americans at his campaign rallies throughout the campaign and cheered it on as it occurred. So did his vermin voters.
He employed vigilante foreign force, in the form of hackers and a fuck hold up in the Ecuadoran Embassy, to steal the 2016 election.
Not a single conservative objected.
Fuck the republican party. Fuck it and kill it.
9/11 was one of the greatest days on the history of the Republican Party. Nothing gave them the leverage to push through their authoritarian domestic agenda like that day of infamy.
The threat of Islamic terrorism on the “homeland” keeps defense and law enforcement budgets flush, while providing cover for cutting the social safety net and demolishing the tax code for high earners.
The President of the United States, that republican conservative lout who represents all republican conservative louts, just yesterday again threatened to shut down the federal government unless his wall is built.
Nothing like vigilantism from the top to achieve their malign ends.
The Bundy vigilantes were treated with kid gloves by law enforcement despite threatening deadly force against law enforcement and federal employees.
They should have been butchered on the first day of the standoff.
rump is a piece of vigilante filth who has his own private vigilante security detail, consisting of thugs, on my meal ticket.
He prompted vigilante action from the dais against Americans at his campaign rallies throughout the campaign and cheered it on as it occurred. So did his vermin voters.
He employed vigilante foreign force, in the form of hackers and a fuck hold up in the Ecuadoran Embassy, to steal the 2016 election.
Not a single conservative objected.
Fuck the republican party. Fuck it and kill it.
The NRA is purely a vigilante organization in the service of the authoritarian republican party, daily threatening threatening vigilante action against huge segments of the American polity. Smash it.
“(and they are guys)”
Well the girls done cucked us all our lives so there ain’t nothin for it but to worship vigilante authoritarianism, Chester.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/young-men-fascism-faith/
Dreher drives me batty. I wish he would finally head for and cloister himself behind the codpiece of the Benedictine monastery, but I realize he needs to hang with we Godless moderns as long as possible and sell as many copies of his book while the gettin is good.
Sing it, cucks. The cock is coming ’round:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RTBn3qFrGQ
The NRA is purely a vigilante organization in the service of the authoritarian republican party, daily threatening threatening vigilante action against huge segments of the American polity. Smash it.
“(and they are guys)”
Well the girls done cucked us all our lives so there ain’t nothin for it but to worship vigilante authoritarianism, Chester.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/young-men-fascism-faith/
Dreher drives me batty. I wish he would finally head for and cloister himself behind the codpiece of the Benedictine monastery, but I realize he needs to hang with we Godless moderns as long as possible and sell as many copies of his book while the gettin is good.
Sing it, cucks. The cock is coming ’round:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RTBn3qFrGQ
Giving libertarian cucks a bad name:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-insidious-libertarian-to-alt-right-pipeline?via=newsletter&source=DDMorning
Giving libertarian cucks a bad name:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-insidious-libertarian-to-alt-right-pipeline?via=newsletter&source=DDMorning
From the Dreher piece the count links to:
They wish to be warriors, but they see no dragons to slay. They want to be heroes, but they can find no one to save.
How long of a freaking list do they want?
If none of that suits, they could start fight clubs, beat the crap out of each other, and leave everyone else the hell alone.
Poor little wounded boys. Cry me a river.
From the Dreher piece the count links to:
They wish to be warriors, but they see no dragons to slay. They want to be heroes, but they can find no one to save.
How long of a freaking list do they want?
If none of that suits, they could start fight clubs, beat the crap out of each other, and leave everyone else the hell alone.
Poor little wounded boys. Cry me a river.
They could also find a nice woman, besides their mother clumping around the kitchen upstairs and their third grade teachers who cucked them all their live long lives, to treat real nice.
Oh, wait …
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-getting-harder-for-white-supremacists-to-find-romance-online-2017-08-22?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
Well, look at ’em girls, Can’t you just wait to read their profiles?
William Shirer made the point in his diaries that Hitler fashioned “Mein Kampf” as a kind of dating profile in order to get the girls.
No, Shirer didn’t write that, but it’s a plausible theory.
After all, Hitler got plenty of girls. Most looked like FOX foxes and fascist nookie Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter.
The problem with taxpayer-funded libraries is the lost boys would have to share the books with socialist cooties. Yet another libertarian/alt-right convergence.
They don’t play well with others.
Then, of course, they would have to learn to read instead of negotiating the world through their thumbs on the video war games.
They could also find a nice woman, besides their mother clumping around the kitchen upstairs and their third grade teachers who cucked them all their live long lives, to treat real nice.
Oh, wait …
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-getting-harder-for-white-supremacists-to-find-romance-online-2017-08-22?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
Well, look at ’em girls, Can’t you just wait to read their profiles?
William Shirer made the point in his diaries that Hitler fashioned “Mein Kampf” as a kind of dating profile in order to get the girls.
No, Shirer didn’t write that, but it’s a plausible theory.
After all, Hitler got plenty of girls. Most looked like FOX foxes and fascist nookie Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter.
The problem with taxpayer-funded libraries is the lost boys would have to share the books with socialist cooties. Yet another libertarian/alt-right convergence.
They don’t play well with others.
Then, of course, they would have to learn to read instead of negotiating the world through their thumbs on the video war games.
“unclear what you refer to here. can you expand?”
The violent antifa movement has picked up support and justification from people who I believe otherwise to be reasonable. Yet masked avengers bringing their weapons to every protest and counter protest so they can create violence is just vigilantism. They don’t even pretend to not want violence. Their justification is those people deserve it and since they haven’t broken any laws the cops won’t do anything, so we either beat the crap out of them or get them engaged in something the cops will arrest them for. Those are vigilantes.
The border patrollers are at least showing their face and categorically denying that they do anything except watch and notify border patrol. Because anything would be, illegal.
Batman they ain’t.
“unclear what you refer to here. can you expand?”
The violent antifa movement has picked up support and justification from people who I believe otherwise to be reasonable. Yet masked avengers bringing their weapons to every protest and counter protest so they can create violence is just vigilantism. They don’t even pretend to not want violence. Their justification is those people deserve it and since they haven’t broken any laws the cops won’t do anything, so we either beat the crap out of them or get them engaged in something the cops will arrest them for. Those are vigilantes.
The border patrollers are at least showing their face and categorically denying that they do anything except watch and notify border patrol. Because anything would be, illegal.
Batman they ain’t.
the Party of Personal Responsibility™ sure does lean heavily on “it’s all the left’s fault”, when it comes to explaining why so many of them act like assholes.
the Party of Personal Responsibility™ sure does lean heavily on “it’s all the left’s fault”, when it comes to explaining why so many of them act like assholes.
The violent antifa movement has picked up support and justification from people who I believe otherwise to be reasonable.
Like who?
The violent antifa movement has picked up support and justification from people who I believe otherwise to be reasonable.
Like who?
Even Noam friggin’ Chomsky is critical of Antifa. He is being criticized for that by some people on “The Left,” so maybe Eleanor Penny and Asa Winstanley, mentioned in the linked article, are the reasonable people Marty’s talking about. I don’t recall hearing of either of them, myself, before reading the linked article.
Even Noam friggin’ Chomsky is critical of Antifa. He is being criticized for that by some people on “The Left,” so maybe Eleanor Penny and Asa Winstanley, mentioned in the linked article, are the reasonable people Marty’s talking about. I don’t recall hearing of either of them, myself, before reading the linked article.
“9/11 was one of the greatest days on the history of the Republican Party.”
I’m surprised they haven’t erected a statue of Osama Bin Laden at the 9/11 memorial. Why are they trying to rewrite history?
“9/11 was one of the greatest days on the history of the Republican Party.”
I’m surprised they haven’t erected a statue of Osama Bin Laden at the 9/11 memorial. Why are they trying to rewrite history?
The violent antifa movement has picked up support and justification from people who I believe otherwise to be reasonable.
what hairshirt said.
I know *A LOT* of people who are politically active on the progressive side. I don’t know a single person who supports or agrees with antifa’s tactics.
That includes me.
To a person, they wish they would stay the hell home.
When you lose Chomsky, you’ve pretty much fallen off the cliff as far as the American left goes.
The violent antifa movement has picked up support and justification from people who I believe otherwise to be reasonable.
what hairshirt said.
I know *A LOT* of people who are politically active on the progressive side. I don’t know a single person who supports or agrees with antifa’s tactics.
That includes me.
To a person, they wish they would stay the hell home.
When you lose Chomsky, you’ve pretty much fallen off the cliff as far as the American left goes.
I realize some of it is venting, some of it is hyperbole, some of it is an attempt at humor, but I’m disheartened with how casually my fellow travelers apply “racist” or “evil” tags (directly or indirectly) to other folks.
Cleary the KKK and Nazis deserve the whatever vindictive that comes their way, but to play six degrees of separation with words like “racist” and “evil” is counterproductive.
When you label someone “evil”, you give yourself a pass on working to see the world from his or her perspective. When you call someone a racist, you make yourself feel a little better, a little superior, but in all likelihood you make the target worse of a racist.
This isn’t entirely directed at posts/posters here. My firm is somewhat active in Dem politics and I’m alarmed that political pros who are usually good naturedly cynical regarding the emotional side of politics (at least after a few drinks) have become wide-eyed sweaty-toothed zealots.
For my part, I’m actually sanguine on many fronts (if not overall).
I don’t care if Congress is Republican-controlled at the moment; it’s a good thing that the legislative branch is reasserting itself and we are walking back from the unitary executive. Bush and Obama both traveled too far down that path for my tastes. The judiciary has also played its roll. The presidency is not supposed to be an all-powerful chief executive. It’s good to be reminded of that.
Trump is also a helpful reminder that elections matter; this is serious business.
I’m also OK that we are having this spasm of right wing ugliness now. As I’ve said before, this was a boil that needed to be lanced. Better it happen with Trump leading the movement than someone competent. I have some economics training and believe in markets, including markets for ideas. I’m honestly not worried that these alt-right assholes can foment an organized movement in the real world. Protect their first amendment rights, let them have their say, and let them see their words of hatred fall on deaf ears.
I’ve lived in many regions of the country and seen racism everywhere. I grew up in a small town in SC and saw it everyday. I have a really good idea how broad and deep racism runs in this country and I have zero concerns that the alt-right can or will engineer a white supremacist revolution.
My suggestion: Take a breath. The republic is not falling apart. If we learn the lessons of the Trump mistake, the nation will be all the better for it.
I realize some of it is venting, some of it is hyperbole, some of it is an attempt at humor, but I’m disheartened with how casually my fellow travelers apply “racist” or “evil” tags (directly or indirectly) to other folks.
Cleary the KKK and Nazis deserve the whatever vindictive that comes their way, but to play six degrees of separation with words like “racist” and “evil” is counterproductive.
When you label someone “evil”, you give yourself a pass on working to see the world from his or her perspective. When you call someone a racist, you make yourself feel a little better, a little superior, but in all likelihood you make the target worse of a racist.
This isn’t entirely directed at posts/posters here. My firm is somewhat active in Dem politics and I’m alarmed that political pros who are usually good naturedly cynical regarding the emotional side of politics (at least after a few drinks) have become wide-eyed sweaty-toothed zealots.
For my part, I’m actually sanguine on many fronts (if not overall).
I don’t care if Congress is Republican-controlled at the moment; it’s a good thing that the legislative branch is reasserting itself and we are walking back from the unitary executive. Bush and Obama both traveled too far down that path for my tastes. The judiciary has also played its roll. The presidency is not supposed to be an all-powerful chief executive. It’s good to be reminded of that.
Trump is also a helpful reminder that elections matter; this is serious business.
I’m also OK that we are having this spasm of right wing ugliness now. As I’ve said before, this was a boil that needed to be lanced. Better it happen with Trump leading the movement than someone competent. I have some economics training and believe in markets, including markets for ideas. I’m honestly not worried that these alt-right assholes can foment an organized movement in the real world. Protect their first amendment rights, let them have their say, and let them see their words of hatred fall on deaf ears.
I’ve lived in many regions of the country and seen racism everywhere. I grew up in a small town in SC and saw it everyday. I have a really good idea how broad and deep racism runs in this country and I have zero concerns that the alt-right can or will engineer a white supremacist revolution.
My suggestion: Take a breath. The republic is not falling apart. If we learn the lessons of the Trump mistake, the nation will be all the better for it.
They want to be heroes, but they can find no one to save.
They could…
Note one thing about your whole list. All of them, to different degrees, require work. Sustained effort.
My sense is that, in a lot of cases (maybe almost all of them), they want to be heroes without being willing to pay the price. Just get the comic-book magic spider bite or something — no effort required to become a hero.
They want to be heroes, but they can find no one to save.
They could…
Note one thing about your whole list. All of them, to different degrees, require work. Sustained effort.
My sense is that, in a lot of cases (maybe almost all of them), they want to be heroes without being willing to pay the price. Just get the comic-book magic spider bite or something — no effort required to become a hero.
hell, i’m don’t i even agree with “antifa”‘s overall goals. aside from a shared hatred of Nazis and the KKK, they and i have very different things in mind when we speak about what is “fa-” and what isn’t.
i don’t want the destruction of capitalism, the destruction of the police, the destruction of the US government. i don’t want communism or anarchy. and i wish they’d stay the hell away.
hell, i’m don’t i even agree with “antifa”‘s overall goals. aside from a shared hatred of Nazis and the KKK, they and i have very different things in mind when we speak about what is “fa-” and what isn’t.
i don’t want the destruction of capitalism, the destruction of the police, the destruction of the US government. i don’t want communism or anarchy. and i wish they’d stay the hell away.
hell, i’m don’t i even.
English 2.0 is still in beta.
hell, i’m don’t i even.
English 2.0 is still in beta.
When you label someone “evil”, you give yourself a pass on working to see the world from his or her perspective.
I don’t care to see the world from the perspective of someone who hates immigrants, condones the cold blooded killing of African-American youth, wants to step up environmental degradation instead of slowing it down, basically endorses a politics of cruelty, and ignores blatant lying, calumny, and misinformation. All of that is evil, truly evil. Whether the people themselves are evil? Although I would rather not judge people (leaving that to God, or whomever), I can’t find it in my heart to think highly of them.
My suggestion: Take a breath. The republic is not falling apart. If we learn the lessons of the Trump mistake, the nation will be all the better for it.
I find that hard to believe that I’ll discover any good coming of Donald Trump in my lifetime. I’ll certainly be happy to be wrong.
As to antifa, what cleek said at 12:24.
When you label someone “evil”, you give yourself a pass on working to see the world from his or her perspective.
I don’t care to see the world from the perspective of someone who hates immigrants, condones the cold blooded killing of African-American youth, wants to step up environmental degradation instead of slowing it down, basically endorses a politics of cruelty, and ignores blatant lying, calumny, and misinformation. All of that is evil, truly evil. Whether the people themselves are evil? Although I would rather not judge people (leaving that to God, or whomever), I can’t find it in my heart to think highly of them.
My suggestion: Take a breath. The republic is not falling apart. If we learn the lessons of the Trump mistake, the nation will be all the better for it.
I find that hard to believe that I’ll discover any good coming of Donald Trump in my lifetime. I’ll certainly be happy to be wrong.
As to antifa, what cleek said at 12:24.
I don’t care to see the world from the perspective of someone who hates immigrants, condones the cold blooded killing of African-American youth, wants to step up environmental degradation instead of slowing it down, basically endorses a politics of cruelty, and ignores blatant lying, calumny, and misinformation. All of that is evil, truly evil.
Posted by: sapient | August 23, 2017 at 12:30 PM
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
I don’t care to see the world from the perspective of someone who hates immigrants, condones the cold blooded killing of African-American youth, wants to step up environmental degradation instead of slowing it down, basically endorses a politics of cruelty, and ignores blatant lying, calumny, and misinformation. All of that is evil, truly evil.
Posted by: sapient | August 23, 2017 at 12:30 PM
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
Certainly seems that their policies are driven by those attitudes.
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
Certainly seems that their policies are driven by those attitudes.
All of them, to different degrees, require work. Sustained effort.
Funny, that.
I have zero concerns that the alt-right can or will engineer a white supremacist revolution.
Look, until about 50 years ago, people could be denied access to housing, public accommodations of all sorts, and almost anything else you want to name, based on the color of their skin or their religion.
De jure.
De facto, black people, Jews, Catholics, gays, people of different races or religions who simply wanted to marry each other, could expect to be met with violence. Killed, beaten, property destroyed. They could be denied employment or lose employment.
And so on and so on.
The de facto thing went on for much longer than 50 years ago.
I don’t really have much of a problem calling those things evil. If “evil” seems overly harsh, I’ll settle for plain old wrong, on moral, ethical, and humanitarian grounds.
There are people – people in positions to actually make policy, to make things happen in the public sphere – who advocate for removing or weakening the laws and institutions that keep those things from returning.
Freedom of association!
States rights!
There are widespread efforts, by people holding national public office, today, to prevent people of “certain demographics” from voting.
And there are a great big crapload of folks who would be – who are – perfectly fine with all of that.
I’m not worried about anyone engineering a white supremacist revolution. I’m worried about the nation sliding back to a white supremacist steady state.
All of them, to different degrees, require work. Sustained effort.
Funny, that.
I have zero concerns that the alt-right can or will engineer a white supremacist revolution.
Look, until about 50 years ago, people could be denied access to housing, public accommodations of all sorts, and almost anything else you want to name, based on the color of their skin or their religion.
De jure.
De facto, black people, Jews, Catholics, gays, people of different races or religions who simply wanted to marry each other, could expect to be met with violence. Killed, beaten, property destroyed. They could be denied employment or lose employment.
And so on and so on.
The de facto thing went on for much longer than 50 years ago.
I don’t really have much of a problem calling those things evil. If “evil” seems overly harsh, I’ll settle for plain old wrong, on moral, ethical, and humanitarian grounds.
There are people – people in positions to actually make policy, to make things happen in the public sphere – who advocate for removing or weakening the laws and institutions that keep those things from returning.
Freedom of association!
States rights!
There are widespread efforts, by people holding national public office, today, to prevent people of “certain demographics” from voting.
And there are a great big crapload of folks who would be – who are – perfectly fine with all of that.
I’m not worried about anyone engineering a white supremacist revolution. I’m worried about the nation sliding back to a white supremacist steady state.
In spite if my firm’s active support of Dem candidates, I represent many Republicans. I also have many Republican friends. Some of these folks even voted for Trump (though they don’t approve of him today). I can’t find one who hates immigrants or condones killing black folks (regardless of age). I disagree with them on the importance of “border security” and the level of lawlessness, but I can’t detect racial animus in their views (believe me, I know it when I see it).
All of them are skeptical of the efficiency and potency of efforts to combat global warming (though many of them agree with me on a revenue neutral carbon tax). Most agree with the basic science related to global warming, but are skeptical of the predictive power of current models (I kind of agree with them there).
Do I think many of these folks are focusing on the wrong things and have their priorities out of whack? Sure. Do I think they are evil? Not for a second.
In spite if my firm’s active support of Dem candidates, I represent many Republicans. I also have many Republican friends. Some of these folks even voted for Trump (though they don’t approve of him today). I can’t find one who hates immigrants or condones killing black folks (regardless of age). I disagree with them on the importance of “border security” and the level of lawlessness, but I can’t detect racial animus in their views (believe me, I know it when I see it).
All of them are skeptical of the efficiency and potency of efforts to combat global warming (though many of them agree with me on a revenue neutral carbon tax). Most agree with the basic science related to global warming, but are skeptical of the predictive power of current models (I kind of agree with them there).
Do I think many of these folks are focusing on the wrong things and have their priorities out of whack? Sure. Do I think they are evil? Not for a second.
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
“Certainly seems that their policies are driven by those attitudes.”
The term “Trump Voter” is a useful shorthand for ‘those people’. It’s up to them to prove otherwise.
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
“Certainly seems that their policies are driven by those attitudes.”
The term “Trump Voter” is a useful shorthand for ‘those people’. It’s up to them to prove otherwise.
I can’t detect racial animus in their views (believe me, I know it when I see it).
I see it when I see people voting for politicians who enact laws and policies in a larger agenda that is cruel to “certain people”, that is based on denying “those people” their right to vote, and that jeopardizes their health and safety. YMMD
I can’t detect racial animus in their views (believe me, I know it when I see it).
I see it when I see people voting for politicians who enact laws and policies in a larger agenda that is cruel to “certain people”, that is based on denying “those people” their right to vote, and that jeopardizes their health and safety. YMMD
I have tons of friends who are Trump supporters. They’re good people. They just have a terribly distorted view of the world outside their own direct personal experience (IMO, of course – maybe I’m the one who’s blind to the very real problems they all see … or maybe not).
I can’t say why that is. They aren’t generally stupid. They just look at the world and see something very different from what I see. It’s perplexing, to be sure.
I have tons of friends who are Trump supporters. They’re good people. They just have a terribly distorted view of the world outside their own direct personal experience (IMO, of course – maybe I’m the one who’s blind to the very real problems they all see … or maybe not).
I can’t say why that is. They aren’t generally stupid. They just look at the world and see something very different from what I see. It’s perplexing, to be sure.
YMMV, I guess I meant. I’m so bad at acronyms.
YMMV, I guess I meant. I’m so bad at acronyms.
Your mileage may differ.
Your mileage may differ.
That’s what I meant, but the Internet says YMMD means “you made my day.”
That’s what I meant, but the Internet says YMMD means “you made my day.”
I can’t find one who hates immigrants or condones killing black folks
Then those aren’t the folks I’m talking about in my 12:49.
It strikes me that you, and Marty, and maybe some other folks want to minimize the threat that is posed by the “alt-right” crowd.
The danger is not that they are going to seize power and turn the nation into a Pepe-worshiping totalitarian state.
The danger is that they are going to stress the institutions of public life – the institutions that make it possible for all of us, and all kinds of us, to coexist in a common polity – to the breaking point.
That is not a particularly far reach, from where we are right now.
I can’t find one who hates immigrants or condones killing black folks
Then those aren’t the folks I’m talking about in my 12:49.
It strikes me that you, and Marty, and maybe some other folks want to minimize the threat that is posed by the “alt-right” crowd.
The danger is not that they are going to seize power and turn the nation into a Pepe-worshiping totalitarian state.
The danger is that they are going to stress the institutions of public life – the institutions that make it possible for all of us, and all kinds of us, to coexist in a common polity – to the breaking point.
That is not a particularly far reach, from where we are right now.
Your mileage may differ.
You Made Me Do it.
Your mileage may differ.
You Made Me Do it.
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
Clearly not all of us — for example, me! 😉
But it’s increasingly hard to argue that it doesn’t describe most self-identified Republicans. The polls seem pretty clear on that.
My personal experience suggests that there are a lot of us who are nothing like that . . . which offers me the luxury of assuming that the majority who are mostly live in “those places.” Which is a handy shorthand, just like “those people”, but so be it.
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
Clearly not all of us — for example, me! 😉
But it’s increasingly hard to argue that it doesn’t describe most self-identified Republicans. The polls seem pretty clear on that.
My personal experience suggests that there are a lot of us who are nothing like that . . . which offers me the luxury of assuming that the majority who are mostly live in “those places.” Which is a handy shorthand, just like “those people”, but so be it.
They just have a terribly distorted view of the world outside their own direct personal experience
….
They just look at the world and see something very different from what I see. It’s perplexing, to be sure.
I’ve gone on about this ad nauseam, but here it is again. This kind of stuff is happening because there is no longer a foundation of agreed facts and reality, as conveyed in schools, by the media, etc etc. Maybe it started with New Age anti-science nonsense (homeopathy, anti-vax etc etc), or maybe it started with the abolition of the Fairness Doctrine, maybe it started as politicians meddled too much with school curricula on ideological grounds. But the end result is that, nationwide, there is no base-level understanding of reality in the world. I am not (too) naive: I realise that people’s worldviews always varied based on class, race, political affiliation etc. But they all started from the foundation that e.g. 2 + 2 = 4, and that the scientific method establishes the explanation for physical phenomena thus, among other results, enabling technological advances. The destruction of this commonly acknowledged reality ends in people believing whatever they are told, or indoctrinated with by people they have decided to trust, and no argument or proof will convince them otherwise. You would never have convinced die-hard racists they were wrong, but a great mass of people in the middle have been convinced by accusations of Fake News, and believe the lies and evasions of the racist politicians they support.
They just have a terribly distorted view of the world outside their own direct personal experience
….
They just look at the world and see something very different from what I see. It’s perplexing, to be sure.
I’ve gone on about this ad nauseam, but here it is again. This kind of stuff is happening because there is no longer a foundation of agreed facts and reality, as conveyed in schools, by the media, etc etc. Maybe it started with New Age anti-science nonsense (homeopathy, anti-vax etc etc), or maybe it started with the abolition of the Fairness Doctrine, maybe it started as politicians meddled too much with school curricula on ideological grounds. But the end result is that, nationwide, there is no base-level understanding of reality in the world. I am not (too) naive: I realise that people’s worldviews always varied based on class, race, political affiliation etc. But they all started from the foundation that e.g. 2 + 2 = 4, and that the scientific method establishes the explanation for physical phenomena thus, among other results, enabling technological advances. The destruction of this commonly acknowledged reality ends in people believing whatever they are told, or indoctrinated with by people they have decided to trust, and no argument or proof will convince them otherwise. You would never have convinced die-hard racists they were wrong, but a great mass of people in the middle have been convinced by accusations of Fake News, and believe the lies and evasions of the racist politicians they support.
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
Most of them voted for Trump. QED
But seriously, sure, one could say many of them are just plain ordinary folk…but when they act as a group they are, to put it bluntly, a bunch of assholes.
Do you think that describes all Republicans? Even most of them?
Most of them voted for Trump. QED
But seriously, sure, one could say many of them are just plain ordinary folk…but when they act as a group they are, to put it bluntly, a bunch of assholes.
There are people – people in positions to actually make policy, to make things happen in the public sphere – who advocate for removing or weakening the laws and institutions that keep those things from returning.
Posted by: russell | August 23, 2017 at 12:49 PM
I’m not in favor of weakening anti-discrimination laws w/r/t public accommodations, but I do see the point that my friends on the right make when “public accommodation” is expanded to include wedding cakes.
There are people – people in positions to actually make policy, to make things happen in the public sphere – who advocate for removing or weakening the laws and institutions that keep those things from returning.
Posted by: russell | August 23, 2017 at 12:49 PM
I’m not in favor of weakening anti-discrimination laws w/r/t public accommodations, but I do see the point that my friends on the right make when “public accommodation” is expanded to include wedding cakes.
The danger is that they are going to stress the institutions of public life – the institutions that make it possible for all of us, and all kinds of us, to coexist in a common polity – to the breaking point.
That is not a particularly far reach, from where we are right now.
Posted by: russell | August 23, 2017 at 01:14 PM
My point is that indiscriminately tossing around labels like “racist” and “evil” will do the same sort of damage.
The danger is that they are going to stress the institutions of public life – the institutions that make it possible for all of us, and all kinds of us, to coexist in a common polity – to the breaking point.
That is not a particularly far reach, from where we are right now.
Posted by: russell | August 23, 2017 at 01:14 PM
My point is that indiscriminately tossing around labels like “racist” and “evil” will do the same sort of damage.
I’ve gone on about this ad nauseam, but here it is again. This kind of stuff is happening because there is no longer a foundation of agreed facts and reality, as conveyed in schools, by the media, etc etc. Maybe it started with New Age anti-science nonsense (homeopathy, anti-vax etc etc), or maybe it started with the abolition of the Fairness Doctrine, maybe it started as politicians meddled too much with school curricula on ideological grounds. But the end result is that, nationwide, there is no base-level understanding of reality in the world. I am not (too) naive: I realise that people’s worldviews always varied based on class, race, political affiliation etc. But they all started from the foundation that e.g. 2 + 2 = 4, and that the scientific method establishes the explanation for physical phenomena thus, among other results, enabling technological advances. The destruction of this commonly acknowledged reality ends in people believing whatever they are told, or indoctrinated with by people they have decided to trust, and no argument or proof will convince them otherwise. You would never have convinced die-hard racists they were wrong, but a great mass of people in the middle have been convinced by accusations of Fake News, and believe the lies and evasions of the racist politicians they support.
Posted by: Girl from the North Country | August 23, 2017 at 01:35 PM
I think it’s simply a result of the internet allowing folks to self-segregate into their little tribal echo-chambers. I will take time for people to adjust and do a better job of curating their information sources, but I think we’ll get there.
I’ve gone on about this ad nauseam, but here it is again. This kind of stuff is happening because there is no longer a foundation of agreed facts and reality, as conveyed in schools, by the media, etc etc. Maybe it started with New Age anti-science nonsense (homeopathy, anti-vax etc etc), or maybe it started with the abolition of the Fairness Doctrine, maybe it started as politicians meddled too much with school curricula on ideological grounds. But the end result is that, nationwide, there is no base-level understanding of reality in the world. I am not (too) naive: I realise that people’s worldviews always varied based on class, race, political affiliation etc. But they all started from the foundation that e.g. 2 + 2 = 4, and that the scientific method establishes the explanation for physical phenomena thus, among other results, enabling technological advances. The destruction of this commonly acknowledged reality ends in people believing whatever they are told, or indoctrinated with by people they have decided to trust, and no argument or proof will convince them otherwise. You would never have convinced die-hard racists they were wrong, but a great mass of people in the middle have been convinced by accusations of Fake News, and believe the lies and evasions of the racist politicians they support.
Posted by: Girl from the North Country | August 23, 2017 at 01:35 PM
I think it’s simply a result of the internet allowing folks to self-segregate into their little tribal echo-chambers. I will take time for people to adjust and do a better job of curating their information sources, but I think we’ll get there.
A tweet I just saw retweeted from the Republican Party of Virginia (@VA_GOP):
Not racist. Not at all.
A tweet I just saw retweeted from the Republican Party of Virginia (@VA_GOP):
Not racist. Not at all.
You would never have convinced die-hard racists they were wrong, but a great mass of people in the middle have been convinced by accusations of Fake News, and believe the lies and evasions of the racist politicians they support.
Some people are not very smart, but some of the people you’re referring to here are willfully ignorant. They are every bit as racist as the people they support, and that’s why they support those people. They don’t care to change.
You would never have convinced die-hard racists they were wrong, but a great mass of people in the middle have been convinced by accusations of Fake News, and believe the lies and evasions of the racist politicians they support.
Some people are not very smart, but some of the people you’re referring to here are willfully ignorant. They are every bit as racist as the people they support, and that’s why they support those people. They don’t care to change.
My point is that indiscriminately tossing around labels like “racist” and “evil” will do the same sort of damage.
You are not being serious. Extreme language in political debate is old stuff. Just take a moment to review the invective during the election of 1800, for starters. To give your claim any credence would be to similarly assert that the Civil War took place because folks called each other bad names.
Why, I’ve been called a comsymp, traitorous, un-American for decades.
I lived.
Our public institutions also got through it OK.
Your assertion in this regard is without merit.
You might turn your oh-so-serious concerns to the real causes of why one of our two major political parties is going off the ideological deep end, and constitutes a definite threat to our society.
My point is that indiscriminately tossing around labels like “racist” and “evil” will do the same sort of damage.
You are not being serious. Extreme language in political debate is old stuff. Just take a moment to review the invective during the election of 1800, for starters. To give your claim any credence would be to similarly assert that the Civil War took place because folks called each other bad names.
Why, I’ve been called a comsymp, traitorous, un-American for decades.
I lived.
Our public institutions also got through it OK.
Your assertion in this regard is without merit.
You might turn your oh-so-serious concerns to the real causes of why one of our two major political parties is going off the ideological deep end, and constitutes a definite threat to our society.
I see it when I see people voting for politicians who enact laws and policies in a larger agenda that is cruel to “certain people”, that is based on denying “those people” their right to vote, and that jeopardizes their health and safety. YMMD
Posted by: sapient | August 23, 2017 at 01:03 PM
Let’s be clear: you are referencing disproportionate impacts; voter ID laws for instance don’t target minorities explicitly.
Is there racial animus in the hearts of the people who formulate these strategies and draft these laws even without much or any evidence of voter fraud? Perhaps, but I’m pretty sure that the voter fraud brigade would feel differently if black folks voted Republican.
As much as I oppose these sham efforts to combat voter fraud, I don’t know that I can attach “racism” to them. Is there a callous disregard to disproportionate impact on black folks? Of course, but it isn’t motivated by racism; it’s motivated by trying to win elections for their team, which is really bad, but not “RACIST” bad.
Compare this to actual Nazis and KKK members who would disenfranchise black folks regardless of how they vote.
Don’t get me wrong, I can think of lots of bad words to describe these sham anti-voter fraud efforts, but I wouldn’t take it all the way to “racism”.
I see it when I see people voting for politicians who enact laws and policies in a larger agenda that is cruel to “certain people”, that is based on denying “those people” their right to vote, and that jeopardizes their health and safety. YMMD
Posted by: sapient | August 23, 2017 at 01:03 PM
Let’s be clear: you are referencing disproportionate impacts; voter ID laws for instance don’t target minorities explicitly.
Is there racial animus in the hearts of the people who formulate these strategies and draft these laws even without much or any evidence of voter fraud? Perhaps, but I’m pretty sure that the voter fraud brigade would feel differently if black folks voted Republican.
As much as I oppose these sham efforts to combat voter fraud, I don’t know that I can attach “racism” to them. Is there a callous disregard to disproportionate impact on black folks? Of course, but it isn’t motivated by racism; it’s motivated by trying to win elections for their team, which is really bad, but not “RACIST” bad.
Compare this to actual Nazis and KKK members who would disenfranchise black folks regardless of how they vote.
Don’t get me wrong, I can think of lots of bad words to describe these sham anti-voter fraud efforts, but I wouldn’t take it all the way to “racism”.
I think it’s simply a result of the internet allowing folks to self-segregate into their little tribal echo-chambers. I will take time for people to adjust and do a better job of curating their information sources, but I think we’ll get there
I’m sure your first sentence explains some of it (the spread and amplification). I think your second sentence is too optimistic, and in my opinion it’s very unlikely unless a way can be found to re-establish a common basic understanding. But you’ll know, if you were lurking for a while, that I’m generally with you on your disapproval of widespread accusation of fascism or evil, unless there is good evidence for it.
I think it’s simply a result of the internet allowing folks to self-segregate into their little tribal echo-chambers. I will take time for people to adjust and do a better job of curating their information sources, but I think we’ll get there
I’m sure your first sentence explains some of it (the spread and amplification). I think your second sentence is too optimistic, and in my opinion it’s very unlikely unless a way can be found to re-establish a common basic understanding. But you’ll know, if you were lurking for a while, that I’m generally with you on your disapproval of widespread accusation of fascism or evil, unless there is good evidence for it.
So, there it is. Back to square one. Republicans are racist, at least the majority of them. We don’t believe the same things because, uh, science and really it’s just your way or the highway.
Things are worse today, except That there have been these people for 150 years and well, we’ve long been calling each other names, but we need to stop these people now.
Democrats are going off the ideological deep end which constitutes an existential threat, even though there are only a few thousand Nazis they must be wiped out.
Read the thread. y’all, meaning “not me:, can’t even agree on why it’s bad or what’s bad or how bad. It’s just bad now because Trump and then Republicans.
I am not sure, except That all people not you are bad and should disappear, what you think should happen.
So, there it is. Back to square one. Republicans are racist, at least the majority of them. We don’t believe the same things because, uh, science and really it’s just your way or the highway.
Things are worse today, except That there have been these people for 150 years and well, we’ve long been calling each other names, but we need to stop these people now.
Democrats are going off the ideological deep end which constitutes an existential threat, even though there are only a few thousand Nazis they must be wiped out.
Read the thread. y’all, meaning “not me:, can’t even agree on why it’s bad or what’s bad or how bad. It’s just bad now because Trump and then Republicans.
I am not sure, except That all people not you are bad and should disappear, what you think should happen.
As much as I oppose these sham efforts to combat voter fraud, I don’t know that I can attach “racism” to them. Is there a callous disregard to disproportionate impact on black folks? Of course, but it isn’t motivated by racism; it’s motivated by trying to win elections for their team, which is really bad, but not “RACIST” bad.
Oh oh, I guess I’m not with you on this after all. I understand your argument, of course, but I think this is either sophistry or willed naivete. If people are prepared to disenfranchise a racial group, in a democratic society, then this is almost by definition racist no matter what the motivation is (and I think your generosity on motive is also largely if not entirely misplaced).
As much as I oppose these sham efforts to combat voter fraud, I don’t know that I can attach “racism” to them. Is there a callous disregard to disproportionate impact on black folks? Of course, but it isn’t motivated by racism; it’s motivated by trying to win elections for their team, which is really bad, but not “RACIST” bad.
Oh oh, I guess I’m not with you on this after all. I understand your argument, of course, but I think this is either sophistry or willed naivete. If people are prepared to disenfranchise a racial group, in a democratic society, then this is almost by definition racist no matter what the motivation is (and I think your generosity on motive is also largely if not entirely misplaced).
We don’t believe the same things because, uh, science and really it’s just your way or the highway.
This is a misunderstanding of my position, Marty. I have no problem when people disagree with me, so my way AND the highway are perfectly fine with me in a civilised society. My point about science was as an example of a possible cause for why groups no longer share a common basic understanding of the world. You can’t argue with e.g. a flat earther about the eclipse. They might insist it’s because a demon temporarily swallows the sun, and you’ve got nowhere to go with talking to them about it, because you have no common understanding of the world. Science is a good example, because things are subject to proof.
We don’t believe the same things because, uh, science and really it’s just your way or the highway.
This is a misunderstanding of my position, Marty. I have no problem when people disagree with me, so my way AND the highway are perfectly fine with me in a civilised society. My point about science was as an example of a possible cause for why groups no longer share a common basic understanding of the world. You can’t argue with e.g. a flat earther about the eclipse. They might insist it’s because a demon temporarily swallows the sun, and you’ve got nowhere to go with talking to them about it, because you have no common understanding of the world. Science is a good example, because things are subject to proof.
As much as I oppose these sham efforts to combat voter fraud, I don’t know that I can attach “racism” to them. Is there a callous disregard to disproportionate impact on black folks? Of course, but it isn’t motivated by racism;
if you can’t attach racism to them, how can you say it isn’t motivated by racism? which is it: are you a mind reader or not?
the policies have racist effects. the people who crafted these policies are not stupid people – they knew what the effects would be. if the thought of disenfranchising people based on race disturbed them, they wouldn’t have worked on these laws (and district boundaries). but they did. they did it knowing it would affect races differently.
not caring that your actions will look like the actions of a racist is a pretty good sign that you are in fact a racist.
As much as I oppose these sham efforts to combat voter fraud, I don’t know that I can attach “racism” to them. Is there a callous disregard to disproportionate impact on black folks? Of course, but it isn’t motivated by racism;
if you can’t attach racism to them, how can you say it isn’t motivated by racism? which is it: are you a mind reader or not?
the policies have racist effects. the people who crafted these policies are not stupid people – they knew what the effects would be. if the thought of disenfranchising people based on race disturbed them, they wouldn’t have worked on these laws (and district boundaries). but they did. they did it knowing it would affect races differently.
not caring that your actions will look like the actions of a racist is a pretty good sign that you are in fact a racist.
You are not being serious. Extreme language in political debate is old stuff. Just take a moment to review the invective during the election of 1800, for starters. To give your claim any credence would be to similarly assert that the Civil War took place because folks called each other bad names.
Why, I’ve been called a comsymp, traitorous, un-American for decades.
I lived.
Our public institutions also got through it OK.
Your assertion in this regard is without merit.
You might turn your oh-so-serious concerns to the real causes of why one of our two major political parties is going off the ideological deep end, and constitutes a definite threat to our society.
Posted by: bobbyp | August 23, 2017 at 02:13 PM
I am being serious … this is my serious face.
I happen to agree with you regarding the callous language used in the past, which is why I’m somewhat optimistic that we’ll get through this rough patch. We’ve been there, done that.
Russel said that the racists will stress out ability “to coexist in a common polity”. I didn’t read that as “dogs and cats living together post apocalyptic dystopia” … just that things will be shittier than they could be.
I’m concerned about the indiscriminate use of “racist” and “Nazi” in the same way … it causes damage and we’d be better off without it. There’s no call for you to recast my position as being more extreme than it is.
You are not being serious. Extreme language in political debate is old stuff. Just take a moment to review the invective during the election of 1800, for starters. To give your claim any credence would be to similarly assert that the Civil War took place because folks called each other bad names.
Why, I’ve been called a comsymp, traitorous, un-American for decades.
I lived.
Our public institutions also got through it OK.
Your assertion in this regard is without merit.
You might turn your oh-so-serious concerns to the real causes of why one of our two major political parties is going off the ideological deep end, and constitutes a definite threat to our society.
Posted by: bobbyp | August 23, 2017 at 02:13 PM
I am being serious … this is my serious face.
I happen to agree with you regarding the callous language used in the past, which is why I’m somewhat optimistic that we’ll get through this rough patch. We’ve been there, done that.
Russel said that the racists will stress out ability “to coexist in a common polity”. I didn’t read that as “dogs and cats living together post apocalyptic dystopia” … just that things will be shittier than they could be.
I’m concerned about the indiscriminate use of “racist” and “Nazi” in the same way … it causes damage and we’d be better off without it. There’s no call for you to recast my position as being more extreme than it is.
I’m concerned about the indiscriminate use of “racist” and “Nazi”
people actually marched, waving Nazi flags and chanting about the evil Jews. in the US. 10 days ago. Trump coddled them. his approval numbers went up among Republicans.
I’m concerned about the indiscriminate use of “racist” and “Nazi”
people actually marched, waving Nazi flags and chanting about the evil Jews. in the US. 10 days ago. Trump coddled them. his approval numbers went up among Republicans.
if you can’t attach racism to them, how can you say it isn’t motivated by racism? which is it: are you a mind reader or not?
the policies have racist effects. the people who crafted these policies are not stupid people – they knew what the effects would be. if the thought of disenfranchising people based on race disturbed them, they wouldn’t have worked on these laws (and district boundaries). but they did. they did it knowing it would affect races differently.
not caring that your actions will look like the actions of a racist is a pretty good sign that you are in fact a racist.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 02:45 PM
I’m not a mindreader and that’s the point: I’m not going to call someone a racist without pretty good evidence that they are in fact a racist.
I can’t even reach the conclusion that they do not care about the racial impact. I can draw the conclusion that they believe the political advantage of Voter ID outweighs the disproportionate racial impact. Is that enough to call them a racist? I don’t know.
Finally, as a technical matter, Voter ID laws don’t disenfranchise based on race … if they did then we’d have a really easy legal case to get rid of them. They do have a disproportionate impact on poorer Dem voters who are disproportionately minorities.
if you can’t attach racism to them, how can you say it isn’t motivated by racism? which is it: are you a mind reader or not?
the policies have racist effects. the people who crafted these policies are not stupid people – they knew what the effects would be. if the thought of disenfranchising people based on race disturbed them, they wouldn’t have worked on these laws (and district boundaries). but they did. they did it knowing it would affect races differently.
not caring that your actions will look like the actions of a racist is a pretty good sign that you are in fact a racist.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 02:45 PM
I’m not a mindreader and that’s the point: I’m not going to call someone a racist without pretty good evidence that they are in fact a racist.
I can’t even reach the conclusion that they do not care about the racial impact. I can draw the conclusion that they believe the political advantage of Voter ID outweighs the disproportionate racial impact. Is that enough to call them a racist? I don’t know.
Finally, as a technical matter, Voter ID laws don’t disenfranchise based on race … if they did then we’d have a really easy legal case to get rid of them. They do have a disproportionate impact on poorer Dem voters who are disproportionately minorities.
So, there it is. Back to square one. Republicans are racist, at least the majority of them. We don’t believe the same things because, uh, science and really it’s just your way or the highway.
I don’t think so. (Although I won’t vouch for everyone here.) I’d say most of us are clear that, while not all Republicans are racists, these days pretty much all racists are Republicans.
As for the make-up of the GOP, my totally unscientific guess would be something like:
“Other” including, for example,
NOTE: there’s probably some overlap in all of these cases. Which would make “other” rather larger than shown.
As for science, I’d say that the vast majority of those who refuse to acknowledge objective reality, as it is seen by pretty much everyone here including you, seem to be self-identifying as Republicans as well. Do you see any significant number of anti-vaxers, creationists, etc. among the Democrats? No doubt there are some conspiracy theorists; those seem to be on both sides. But otherwise?
So, there it is. Back to square one. Republicans are racist, at least the majority of them. We don’t believe the same things because, uh, science and really it’s just your way or the highway.
I don’t think so. (Although I won’t vouch for everyone here.) I’d say most of us are clear that, while not all Republicans are racists, these days pretty much all racists are Republicans.
As for the make-up of the GOP, my totally unscientific guess would be something like:
“Other” including, for example,
NOTE: there’s probably some overlap in all of these cases. Which would make “other” rather larger than shown.
As for science, I’d say that the vast majority of those who refuse to acknowledge objective reality, as it is seen by pretty much everyone here including you, seem to be self-identifying as Republicans as well. Do you see any significant number of anti-vaxers, creationists, etc. among the Democrats? No doubt there are some conspiracy theorists; those seem to be on both sides. But otherwise?
I’m concerned about the indiscriminate use of “racist” and “Nazi” in the same way … it causes damage and we’d be better off without it. There’s no call for you to recast my position as being more extreme than it is.
I guess if you’re talking about “indiscriminate use” you should be specific when someone does that. Because when it’s justified, I think it needs to be called out. That doesn’t mean that if you have a cordial relationship with your elderly next door neighbor, you have to start calling him a racist whenever you get together. But when people support racist policies, it doesn’t seem wrong to call them racists.
The term “Nazi” is a bit more difficult, because people start splitting hairs about the fact that the world has changed since the 1930’s, etc., and the various alt-right movements in this country don’t support Yeah, sure. But with the lovely folks that were in C’ville recently (some bad and good people on all sides!), I feel quite comfortable using the term to describe Trumpism as I have been doing.
I’m concerned about the indiscriminate use of “racist” and “Nazi” in the same way … it causes damage and we’d be better off without it. There’s no call for you to recast my position as being more extreme than it is.
I guess if you’re talking about “indiscriminate use” you should be specific when someone does that. Because when it’s justified, I think it needs to be called out. That doesn’t mean that if you have a cordial relationship with your elderly next door neighbor, you have to start calling him a racist whenever you get together. But when people support racist policies, it doesn’t seem wrong to call them racists.
The term “Nazi” is a bit more difficult, because people start splitting hairs about the fact that the world has changed since the 1930’s, etc., and the various alt-right movements in this country don’t support Yeah, sure. But with the lovely folks that were in C’ville recently (some bad and good people on all sides!), I feel quite comfortable using the term to describe Trumpism as I have been doing.
“They do have a disproportionate impact on poorer Dem voters who are disproportionately minorities.”
They really don’t. They have a disproportionate impact on poor voters. Not Democratic poor voters.
It isn’t even clear they have disproportionate impact on outcomes, poor voters are used to working a little harder to get stuff.
“They do have a disproportionate impact on poorer Dem voters who are disproportionately minorities.”
They really don’t. They have a disproportionate impact on poor voters. Not Democratic poor voters.
It isn’t even clear they have disproportionate impact on outcomes, poor voters are used to working a little harder to get stuff.
people actually marched, waving Nazi flags and chanting about the evil Jews. in the US. 10 days ago. Trump coddled them. his approval numbers went up among Republicans.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 02:55 PM
I don’t think that’s an accurate statement of the polling … lies, damn lies and statistics and all that.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/23/trump-charlottesville-polls-241917
That’s also a pretty blunt instrument to use for applying “racist” to a large group of people.
people actually marched, waving Nazi flags and chanting about the evil Jews. in the US. 10 days ago. Trump coddled them. his approval numbers went up among Republicans.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 02:55 PM
I don’t think that’s an accurate statement of the polling … lies, damn lies and statistics and all that.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/23/trump-charlottesville-polls-241917
That’s also a pretty blunt instrument to use for applying “racist” to a large group of people.
I see I should have edited my 3:02, but you get my drift.
I see I should have edited my 3:02, but you get my drift.
They really don’t. They have a disproportionate impact on poor voters. Not Democratic poor voters.
It isn’t even clear they have disproportionate impact on outcomes, poor voters are used to working a little harder to get stuff.
Posted by: Marty | August 23, 2017 at 03:03 PM
Point taken re: poor voters in general. I hate when people on the internet make these types of claims, but I’ve seen private polling that suggests poor Republican voters are more likely to have ID than poor Dem voters. My guess is that it’s related to the need to have ID to legally purchase a firearm (I’m only kidding a little). This poll targeted likely voters and not the population in general FWIW.
They really don’t. They have a disproportionate impact on poor voters. Not Democratic poor voters.
It isn’t even clear they have disproportionate impact on outcomes, poor voters are used to working a little harder to get stuff.
Posted by: Marty | August 23, 2017 at 03:03 PM
Point taken re: poor voters in general. I hate when people on the internet make these types of claims, but I’ve seen private polling that suggests poor Republican voters are more likely to have ID than poor Dem voters. My guess is that it’s related to the need to have ID to legally purchase a firearm (I’m only kidding a little). This poll targeted likely voters and not the population in general FWIW.
I don’t think that’s an accurate statement of the polling
here, look at the graph.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
see the bump that starts last Monday?
That’s also a pretty blunt instrument to use for applying “racist” to a large group of people.
if you work for outcomes that deliberately work against one race, you’re a racist.
I don’t think that’s an accurate statement of the polling
here, look at the graph.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
see the bump that starts last Monday?
That’s also a pretty blunt instrument to use for applying “racist” to a large group of people.
if you work for outcomes that deliberately work against one race, you’re a racist.
Oh oh, I guess I’m not with you on this after all. I understand your argument, of course, but I think this is either sophistry or willed naivete. If people are prepared to disenfranchise a racial group, in a democratic society, then this is almost by definition racist no matter what the motivation is (and I think your generosity on motive is also largely if not entirely misplaced).
Posted by: Girl from the North Country | August 23, 2017 at 02:38 PM
Damn it! I almost won over one of the regulars.
As I said in another response, Voter ID is not overtly disenfranchising a racial group. It has a disproportionate impact. To put this in perspective, *lots* of laws have a disproportionate impact.
Consider a person who has a job as a legislative aid or with a partisan think tank, and that person’s job is to think up legislation that will help Republicans win elections.
Assume they have good evidence that Voter ID will accomplish that goal, but the law will impact black voters in greater numbers than white voters.
Are they a racist for advocating Voter ID? Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not giving our hypothetical legislative aid a gold star, but I won’t call him a racist. As described he isn’t a Nazi who would seek to disenfranchise black folks for its own end. That’s an important distinction in my book.
Oh oh, I guess I’m not with you on this after all. I understand your argument, of course, but I think this is either sophistry or willed naivete. If people are prepared to disenfranchise a racial group, in a democratic society, then this is almost by definition racist no matter what the motivation is (and I think your generosity on motive is also largely if not entirely misplaced).
Posted by: Girl from the North Country | August 23, 2017 at 02:38 PM
Damn it! I almost won over one of the regulars.
As I said in another response, Voter ID is not overtly disenfranchising a racial group. It has a disproportionate impact. To put this in perspective, *lots* of laws have a disproportionate impact.
Consider a person who has a job as a legislative aid or with a partisan think tank, and that person’s job is to think up legislation that will help Republicans win elections.
Assume they have good evidence that Voter ID will accomplish that goal, but the law will impact black voters in greater numbers than white voters.
Are they a racist for advocating Voter ID? Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not giving our hypothetical legislative aid a gold star, but I won’t call him a racist. As described he isn’t a Nazi who would seek to disenfranchise black folks for its own end. That’s an important distinction in my book.
I guess if you’re talking about “indiscriminate use” you should be specific when someone does that.
I call people Nazis when they don’t pick up their dogs’ poop. Does that count?
I guess if you’re talking about “indiscriminate use” you should be specific when someone does that.
I call people Nazis when they don’t pick up their dogs’ poop. Does that count?
here, look at the graph.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
see the bump that starts last Monday?
That’s also a pretty blunt instrument to use for applying “racist” to a large group of people.
if you work for outcomes that deliberately work against one race, you’re a racist.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 03:21 PM
My link says the opposite. Lies, damn lies, yadda yadda.
I think it will take some time to measure the real impact on C’ville.
here, look at the graph.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html
see the bump that starts last Monday?
That’s also a pretty blunt instrument to use for applying “racist” to a large group of people.
if you work for outcomes that deliberately work against one race, you’re a racist.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 03:21 PM
My link says the opposite. Lies, damn lies, yadda yadda.
I think it will take some time to measure the real impact on C’ville.
Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
it doesn’t make you a racist. it demonstrates that you are.
Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
it doesn’t make you a racist. it demonstrates that you are.
it doesn’t make you a racist. it demonstrates that you are.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 03:40 PM
“Demonstrate” ≠ prove … unless you have a low standard of proof. Obviously I’m arguing for a higher standard.
it doesn’t make you a racist. it demonstrates that you are.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 03:40 PM
“Demonstrate” ≠ prove … unless you have a low standard of proof. Obviously I’m arguing for a higher standard.
this has become ridiculous.
this has become ridiculous.
“I call people Nazis when they don’t pick up their dogs’ poop. Does that count?”
In your yard or theirs?
“I call people Nazis when they don’t pick up their dogs’ poop. Does that count?”
In your yard or theirs?
“this has become ridiculous.”
No, it has been ridiculous for a while.
“this has become ridiculous.”
No, it has been ridiculous for a while.
this has become ridiculous.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 03:47 PM
Apologies … I was actually being serious, but I had a depo cancel and time on my hands and the rapid fire posts may have been a bit much … I’ll take a timeout.
this has become ridiculous.
Posted by: cleek_with_a_fake_beard | August 23, 2017 at 03:47 PM
Apologies … I was actually being serious, but I had a depo cancel and time on my hands and the rapid fire posts may have been a bit much … I’ll take a timeout.
“I’ll take a timeout.”
That isn’t necessary, this has become ridiculous doesn’t mean you have. Just some of the answers to you, so I am at the rare point of agreeing with cleek.
“I’ll take a timeout.”
That isn’t necessary, this has become ridiculous doesn’t mean you have. Just some of the answers to you, so I am at the rare point of agreeing with cleek.
In your yard or theirs?
Yard? I don’t have a yard. Yards are for Nazis.
In your yard or theirs?
Yard? I don’t have a yard. Yards are for Nazis.
I do see the point that my friends on the right make when “public accommodation” is expanded to include wedding cakes.
I see the point, too.
People with strong religious beliefs quite often, historically and now, bump into situations where their convictions bump up against everyday public life. Sometimes they demand that everyday public life accommodate them, sometimes they voluntarily exclude themselves from things that create moral or ethical problems for them.
The issue I have with this issue are the folks who want to portray this as some kind of hostility to religion. Trust me, I know folks who see this stuff as one step away from Roman Christians being thrown to the lions.
Religious people have rights and interests. Gay people have rights and interests. Sometimes they come into conflict. So, a problem. We need to figure it out. There might not actually be a win-win solution. What should we do?
In these cases, specifically, granting religious people an exception to what is required of everybody else undermines the basic principle that everyone who participates in public life should be able to participate on an equal footing. That includes having access to privately owned public accommodations, which operate under publicly granted licenses and regulations.
I understand the dilemma. I also understand the consequences.
If we want to carve out an exception for fundamentalist cake-bakers, it won’t really upset me all that much. Most places, there’s more than one place to get a cake.
But it erodes the sense that we all share a common public life. We should think hard before we undermine that.
if you work for outcomes that deliberately work against one race, you’re a racist.
I actually disagree with this. I agree with pollo, if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
My thought about racism in this country is that most of us are racist. How we think about and respond to other people are, to some degree, influenced by the color of their skin and/or their apparent ethnic heritage. I know Marty objects when I call that racism, but I simply don’t know what else to call it.
It’s our common problem, it’s part of our heritage as a nation, it’s something we all are responsible for, and something we all have to address and try to mitigate.
I live in deep-blue MA, which is politically absolutely dominated by the (D) party, and you can believe me when I say race is a factor in daily life here, one way or another.
The biggest issue I have with (R)’s regarding race is that their approaches to dealing with it seem to all be based on the idea that it doesn’t exist.
I do see the point that my friends on the right make when “public accommodation” is expanded to include wedding cakes.
I see the point, too.
People with strong religious beliefs quite often, historically and now, bump into situations where their convictions bump up against everyday public life. Sometimes they demand that everyday public life accommodate them, sometimes they voluntarily exclude themselves from things that create moral or ethical problems for them.
The issue I have with this issue are the folks who want to portray this as some kind of hostility to religion. Trust me, I know folks who see this stuff as one step away from Roman Christians being thrown to the lions.
Religious people have rights and interests. Gay people have rights and interests. Sometimes they come into conflict. So, a problem. We need to figure it out. There might not actually be a win-win solution. What should we do?
In these cases, specifically, granting religious people an exception to what is required of everybody else undermines the basic principle that everyone who participates in public life should be able to participate on an equal footing. That includes having access to privately owned public accommodations, which operate under publicly granted licenses and regulations.
I understand the dilemma. I also understand the consequences.
If we want to carve out an exception for fundamentalist cake-bakers, it won’t really upset me all that much. Most places, there’s more than one place to get a cake.
But it erodes the sense that we all share a common public life. We should think hard before we undermine that.
if you work for outcomes that deliberately work against one race, you’re a racist.
I actually disagree with this. I agree with pollo, if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
My thought about racism in this country is that most of us are racist. How we think about and respond to other people are, to some degree, influenced by the color of their skin and/or their apparent ethnic heritage. I know Marty objects when I call that racism, but I simply don’t know what else to call it.
It’s our common problem, it’s part of our heritage as a nation, it’s something we all are responsible for, and something we all have to address and try to mitigate.
I live in deep-blue MA, which is politically absolutely dominated by the (D) party, and you can believe me when I say race is a factor in daily life here, one way or another.
The biggest issue I have with (R)’s regarding race is that their approaches to dealing with it seem to all be based on the idea that it doesn’t exist.
If we want to carve out an exception for fundamentalist cake-bakers, it won’t really upset me all that much. Most places, there’s more than one place to get a cake.
There shouldn’t be any carve outs for religion or any other group identities. A right either exists or it doesn’t.
Consider a person who has a job as a legislative aid or with a partisan think tank, and that person’s job is to think up legislation that will help Republicans win elections.
Assume they have good evidence that Voter ID will accomplish that goal, but the law will impact black voters in greater numbers than white voters.
Are they a racist for advocating Voter ID? Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
I think it’s a larger ball of wax than just the Voter ID policy, and trying to disenfranchise people who vote D who happen to be black. They want to disenfranchise people who vote D because D policies are fashioned to create a more egalitarian world, which is why semi-disenfranchised people feel more comfortable voting for D’s. It’s why we seem to be polarized on most issues, because single issues usually are tied together with other issues, that reflect a more comprehensive world view. If I want to disenfranchise African-Americans because they are more likely to vote D, because Democrats are more likely to support affirmative action, fair housing and other anti-discriminatory laws, labor regulations, environmental regulations, etc., I have a view that government exists to create a fairer world. People who reject that view tend more toward social Darwinism, a philosophy that has been embraced by people like Nazis.
Just saying. No, not every single R is a Nazi, but these days, when the R party is embraced by open Nazis and KKK members, R’s need to better justify their worldview of leaving less fortunate people in the dirt. Because it ends up being racist, cruel and it stinks.
I call people Nazis when they don’t pick up their dogs’ poop. Does that count?
They fall into the “it stinks” category.
If we want to carve out an exception for fundamentalist cake-bakers, it won’t really upset me all that much. Most places, there’s more than one place to get a cake.
There shouldn’t be any carve outs for religion or any other group identities. A right either exists or it doesn’t.
Consider a person who has a job as a legislative aid or with a partisan think tank, and that person’s job is to think up legislation that will help Republicans win elections.
Assume they have good evidence that Voter ID will accomplish that goal, but the law will impact black voters in greater numbers than white voters.
Are they a racist for advocating Voter ID? Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
I think it’s a larger ball of wax than just the Voter ID policy, and trying to disenfranchise people who vote D who happen to be black. They want to disenfranchise people who vote D because D policies are fashioned to create a more egalitarian world, which is why semi-disenfranchised people feel more comfortable voting for D’s. It’s why we seem to be polarized on most issues, because single issues usually are tied together with other issues, that reflect a more comprehensive world view. If I want to disenfranchise African-Americans because they are more likely to vote D, because Democrats are more likely to support affirmative action, fair housing and other anti-discriminatory laws, labor regulations, environmental regulations, etc., I have a view that government exists to create a fairer world. People who reject that view tend more toward social Darwinism, a philosophy that has been embraced by people like Nazis.
Just saying. No, not every single R is a Nazi, but these days, when the R party is embraced by open Nazis and KKK members, R’s need to better justify their worldview of leaving less fortunate people in the dirt. Because it ends up being racist, cruel and it stinks.
I call people Nazis when they don’t pick up their dogs’ poop. Does that count?
They fall into the “it stinks” category.
In other words, if you need to win elections by gerrymandering, disenfranchising people, winning the electoral college only, and you strive to do that instead of winning over the majority of people with your message, you have to do a bit of soul searching about your message, and your view of democratic principles.
In other words, if you need to win elections by gerrymandering, disenfranchising people, winning the electoral college only, and you strive to do that instead of winning over the majority of people with your message, you have to do a bit of soul searching about your message, and your view of democratic principles.
I actually disagree with this. I agree with pollo, if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
right. but…
if minorities voted for Rs in large numbers, the GOP would have to be a very different party than what they are now. there are many reasons a minority might not want to vote R right now, but one of those reasons is that the Rs do things that make minorities think Rs are racist. i won’t bother listing examples, because i know you know them all.
there are racist Dems, no doubt. but on the whole, the Dems really do try to stamp out racism and to level the playing field. and i know you know that, too.
so, yes: minorities would probably vote Republican if Republicans did not have Republican attitudes towards race. but they do.
I actually disagree with this. I agree with pollo, if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
right. but…
if minorities voted for Rs in large numbers, the GOP would have to be a very different party than what they are now. there are many reasons a minority might not want to vote R right now, but one of those reasons is that the Rs do things that make minorities think Rs are racist. i won’t bother listing examples, because i know you know them all.
there are racist Dems, no doubt. but on the whole, the Dems really do try to stamp out racism and to level the playing field. and i know you know that, too.
so, yes: minorities would probably vote Republican if Republicans did not have Republican attitudes towards race. but they do.
A right either exists or it doesn’t.
Gays have the right of access to public accommodations.
Religious people have the right to exercise their religion.
Sometimes different people’s rights, all of which exist, conflict.
This isn’t the only example. It comes up, from time to time.
if minorities voted for Rs in large numbers, the GOP would have to be a very different party than what they are now.
You got that right.
and i know you know that, too.
Indeed I do. And so do minority voters.
A right either exists or it doesn’t.
Gays have the right of access to public accommodations.
Religious people have the right to exercise their religion.
Sometimes different people’s rights, all of which exist, conflict.
This isn’t the only example. It comes up, from time to time.
if minorities voted for Rs in large numbers, the GOP would have to be a very different party than what they are now.
You got that right.
and i know you know that, too.
Indeed I do. And so do minority voters.
if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. Republicans have been comfortable with disenfranchising African Americans, and trying to end affirmative action, for as long as I can remember. You can (and some here have) make arguments for doing these things which present them as not racist, but the evidence stacks up pretty convincingly in my opinion. If it quacks like a duck etc (this is my post for questionable proverbs).
yes: minorities would probably vote Republican if Republicans did not have Republican attitudes towards race. but they do.
Impossible to disagree.
if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. Republicans have been comfortable with disenfranchising African Americans, and trying to end affirmative action, for as long as I can remember. You can (and some here have) make arguments for doing these things which present them as not racist, but the evidence stacks up pretty convincingly in my opinion. If it quacks like a duck etc (this is my post for questionable proverbs).
yes: minorities would probably vote Republican if Republicans did not have Republican attitudes towards race. but they do.
Impossible to disagree.
GftNC: But they all started from the foundation that e.g. 2 + 2 = 4
Suzie has 4 ideas. She gives Johnny 2 of her ideas.
How many ideas does Suzie have left?
Is it possible that liberals and conservatives, while agreeing that 2+2=4, would answer the question differently?
–TP
GftNC: But they all started from the foundation that e.g. 2 + 2 = 4
Suzie has 4 ideas. She gives Johnny 2 of her ideas.
How many ideas does Suzie have left?
Is it possible that liberals and conservatives, while agreeing that 2+2=4, would answer the question differently?
–TP
I had this same conversation with one of the organizers of the free speech rally. We were discussing one of his speakers.
“Not a racist!”, he claimed.
Maybe not, says I, but the guy has publicly called Jada Smith a “monkey actress” and has publicly referred to Asians as “slopes” and “riceballs”.
I don’t know what’s in his heart. I only know what he says.
Racist, not racist – who am I to judge? I’m not a mind reader. No doubt some of his best friends, etc.
Treats people of different races differently, that’s all I know.
I had this same conversation with one of the organizers of the free speech rally. We were discussing one of his speakers.
“Not a racist!”, he claimed.
Maybe not, says I, but the guy has publicly called Jada Smith a “monkey actress” and has publicly referred to Asians as “slopes” and “riceballs”.
I don’t know what’s in his heart. I only know what he says.
Racist, not racist – who am I to judge? I’m not a mind reader. No doubt some of his best friends, etc.
Treats people of different races differently, that’s all I know.
How many ideas does Suzie have left?
Four, but who gets the IP?
How many ideas does Suzie have left?
Four, but who gets the IP?
TonyP, I like your question. Personally, I think that Suzie is likely to end up with 6 ideas. But you’re right, conservatives would probably disagree..
TonyP, I like your question. Personally, I think that Suzie is likely to end up with 6 ideas. But you’re right, conservatives would probably disagree..
if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
Whites at the lowest end of the income scale vote Democratic.
Lower middle class whites tend to favor the GOP
Blacks are disproportionately poor, and vote heavily Democratic
Voter ID laws are a relatively new mantra by GOP lawmakers.
They are targeted at blacks.
If blacks voted R, there would not be a hue and cry by the GOP for voter ID laws.
Disparate impact is a well established benchmark used to show institutional racial bias.
Thus, to my way of looking at it, voter ID laws are inherently racist.
if minorities voted for (R)’s in large numbers, they’d not only make sure they had access to the polls, they’d drive them to the polling place.
Whites at the lowest end of the income scale vote Democratic.
Lower middle class whites tend to favor the GOP
Blacks are disproportionately poor, and vote heavily Democratic
Voter ID laws are a relatively new mantra by GOP lawmakers.
They are targeted at blacks.
If blacks voted R, there would not be a hue and cry by the GOP for voter ID laws.
Disparate impact is a well established benchmark used to show institutional racial bias.
Thus, to my way of looking at it, voter ID laws are inherently racist.
Are they a racist for advocating Voter ID? Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
If they are cognizant of the disproportionate impact and proceed nonetheless, then yes, they are.
Are they a racist for advocating Voter ID? Does being callous to a disproportionate impact make you a racist?
If they are cognizant of the disproportionate impact and proceed nonetheless, then yes, they are.
Did redlining only affect black people?
Is is racist?
Come on, folks. This is not rocket science.
Did redlining only affect black people?
Is is racist?
Come on, folks. This is not rocket science.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agrees re. Texas.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agrees re. Texas.
Relevant: The Color of Law, by Richard Rothstein.
I started it recently, but I don’t know if I can stand to finish it.
Relevant: The Color of Law, by Richard Rothstein.
I started it recently, but I don’t know if I can stand to finish it.
A right either exists or it doesn’t.
Gays have the right of access to public accommodations.
Religious people have the right to exercise their religion.
Sometimes different people’s rights, all of which exist, conflict.
The question, for me, is what constitutes a “public accommodation”? Clearly, a hotel or other housing qualifies. Likewise a restaurant (or bar). But does the term include any business? Including any and every possible business seems like a bit of a stretch.
I don’t have a comprehensive answer that I’m happy with. But I don’t think I’d go quite as far as a wedding cake bakery which is entirely takeout. Maybe what I’m groping towards is something like “suppliers of necessities are covered; suppliers of luxuries are not.” Still trying to figure it out.
A right either exists or it doesn’t.
Gays have the right of access to public accommodations.
Religious people have the right to exercise their religion.
Sometimes different people’s rights, all of which exist, conflict.
The question, for me, is what constitutes a “public accommodation”? Clearly, a hotel or other housing qualifies. Likewise a restaurant (or bar). But does the term include any business? Including any and every possible business seems like a bit of a stretch.
I don’t have a comprehensive answer that I’m happy with. But I don’t think I’d go quite as far as a wedding cake bakery which is entirely takeout. Maybe what I’m groping towards is something like “suppliers of necessities are covered; suppliers of luxuries are not.” Still trying to figure it out.
I’m probably restating what someone else already wrote, but Republicans could try to support policies that would help black people close the numerous gaps by which they fall behind the overall population, thereby winning some number of black votes. Instead, they leave that to the Democrats and try to keep black people from voting. That’s racist. Perhaps it’s systemically racist rather than individually racist, but I’m not sure who is making that particular system possible, other than a number of individuals.
“Let’s fnck over black people with our policies, while also fncking black people over at the polling place so we don’t pay the price electorally.”
I suppose it’s possible that the goal of the first part isn’t to fnck over black people, and that Republicans just happen to favor policies that just happen to fnck over black people. And the second part isn’t done to fnck over black people, per se, but it’s necessary to enact the policies that just happen to fnck over black people.
It is a crazy world, after all.
I’m probably restating what someone else already wrote, but Republicans could try to support policies that would help black people close the numerous gaps by which they fall behind the overall population, thereby winning some number of black votes. Instead, they leave that to the Democrats and try to keep black people from voting. That’s racist. Perhaps it’s systemically racist rather than individually racist, but I’m not sure who is making that particular system possible, other than a number of individuals.
“Let’s fnck over black people with our policies, while also fncking black people over at the polling place so we don’t pay the price electorally.”
I suppose it’s possible that the goal of the first part isn’t to fnck over black people, and that Republicans just happen to favor policies that just happen to fnck over black people. And the second part isn’t done to fnck over black people, per se, but it’s necessary to enact the policies that just happen to fnck over black people.
It is a crazy world, after all.
The question, for me, is what constitutes a “public accommodation”?
Yes, that is certainly one dimension of the overall question.
The best solution I’ve heard suggested was Areala’s: if you want to restrict who you will serve, for some or all of the products and services you offer, you make that explicit in your advertising and signage.
Don’t want to make wedding cakes for gays? Advertising and on-prem signage says “We do not make wedding cakes for gays”.
That way nobody has to make cakes for folks they don’t want to make cakes for, and nobody has to go through the insulting exercise of having a potential baker tell them how repugnant their lifestyle is.
That might cost you business, then again it might win you business. I’m sure there’s a market for 100% hetero cakes out there somewhere.
What I would *really* like is a crisp definition of what the “exercise of religion” means. Nowadays even for-profit corps have a spiritual life.
I keep looking for the passage about for-profit corps in Paul’s letters, to no avail. Torah, sutras, Bhagavad-Gita, Koran, still no luck. Egyptian book of the dead, still no black letter corporate law.
But I digress.
An aside : Areala, if you’re reading this, we miss you. Come visit.
Are they a racist for…
Racists are as racists do. If anyone has a better formulation, I’m all ears.
If the shoe fits, wear it. If you don’t like it, change your shoe size.
Just saying.
The question, for me, is what constitutes a “public accommodation”?
Yes, that is certainly one dimension of the overall question.
The best solution I’ve heard suggested was Areala’s: if you want to restrict who you will serve, for some or all of the products and services you offer, you make that explicit in your advertising and signage.
Don’t want to make wedding cakes for gays? Advertising and on-prem signage says “We do not make wedding cakes for gays”.
That way nobody has to make cakes for folks they don’t want to make cakes for, and nobody has to go through the insulting exercise of having a potential baker tell them how repugnant their lifestyle is.
That might cost you business, then again it might win you business. I’m sure there’s a market for 100% hetero cakes out there somewhere.
What I would *really* like is a crisp definition of what the “exercise of religion” means. Nowadays even for-profit corps have a spiritual life.
I keep looking for the passage about for-profit corps in Paul’s letters, to no avail. Torah, sutras, Bhagavad-Gita, Koran, still no luck. Egyptian book of the dead, still no black letter corporate law.
But I digress.
An aside : Areala, if you’re reading this, we miss you. Come visit.
Are they a racist for…
Racists are as racists do. If anyone has a better formulation, I’m all ears.
If the shoe fits, wear it. If you don’t like it, change your shoe size.
Just saying.
wj, if business owners can refuse to serve me because I don’t practice their religion, we have lost the public square. Or, more accurately, a long list of minorities will, in the end, have lost it.
Some business owners say they want to turn away gays because homosexuality is against their (the business owners’) religion. Well, divorce is against a lot of the same people’s religion (or at least remarriage after divorce), but I don’t see those people refusing to serve divorced folks.
At bottom I don’t think this is about religion at all, it’s about people being squicky about homosexuality. But suppose it is sincerely about religion. Should Catholic business owners be able to turn away people who eat meat on Friday? (I suppose I’m dating myself; do they still have that rule?) Muslims/halal. Jews/kosher. Etc.
Would you feel so ambiguous about it if some business owners said it was sinful for the races to mix, so they won’t let black people in their stores?
These excuses can be extended ad infinitum. If everyone was allowed to turn away people who didn’t follow *their* religious strictures, we couldn’t have a public square at all. Or rather, we’d go back to the days when in fact the public square was not available to blacks or gays on an equal basis with whites and straights.
Rights do collide, but I don’t think this is the best example.
[Several comments appeared while I was replying to wj. I haven’t read them yet…]
wj, if business owners can refuse to serve me because I don’t practice their religion, we have lost the public square. Or, more accurately, a long list of minorities will, in the end, have lost it.
Some business owners say they want to turn away gays because homosexuality is against their (the business owners’) religion. Well, divorce is against a lot of the same people’s religion (or at least remarriage after divorce), but I don’t see those people refusing to serve divorced folks.
At bottom I don’t think this is about religion at all, it’s about people being squicky about homosexuality. But suppose it is sincerely about religion. Should Catholic business owners be able to turn away people who eat meat on Friday? (I suppose I’m dating myself; do they still have that rule?) Muslims/halal. Jews/kosher. Etc.
Would you feel so ambiguous about it if some business owners said it was sinful for the races to mix, so they won’t let black people in their stores?
These excuses can be extended ad infinitum. If everyone was allowed to turn away people who didn’t follow *their* religious strictures, we couldn’t have a public square at all. Or rather, we’d go back to the days when in fact the public square was not available to blacks or gays on an equal basis with whites and straights.
Rights do collide, but I don’t think this is the best example.
[Several comments appeared while I was replying to wj. I haven’t read them yet…]
There was a ruling in Maine a while back (I didn’t follow so don’t know if it was appealed) that a business owner (a factory, I think) could not forbid employees from keeping weapons in their cars on company property during the work day.
What if I want to keep guns out of my store?
Which brings to mind another thing. There’s all kinds of shit I abhor (carrying assault weapons in a peaceful public place being one of them) that I can’t justify by an appeal to organized religion. This means that self-styled “Christian” beliefs are privileged over mine.
Freedom “from” religion was one of the high motifs of my thinking during the many years of gay rights and gay marriage referenda in my home state. I find homophobic religions just as disgusting as they find my relationship choices. Can I therefore refuse to bake them a cake?
There was a ruling in Maine a while back (I didn’t follow so don’t know if it was appealed) that a business owner (a factory, I think) could not forbid employees from keeping weapons in their cars on company property during the work day.
What if I want to keep guns out of my store?
Which brings to mind another thing. There’s all kinds of shit I abhor (carrying assault weapons in a peaceful public place being one of them) that I can’t justify by an appeal to organized religion. This means that self-styled “Christian” beliefs are privileged over mine.
Freedom “from” religion was one of the high motifs of my thinking during the many years of gay rights and gay marriage referenda in my home state. I find homophobic religions just as disgusting as they find my relationship choices. Can I therefore refuse to bake them a cake?
wj: I really wish much more of the GOP had your attitudes and inclinations. Then we could have HUGE fights over a few percentage points of marginal tax rates, but avoid lots of animus.
Except for wedding cakes. Them’s fightin’ words.
wj: I really wish much more of the GOP had your attitudes and inclinations. Then we could have HUGE fights over a few percentage points of marginal tax rates, but avoid lots of animus.
Except for wedding cakes. Them’s fightin’ words.
Legally requiring someone to engage in artistic expression, (personalized cakes, flower arrangements, photography, etc.), for someone else’s benefit starts to shade into First Amendment issues.
Legally requiring someone to engage in artistic expression, (personalized cakes, flower arrangements, photography, etc.), for someone else’s benefit starts to shade into First Amendment issues.
Can I therefore refuse to bake them a cake?
*They* would say (and in fact have said to me out loud) that no I can’t, because first amendment blah blah blah. In other words, they can appeal to their religion to discriminate against me but I can’t cite my beliefs (about their religion) as a reason to discriminate against them.
Bah.
Can I therefore refuse to bake them a cake?
*They* would say (and in fact have said to me out loud) that no I can’t, because first amendment blah blah blah. In other words, they can appeal to their religion to discriminate against me but I can’t cite my beliefs (about their religion) as a reason to discriminate against them.
Bah.
… starts to shade into First Amendment issues.
I mean the freedom of speech part of the 1A.
… starts to shade into First Amendment issues.
I mean the freedom of speech part of the 1A.
if business owners can refuse to serve me because I don’t practice their religion, we have lost the public square.
That’s pretty much how I see it.
If you prefer an extraordinarily broad reading of “exercise of religion” to preserving the basic ability of people to go buy stuff they need from folks who had put themselves out in public as providers of that stuff, so be it.
But you’re giving up something pretty important. To make sure somebody doesn’t have to make a cake for an event they don’t agree with.
If we’re going there, there are going to be lots of things folks aren’t going to want to make cakes for. Or paint houses for. Or fix plumbing for. Or sell cars for. Or, whatever.
There are lots of forms of expression guaranteed by the Bill of Rights beyond just the exercise of religion.
If you show up to my hotel in the middle of the night with a Trump sticker on your car, I might just tell you to pound sand. Need gas on a long stretch of empty road? Hope you brought your walking shoes. Car broke down and you need a tow? Sorry, we’re too busy tonight, call somebody else.
I don’t want to associate with Trumpies. Piss off.
You don’t want to make a wedding cake for gays, you got nothing to say about it. Go sleep in your car. You shoulda gassed up before you left home. Hope you’re not too far from home, maybe you can get a cab.
Be careful what you wish for.
Legally requiring someone to engage in artistic expression, (personalized cakes, flower arrangements, photography, etc.), for someone else’s benefit
If you’re getting paid, it’s not “for someone else’s benefit”.
if business owners can refuse to serve me because I don’t practice their religion, we have lost the public square.
That’s pretty much how I see it.
If you prefer an extraordinarily broad reading of “exercise of religion” to preserving the basic ability of people to go buy stuff they need from folks who had put themselves out in public as providers of that stuff, so be it.
But you’re giving up something pretty important. To make sure somebody doesn’t have to make a cake for an event they don’t agree with.
If we’re going there, there are going to be lots of things folks aren’t going to want to make cakes for. Or paint houses for. Or fix plumbing for. Or sell cars for. Or, whatever.
There are lots of forms of expression guaranteed by the Bill of Rights beyond just the exercise of religion.
If you show up to my hotel in the middle of the night with a Trump sticker on your car, I might just tell you to pound sand. Need gas on a long stretch of empty road? Hope you brought your walking shoes. Car broke down and you need a tow? Sorry, we’re too busy tonight, call somebody else.
I don’t want to associate with Trumpies. Piss off.
You don’t want to make a wedding cake for gays, you got nothing to say about it. Go sleep in your car. You shoulda gassed up before you left home. Hope you’re not too far from home, maybe you can get a cab.
Be careful what you wish for.
Legally requiring someone to engage in artistic expression, (personalized cakes, flower arrangements, photography, etc.), for someone else’s benefit
If you’re getting paid, it’s not “for someone else’s benefit”.
we’d go back to the days when in fact the public square was not available to blacks or gays on an equal basis with whites and straights.
Please see my comment upthread about reverting to a steady state of basic, everyday racism. Or sexism, or homophobia.
There doesn’t need to be a weird apocalyptic revolution. Simply eroding what people have, literally, given their lives to achieve, seems like failure to me.
What we are talking about is a basic, rudimentary, every-day acceptance of the fact that people who aren’t like you exist in the same public space that you do. And, are entitled to do so, and should do so.
People bleat about “identity politics”. As if there was some kind of politics that was not “identity politics”.
“Identity politics” is about not excluding people because they aren’t like you. “Political correctness” is about not being fucking rude to people.
It’s about not calling Jada Pinkett a “monkey actress”. It’s about not calling Asians “slopes” and “riceballs”. It is, for that matter, not calling people who speak with a southern accent a cracker, or assuming they are ignorant trash.
Right?
It’s about not telling people who ask you to bake them a cake exactly how abhorrent their very existence is, to you. It’s about not following black people around in your store because you assume they’re here to rob you, because they’re black.
It’s about not assuming that every woman who wears a hijab, or every man who has olive skin and a big beard, is planning to cut your throat as soon as you turn your back.
It’s about not treating people like shit, just because you can get away with it. It’s about recognizing, acknowledging, and getting the hell over your own, personal, freaking fear of anyone who isn’t just like you.
Briefly, it’s about growing the hell up.
That’s what “political correctness” is. Another word for it is “being a decent human being”. Or at least acting like one in public.
It’s not a big ask.
we’d go back to the days when in fact the public square was not available to blacks or gays on an equal basis with whites and straights.
Please see my comment upthread about reverting to a steady state of basic, everyday racism. Or sexism, or homophobia.
There doesn’t need to be a weird apocalyptic revolution. Simply eroding what people have, literally, given their lives to achieve, seems like failure to me.
What we are talking about is a basic, rudimentary, every-day acceptance of the fact that people who aren’t like you exist in the same public space that you do. And, are entitled to do so, and should do so.
People bleat about “identity politics”. As if there was some kind of politics that was not “identity politics”.
“Identity politics” is about not excluding people because they aren’t like you. “Political correctness” is about not being fucking rude to people.
It’s about not calling Jada Pinkett a “monkey actress”. It’s about not calling Asians “slopes” and “riceballs”. It is, for that matter, not calling people who speak with a southern accent a cracker, or assuming they are ignorant trash.
Right?
It’s about not telling people who ask you to bake them a cake exactly how abhorrent their very existence is, to you. It’s about not following black people around in your store because you assume they’re here to rob you, because they’re black.
It’s about not assuming that every woman who wears a hijab, or every man who has olive skin and a big beard, is planning to cut your throat as soon as you turn your back.
It’s about not treating people like shit, just because you can get away with it. It’s about recognizing, acknowledging, and getting the hell over your own, personal, freaking fear of anyone who isn’t just like you.
Briefly, it’s about growing the hell up.
That’s what “political correctness” is. Another word for it is “being a decent human being”. Or at least acting like one in public.
It’s not a big ask.
“It’s about not treating people like shit, just because you can get away with it. It’s about recognizing, acknowledging, and getting the hell over your own, personal, freaking fear of anyone who isn’t just like you.”
Unless they shave their head and have an 88 ratio. Then you can do what you want.
“It’s about not treating people like shit, just because you can get away with it. It’s about recognizing, acknowledging, and getting the hell over your own, personal, freaking fear of anyone who isn’t just like you.”
Unless they shave their head and have an 88 ratio. Then you can do what you want.
It’s about not calling Asians “slopes”…
On the other hand, The Slants…
It’s about not calling Asians “slopes”…
On the other hand, The Slants…
i try to keep up, but i have to admit that i have no idea what an “88 ratio” is.
i try to keep up, but i have to admit that i have no idea what an “88 ratio” is.
What I would *really* like is a crisp definition of what the “exercise of religion” means. Nowadays even for-profit corps have a spiritual life.
I am fine with corporations being, legally, “persons” for the purpose of making contracts or being sued. But for the purpose of religion, or free speech, or political activity? That’s just nuts.
And I wouldn’t limit that to just for-profit corporations. If you want to create a company for the purpose of pooling funds for political action, fine. But you have to have 100% transparency on who the biologic persons are who put up the money. And no layering — your PAC’s contributors can’t be other organizations.
Explicitly including other corporations. If your company, as an organization, wants to engage in politics, including lobbying, either it does so on behalf of its owners, or the owners do so as individuals. Necessarily, if organizations hold stock in your company, you don’t get to play. Your executives can do so, of course, but only as individuals and with their own funds.
What I would *really* like is a crisp definition of what the “exercise of religion” means. Nowadays even for-profit corps have a spiritual life.
I am fine with corporations being, legally, “persons” for the purpose of making contracts or being sued. But for the purpose of religion, or free speech, or political activity? That’s just nuts.
And I wouldn’t limit that to just for-profit corporations. If you want to create a company for the purpose of pooling funds for political action, fine. But you have to have 100% transparency on who the biologic persons are who put up the money. And no layering — your PAC’s contributors can’t be other organizations.
Explicitly including other corporations. If your company, as an organization, wants to engage in politics, including lobbying, either it does so on behalf of its owners, or the owners do so as individuals. Necessarily, if organizations hold stock in your company, you don’t get to play. Your executives can do so, of course, but only as individuals and with their own funds.
ah do you mean an 88 tattoo? we’re back to antifa, i take it.
if i see a shaved head and an 88 tattoo, i stay the hell away.
glad that somebody is standing up for rights of people with sekrit nazi crap indelibly etched into their flesh.
announce to the world that you’d love to see people who aren’t just like you baked in an oven, and maybe you neeed to set your expectations about the milk of human kindness fairly low.
ah do you mean an 88 tattoo? we’re back to antifa, i take it.
if i see a shaved head and an 88 tattoo, i stay the hell away.
glad that somebody is standing up for rights of people with sekrit nazi crap indelibly etched into their flesh.
announce to the world that you’d love to see people who aren’t just like you baked in an oven, and maybe you neeed to set your expectations about the milk of human kindness fairly low.
Snarki: Then we could have HUGE fights over a few percentage points of marginal tax rates, but avoid lots of animus.
You may be SOL. I embrace the concept of “enough”. When you are making enough money to cover necessities, have adequate funds set aside for emergencies and have funded your retirement, and are bringing in money as fast as you can spend it, you unarguably are making enough. At that point, the only purpose for making more is to impress people who have no clue about the actual value of what you do. (To put it crudely, at that point it’s just a dick measuring contest.)
That being the case, marginal tax rates above there are meaningless. The people that you, for whatever reason, want to impress can look at your pre-tax pay. So even a 100% marginal tax rate wouldn’t be a problem. I have heard a variety of arguments otherwise; I have yet to hear a persuasive one.
We can, I suppose, argue about how much reasonably constitutes “enough”. Will that do?
Snarki: Then we could have HUGE fights over a few percentage points of marginal tax rates, but avoid lots of animus.
You may be SOL. I embrace the concept of “enough”. When you are making enough money to cover necessities, have adequate funds set aside for emergencies and have funded your retirement, and are bringing in money as fast as you can spend it, you unarguably are making enough. At that point, the only purpose for making more is to impress people who have no clue about the actual value of what you do. (To put it crudely, at that point it’s just a dick measuring contest.)
That being the case, marginal tax rates above there are meaningless. The people that you, for whatever reason, want to impress can look at your pre-tax pay. So even a 100% marginal tax rate wouldn’t be a problem. I have heard a variety of arguments otherwise; I have yet to hear a persuasive one.
We can, I suppose, argue about how much reasonably constitutes “enough”. Will that do?
I suspect General Robert E. Lee was gay.
All of that mincing at the Appomattox Courthouse.
Nevertheless, I would make a statue of a cake and set it next to the statue of Robert E. Lee marrying the statue of his first cousin, Nathaniel E. Lee, just to watch pigfucking republicans tear down all three statues to satisfy their fucking fake spirituality regarding wedding cakes, which God frowned upon in general, though God didn’t seem to mind the 600,000 plus slaughtered during the Civil War, but then God set low standards for shitheads.
But, maybe instead I would take the cake down to the bakery and leave it there to visit with the other cakes.
I suspect General Robert E. Lee was gay.
All of that mincing at the Appomattox Courthouse.
Nevertheless, I would make a statue of a cake and set it next to the statue of Robert E. Lee marrying the statue of his first cousin, Nathaniel E. Lee, just to watch pigfucking republicans tear down all three statues to satisfy their fucking fake spirituality regarding wedding cakes, which God frowned upon in general, though God didn’t seem to mind the 600,000 plus slaughtered during the Civil War, but then God set low standards for shitheads.
But, maybe instead I would take the cake down to the bakery and leave it there to visit with the other cakes.
Geez, wj, are you sure you’re a Republican?
“Enough.” What a concept!
Can I have enough to go live in London for a few years? (I would be glad to keep working. 🙂
Geez, wj, are you sure you’re a Republican?
“Enough.” What a concept!
Can I have enough to go live in London for a few years? (I would be glad to keep working. 🙂
I’ve watched some of the Slants’ heavy metal videos.
I suspect if a Nazi walked up to them and called them “slopes”, they’d find the chink in his armor and deal him out.
So, if Hitler walked among us today (he does, but without the panache) and began holding gigantic rallies drawing adoring crowds of tens of thousands of free-speech-loving Jew burners, who also walk among us, hoarding their baked goods, and calling for the annexation of Czechoslovakia and Poland into the state of Texas, who among you would object if a I stifled his free speech by putting a bullet in his head, or a bomb in his birthday cake?
I suspect rump would find the Fuhrer a strong, decisive leader and would lease space to him in Trump Tower.
I’ve watched some of the Slants’ heavy metal videos.
I suspect if a Nazi walked up to them and called them “slopes”, they’d find the chink in his armor and deal him out.
So, if Hitler walked among us today (he does, but without the panache) and began holding gigantic rallies drawing adoring crowds of tens of thousands of free-speech-loving Jew burners, who also walk among us, hoarding their baked goods, and calling for the annexation of Czechoslovakia and Poland into the state of Texas, who among you would object if a I stifled his free speech by putting a bullet in his head, or a bomb in his birthday cake?
I suspect rump would find the Fuhrer a strong, decisive leader and would lease space to him in Trump Tower.
What would republicans do if for-profit corporations not only had spiritual lives, but had sexual love lives as well. And some percentage of them were gay and wanted to merge with each other in ceremonies down at the courthouse, just like the straight corporations are permitted to do (and then celebrate their mergers with their investment bankers by paying women to jump out of cakes at the local gentleman’s club)?
Would Republicans demand the State of Delaware leave the Union for hosting such behavior?
Someone please prove to me that the Koch Corporation is nothing other than a gay male review dressed up as Hermann Goehring, whose daughter had herself sterilized, not so that she would pass down his homosexuality, mind you, homosexuality never harmed anyone, but so that she would not pollute the gene pool with right-wing fascism.
Frankly, I wouldn’t buy a cake from a conservative, even though I’m straight, because I’d be afraid the things they say about conservatives might be true, that they piss in the cake batter.
What would republicans do if for-profit corporations not only had spiritual lives, but had sexual love lives as well. And some percentage of them were gay and wanted to merge with each other in ceremonies down at the courthouse, just like the straight corporations are permitted to do (and then celebrate their mergers with their investment bankers by paying women to jump out of cakes at the local gentleman’s club)?
Would Republicans demand the State of Delaware leave the Union for hosting such behavior?
Someone please prove to me that the Koch Corporation is nothing other than a gay male review dressed up as Hermann Goehring, whose daughter had herself sterilized, not so that she would pass down his homosexuality, mind you, homosexuality never harmed anyone, but so that she would not pollute the gene pool with right-wing fascism.
Frankly, I wouldn’t buy a cake from a conservative, even though I’m straight, because I’d be afraid the things they say about conservatives might be true, that they piss in the cake batter.
Geez, wj, are you sure you’re a Republican?
Actually, I think there are a fair number of, perhaps the traditional label is Main Street Republicans. We actually live the religious admonition to care for others, treat our neighbors (all of them, not just the ones who happen to be like us) as we would wish to be treated, etc. All those traditional values that get lip service, but no more, from too many.
No question, our party has been largely taken over by the fanatics of various types. But we haven’t ceased to exist.
Geez, wj, are you sure you’re a Republican?
Actually, I think there are a fair number of, perhaps the traditional label is Main Street Republicans. We actually live the religious admonition to care for others, treat our neighbors (all of them, not just the ones who happen to be like us) as we would wish to be treated, etc. All those traditional values that get lip service, but no more, from too many.
No question, our party has been largely taken over by the fanatics of various types. But we haven’t ceased to exist.
Someone please prove to me that the Koch Corporation is nothing other than a gay male review dressed up as Hermann Goehring
I think you are confusing the Koch brothers, who are basically rabid libertarians, with the religious fundamentalist KnowNothings. They have a marriage of convenience, it’s true. But it’s a loveless marriage.
Someone please prove to me that the Koch Corporation is nothing other than a gay male review dressed up as Hermann Goehring
I think you are confusing the Koch brothers, who are basically rabid libertarians, with the religious fundamentalist KnowNothings. They have a marriage of convenience, it’s true. But it’s a loveless marriage.
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/15/its-the-economy-stupid-2/
Republican bugs dismantle the public infrastructure in their midwestern states just as midwesterners turn to republicans to fuck the rest of the country.
See that Youngstown Sheet and Tube ruin in the photo. Just as I was born near my maternal grandparents in Middletown, Ohio, home of various recent fake cracker conservative philosophers, just so my paternal great uncle, Frank Purnell, was Chairman of the Board of Youngstown Sheet and Tube in its heyday. In Youngstown, Ohio, where my paternal grandparents lived.
Though he died around the time I was born, I spent many hours as a child and teenager running up the palatial front stairwell in his wife’s, my great Aunt’s house and down the back servants stairwell thru the kitchen in an endless game of hide and seek with my brother.
When we buried my mother in Youngstown, next to my Dad and sister, two years ago, we kids stopped at the house on a whim and rang the doorbell and an elderly woman who lives there now, graciously invited us in and let us look around. The house was sold in the mid 1970s.
I resisted taking the stairs two at a time, but my son with with us so he could see one of my childhood haunts.
This be Frank Purnell:
https://www.google.com/search?q=frank+purnell+youngstown+sheet+and+tube&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjMxPL__-7VAhVk1oMKHZsjDngQsAQIOw&biw=1523&bih=735
My father and my brother were named after him.
Funny story. He was a very conservative Republican, but Franklin Roosevelt, whom he hated, called him numerous times to Washington to galvanize corporate America for the WWII effort.
It was either on one of those trips or one to NYC that my great aunt and my grandmother, his sister, has to board the train East and retrieve him because he was hold up in a tony hotel room, drunk for a month (those corporate titans can put it away; in fact, most corporations themselves are alcoholics, being the people conservatives hold them to legally be) and entertaining most of the Rocketts and various young ingenues in his boudoir.
Not clear how many abortions resulted from this republican behavior, but then he could afford it … and I expect … condemn it.
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/15/its-the-economy-stupid-2/
Republican bugs dismantle the public infrastructure in their midwestern states just as midwesterners turn to republicans to fuck the rest of the country.
See that Youngstown Sheet and Tube ruin in the photo. Just as I was born near my maternal grandparents in Middletown, Ohio, home of various recent fake cracker conservative philosophers, just so my paternal great uncle, Frank Purnell, was Chairman of the Board of Youngstown Sheet and Tube in its heyday. In Youngstown, Ohio, where my paternal grandparents lived.
Though he died around the time I was born, I spent many hours as a child and teenager running up the palatial front stairwell in his wife’s, my great Aunt’s house and down the back servants stairwell thru the kitchen in an endless game of hide and seek with my brother.
When we buried my mother in Youngstown, next to my Dad and sister, two years ago, we kids stopped at the house on a whim and rang the doorbell and an elderly woman who lives there now, graciously invited us in and let us look around. The house was sold in the mid 1970s.
I resisted taking the stairs two at a time, but my son with with us so he could see one of my childhood haunts.
This be Frank Purnell:
https://www.google.com/search?q=frank+purnell+youngstown+sheet+and+tube&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjMxPL__-7VAhVk1oMKHZsjDngQsAQIOw&biw=1523&bih=735
My father and my brother were named after him.
Funny story. He was a very conservative Republican, but Franklin Roosevelt, whom he hated, called him numerous times to Washington to galvanize corporate America for the WWII effort.
It was either on one of those trips or one to NYC that my great aunt and my grandmother, his sister, has to board the train East and retrieve him because he was hold up in a tony hotel room, drunk for a month (those corporate titans can put it away; in fact, most corporations themselves are alcoholics, being the people conservatives hold them to legally be) and entertaining most of the Rocketts and various young ingenues in his boudoir.
Not clear how many abortions resulted from this republican behavior, but then he could afford it … and I expect … condemn it.
wj, we may have to place you in a museum. 😉
wj, we may have to place you in a museum. 😉
JanieM: In other words, they can appeal to their religion to discriminate against me but I can’t cite my beliefs (about their religion) as a reason to discriminate against them.
Bah.
THIS.
Except “bah” is an utterly inadequate reaction. The language of Shakespeare and Twain is rich with invective. Let’s not be stingy with it. Try “Eat my shorts!” for instance.
Seriously, and fully intending to offend any godbotherers who think their “faith” gives them more rights than atheists have: go piss up a rope.
Also seriously: “88” tattoos?! Is Marty a high priest of the Church of Both Sides Do It, or what?
–TP
JanieM: In other words, they can appeal to their religion to discriminate against me but I can’t cite my beliefs (about their religion) as a reason to discriminate against them.
Bah.
THIS.
Except “bah” is an utterly inadequate reaction. The language of Shakespeare and Twain is rich with invective. Let’s not be stingy with it. Try “Eat my shorts!” for instance.
Seriously, and fully intending to offend any godbotherers who think their “faith” gives them more rights than atheists have: go piss up a rope.
Also seriously: “88” tattoos?! Is Marty a high priest of the Church of Both Sides Do It, or what?
–TP
Speaking of drunk republicans:
“Once a president has verified his identity with a code kept constantly on his person or nearby, the military chain of command has no power to block his launch orders. […]
[Clapper said]: If “in a fit of pique [Trump] decides to do something about Kim Jong-un, there’s actually very little to stop him. The whole system is built to ensure rapid response if necessary. So there’s very little in the way of controls over exercising a nuclear option, which is pretty damn scary.”
Clapper did not mention Richard Nixon, who was involved in a tense stand-off with North Korea in 1969, after the regime shot down a US spy plane. Nixon is reported to have gotten drunk and ordered a tactical nuclear strike, which was only averted by his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger.
Nixon’s biographers Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan quoted a top CIA official, George Carver, as saying: “The joint chiefs were alerted and asked to recommend targets, but Kissinger got on the phone to them. They agreed not to do anything until Nixon sobered up in the morning.”
Conservatives will rush in and tell us but rump doesn’t drink.
Yeah, O.K.
Speaking of drunk republicans:
“Once a president has verified his identity with a code kept constantly on his person or nearby, the military chain of command has no power to block his launch orders. […]
[Clapper said]: If “in a fit of pique [Trump] decides to do something about Kim Jong-un, there’s actually very little to stop him. The whole system is built to ensure rapid response if necessary. So there’s very little in the way of controls over exercising a nuclear option, which is pretty damn scary.”
Clapper did not mention Richard Nixon, who was involved in a tense stand-off with North Korea in 1969, after the regime shot down a US spy plane. Nixon is reported to have gotten drunk and ordered a tactical nuclear strike, which was only averted by his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger.
Nixon’s biographers Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan quoted a top CIA official, George Carver, as saying: “The joint chiefs were alerted and asked to recommend targets, but Kissinger got on the phone to them. They agreed not to do anything until Nixon sobered up in the morning.”
Conservatives will rush in and tell us but rump doesn’t drink.
Yeah, O.K.
RE: Gay wedding cakes and public accommodations …
I’m confused by some of the responses.
The CRA spells out what qualifies as a public accommodation. States can go beyond that, but for purposes of discussion, I’ll just leave it at the Federal definition that lists hotels, restaurants and “places of public exhibition and entertainment”, i.e., theaters and stadiums.
So when russell gives an example of not renting a hotel room to someone with a Trump bumper sticker, that would definitely be covered by the public accommodation portion of the CRA. Whether someone with a Trump bumper sticker is part of the protected class is doubtful and if that was the point then I’m confused for different reasons.
russell goes on to say: “What we are talking about is a basic, rudimentary, every-day acceptance of the fact that people who aren’t like you exist in the same public space that you do. And, are entitled to do so, and should do so.”
How is a wedding cake shop a “public space”? Are you advocating that any private business open to the public should treated as a public square? That would be pretty radical. The CRA extended protection to certain classes so they would be able to access the services of a limited list of private business categories. The “restaurant” category in the CRA is limited to establishments “engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises”. How does a wedding cake shop fit in that category?
JanieM frames this a freedom of religion issue and that’s not the first time I’ve seen that formulation, but I really don’t think that’s the legal issue. A person could be a homophobic atheist wedding cake shop owner and refuse to sell a cake to gay couple without violating the CRA. The CRA § 201 deals with extending some constitutional rights that were limited to public spaces to a limited list of private businesses. It really is a private property rights issue more than a freedom of religious expression issue.
As an aside, JanieM wonders if she can keep someone carrying a gun out of her store, and in terms of federal law the answer is “yes”. In fact, I doubt a state law that requires a private business owner to allow guns on site would be unconstitutional. The employee’s gun in the car in the employer’s parking lot is different. That’s an attempt to strike a balance between the employer’s desire to maintain safety and the employee’s desire to protect himself or herself with a firearm. The line has been drawn so that the employee can have a gun in his or her car, but the employer can prohibit removing that gun from the car while on business property.
Similar to russell, JanieM discusses the negative impact on the “public square”. So I’ll repeat my question, how is a wedding cake shop part of the “public square”?
If you feel that the wedding cake shop should be part of the “public square”, then where do you draw the line? The obvious next question is what about the homophobic wedding photographer? Can that person be forced to work a gay wedding?
Finally, as an aside since you guys don’t know me, I’m completely in favor of marriage equality. I’ve been fighting for it since the DOMA days. FWIW, I personally think the government should be out of the “marriage” business altogether as marriage is a religious sacrament, but rather offer civil unions to any pair of consenting adults not already part of a union.
RE: Gay wedding cakes and public accommodations …
I’m confused by some of the responses.
The CRA spells out what qualifies as a public accommodation. States can go beyond that, but for purposes of discussion, I’ll just leave it at the Federal definition that lists hotels, restaurants and “places of public exhibition and entertainment”, i.e., theaters and stadiums.
So when russell gives an example of not renting a hotel room to someone with a Trump bumper sticker, that would definitely be covered by the public accommodation portion of the CRA. Whether someone with a Trump bumper sticker is part of the protected class is doubtful and if that was the point then I’m confused for different reasons.
russell goes on to say: “What we are talking about is a basic, rudimentary, every-day acceptance of the fact that people who aren’t like you exist in the same public space that you do. And, are entitled to do so, and should do so.”
How is a wedding cake shop a “public space”? Are you advocating that any private business open to the public should treated as a public square? That would be pretty radical. The CRA extended protection to certain classes so they would be able to access the services of a limited list of private business categories. The “restaurant” category in the CRA is limited to establishments “engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises”. How does a wedding cake shop fit in that category?
JanieM frames this a freedom of religion issue and that’s not the first time I’ve seen that formulation, but I really don’t think that’s the legal issue. A person could be a homophobic atheist wedding cake shop owner and refuse to sell a cake to gay couple without violating the CRA. The CRA § 201 deals with extending some constitutional rights that were limited to public spaces to a limited list of private businesses. It really is a private property rights issue more than a freedom of religious expression issue.
As an aside, JanieM wonders if she can keep someone carrying a gun out of her store, and in terms of federal law the answer is “yes”. In fact, I doubt a state law that requires a private business owner to allow guns on site would be unconstitutional. The employee’s gun in the car in the employer’s parking lot is different. That’s an attempt to strike a balance between the employer’s desire to maintain safety and the employee’s desire to protect himself or herself with a firearm. The line has been drawn so that the employee can have a gun in his or her car, but the employer can prohibit removing that gun from the car while on business property.
Similar to russell, JanieM discusses the negative impact on the “public square”. So I’ll repeat my question, how is a wedding cake shop part of the “public square”?
If you feel that the wedding cake shop should be part of the “public square”, then where do you draw the line? The obvious next question is what about the homophobic wedding photographer? Can that person be forced to work a gay wedding?
Finally, as an aside since you guys don’t know me, I’m completely in favor of marriage equality. I’ve been fighting for it since the DOMA days. FWIW, I personally think the government should be out of the “marriage” business altogether as marriage is a religious sacrament, but rather offer civil unions to any pair of consenting adults not already part of a union.
Concerning voter disenfranchisement and race I think the GOP is mixed on that. Most of the establishment these days (at the federal level at least) is in the ‘disenfranchise those that don’t vote for us regardless of race, personal beliefs, sexual orientation etc.’ camp. They likely see it just as a bonus that the victims are primarily minorities because the party at the same time appeals to those that hate those minorities for the same tactical reasons. But (in particular on the state level) there are still significant parts of the GOP that would hate it, if minorities started to vote for them and would push the same disenfranchisement laws. ‘we do not want their votes’. And some are cowards that fear to be seen as too n-word-friendly, if they do not push for discrimination, although they themselves lack the specific prejudice.
For a non racially charged example look at Congress where GOP bills are not brought up for a vote because they could only pass with some Dem votes which would taint GOPsters with the dreaded bipartisanship, risking the wrath of the base
There were btw Jews in Germany that were ardent Nazis and extremly disappointed that they were not allowed to join in. On the other end of the spectrum at least one candidate for German president (post WW2) made it explicit that he would not accept his own election, if he got the majority only through votes from the extreme Right (a real possibility since the contest was quite close, so the handful of extremist electors could have tipped the scales).
Concerning voter disenfranchisement and race I think the GOP is mixed on that. Most of the establishment these days (at the federal level at least) is in the ‘disenfranchise those that don’t vote for us regardless of race, personal beliefs, sexual orientation etc.’ camp. They likely see it just as a bonus that the victims are primarily minorities because the party at the same time appeals to those that hate those minorities for the same tactical reasons. But (in particular on the state level) there are still significant parts of the GOP that would hate it, if minorities started to vote for them and would push the same disenfranchisement laws. ‘we do not want their votes’. And some are cowards that fear to be seen as too n-word-friendly, if they do not push for discrimination, although they themselves lack the specific prejudice.
For a non racially charged example look at Congress where GOP bills are not brought up for a vote because they could only pass with some Dem votes which would taint GOPsters with the dreaded bipartisanship, risking the wrath of the base
There were btw Jews in Germany that were ardent Nazis and extremly disappointed that they were not allowed to join in. On the other end of the spectrum at least one candidate for German president (post WW2) made it explicit that he would not accept his own election, if he got the majority only through votes from the extreme Right (a real possibility since the contest was quite close, so the handful of extremist electors could have tipped the scales).
EDIT: In fact, I doubt a state law that requires a private business owner to allow guns on site would be
unconstitutional.EDIT: In fact, I doubt a state law that requires a private business owner to allow guns on site would be
unconstitutional.It really is a private property rights issue more than a freedom of religious expression issue.
In the Masterpiece Cakeshop case (which is up for review by the Supremes), the parties agreed that the cakeshop was a public accommodation.
Finally, as an aside since you guys don’t know me, I’m completely in favor of marriage equality. I’ve been fighting for it since the DOMA days. FWIW, I personally think the government should be out of the “marriage” business altogether as marriage is a religious sacrament, but rather offer civil unions to any pair of consenting adults not already part of a union.
Right with you on this.
It really is a private property rights issue more than a freedom of religious expression issue.
In the Masterpiece Cakeshop case (which is up for review by the Supremes), the parties agreed that the cakeshop was a public accommodation.
Finally, as an aside since you guys don’t know me, I’m completely in favor of marriage equality. I’ve been fighting for it since the DOMA days. FWIW, I personally think the government should be out of the “marriage” business altogether as marriage is a religious sacrament, but rather offer civil unions to any pair of consenting adults not already part of a union.
Right with you on this.
In the Masterpiece Cakeshop case (which is up for review by the Supremes), the parties agreed that the cakeshop was a public accommodation.
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 07:39 AM
That’s because Colorado extended the federal CRA. I couched my comments to be limited to the federal CRA for discussion purposes.
In the Masterpiece Cakeshop case (which is up for review by the Supremes), the parties agreed that the cakeshop was a public accommodation.
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 07:39 AM
That’s because Colorado extended the federal CRA. I couched my comments to be limited to the federal CRA for discussion purposes.
That’s because Colorado extended the federal CRA. I couched my comments to be limited to the federal CRA for discussion purposes.
Are there any actual cases under federal law? If not, why are we talking about it?
That’s because Colorado extended the federal CRA. I couched my comments to be limited to the federal CRA for discussion purposes.
Are there any actual cases under federal law? If not, why are we talking about it?
Are there any actual cases under federal law? If not, why are we talking about it?
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 07:51 AM
I brought it up because I’m interested in where posters think the line should be drawn between the public square and a private citizen’s right to be an asshole. The federal CRA was just a framing device.
Are there any actual cases under federal law? If not, why are we talking about it?
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 07:51 AM
I brought it up because I’m interested in where posters think the line should be drawn between the public square and a private citizen’s right to be an asshole. The federal CRA was just a framing device.
Not to turn this into a comparative law exercise, but for the curious, Colorado defines “public accommodation” broadly as “any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public”. Co Code § 24-34-601(1). I actually think that too broad, but I’m probably in the minority here.
My interest in where others here would draw the line remains.
Not to turn this into a comparative law exercise, but for the curious, Colorado defines “public accommodation” broadly as “any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public”. Co Code § 24-34-601(1). I actually think that too broad, but I’m probably in the minority here.
My interest in where others here would draw the line remains.
Pollo, thanks for trying to drive the conversation to some kind of clarity.
Personally, I figure that if you are opening the door to any custom, you’re in the public square. Perhaps that is an insufficiently crisp legal definition.
In a (or my) perfect world, the right of gay people to marry, or indeed to participate in any of the institutions of public civil life, would never have been a question.
Also in a (or my) perfect world, if someone had a religious conviction that prevented them from providing some good or service for whatever reason, all parties would sit at table, discuss, and come to some amicable conclusion.
Don’t want to make our cake? No harm no foul, we’ll go next door. Win-win. Nobody loses.
In the real world, gays have taken literal beatings to earn the right to marry, be employed, and do 1,000 other things that everybody else in the world takes for granted.
In the real world, conservative Christians have decided that involvement, at any degree of separation, in something they don’t approve of is an infringement on the practice of their faith.
Also in the real world, some conservative Christians are incapable of simply saying “no thanks”, they have to do so using insulting language and claims of persecution and victimization.
So we end up with dueling rights. Which means we end up in court. Which means somebody loses. Maybe everybody. Except the attorneys.
IANAL. If you tell me the CRA doesn’t cover bakeries, I am happy to defer to your greater knowledge.
No cakes for the happy couple.
But things like that erode public life. Somebody gets excluded.
The counter-argument is that, if we require people to do things that violate their conscience, their life is diminished.
My personal feeling is that, if your religious conscience makes it impossible for you to comply with normal social practice, the onus is on you to organize your life in a way to work around that. Rather than require the rest of the world to accommodate you.
But obviously, opinions differ on that point.
Long story short, I take your legal point, but the end result is still a diminishment of public life. Somebody is excluded from things that everyone else can have.
If there is no win-win available, that’s what happens, I guess.
I *would* like a crisp definition of what “free exercise of religion” means under the law. The RFRA was passed to protect the sacramental use of peyote, an ancient indigenous American practice.
Now it covers making cakes and taking pictures for hire. Which seems, to me, a stretch.
So, if we’re talking about wanting clarity, that’s an area that could use some. IMO.
Pollo, thanks for trying to drive the conversation to some kind of clarity.
Personally, I figure that if you are opening the door to any custom, you’re in the public square. Perhaps that is an insufficiently crisp legal definition.
In a (or my) perfect world, the right of gay people to marry, or indeed to participate in any of the institutions of public civil life, would never have been a question.
Also in a (or my) perfect world, if someone had a religious conviction that prevented them from providing some good or service for whatever reason, all parties would sit at table, discuss, and come to some amicable conclusion.
Don’t want to make our cake? No harm no foul, we’ll go next door. Win-win. Nobody loses.
In the real world, gays have taken literal beatings to earn the right to marry, be employed, and do 1,000 other things that everybody else in the world takes for granted.
In the real world, conservative Christians have decided that involvement, at any degree of separation, in something they don’t approve of is an infringement on the practice of their faith.
Also in the real world, some conservative Christians are incapable of simply saying “no thanks”, they have to do so using insulting language and claims of persecution and victimization.
So we end up with dueling rights. Which means we end up in court. Which means somebody loses. Maybe everybody. Except the attorneys.
IANAL. If you tell me the CRA doesn’t cover bakeries, I am happy to defer to your greater knowledge.
No cakes for the happy couple.
But things like that erode public life. Somebody gets excluded.
The counter-argument is that, if we require people to do things that violate their conscience, their life is diminished.
My personal feeling is that, if your religious conscience makes it impossible for you to comply with normal social practice, the onus is on you to organize your life in a way to work around that. Rather than require the rest of the world to accommodate you.
But obviously, opinions differ on that point.
Long story short, I take your legal point, but the end result is still a diminishment of public life. Somebody is excluded from things that everyone else can have.
If there is no win-win available, that’s what happens, I guess.
I *would* like a crisp definition of what “free exercise of religion” means under the law. The RFRA was passed to protect the sacramental use of peyote, an ancient indigenous American practice.
Now it covers making cakes and taking pictures for hire. Which seems, to me, a stretch.
So, if we’re talking about wanting clarity, that’s an area that could use some. IMO.
I still think Areala’s suggestion was the best practical solution.
If you don’t want to serve gays, make that explicit. “We don’t serve gays”. Or even “We don’t make wedding cakes for same-sex marriages”.
Right up front. Advertising and on-prem signage. Assuming you’re in a jurisdiction where your bakery is not considered to be a public accommodation.
Then there’s no mistake, nobody has to feel uncomfortable saying no, nobody has to sit and listen to some freaking baker tell them their very existence is abhorrent and they’re probably going to hell.
If you have the conviction to take stuff like this to court, you should have the conviction to be up-front in how you present yourself to the world.
Not an ideal solution, but better than what we got now.
I still think Areala’s suggestion was the best practical solution.
If you don’t want to serve gays, make that explicit. “We don’t serve gays”. Or even “We don’t make wedding cakes for same-sex marriages”.
Right up front. Advertising and on-prem signage. Assuming you’re in a jurisdiction where your bakery is not considered to be a public accommodation.
Then there’s no mistake, nobody has to feel uncomfortable saying no, nobody has to sit and listen to some freaking baker tell them their very existence is abhorrent and they’re probably going to hell.
If you have the conviction to take stuff like this to court, you should have the conviction to be up-front in how you present yourself to the world.
Not an ideal solution, but better than what we got now.
“…if your religious conscience makes it impossible for you to comply with normal social practice, the onus is on you to organize your life in a way to work around that. Rather than require the rest of the world to accommodate you….”
Paging Amish and Mennonites on line 1. Oh wait, they don’t do that, or some don’t.
It’s not like good examples of “belief wins over engagement with the rest of society” don’t exist, it’s just that the christianist cake-bakers are too lazy and hypocritical to do more than talk the talk.
So yes, they deserve all of the mockery they get.
“…if your religious conscience makes it impossible for you to comply with normal social practice, the onus is on you to organize your life in a way to work around that. Rather than require the rest of the world to accommodate you….”
Paging Amish and Mennonites on line 1. Oh wait, they don’t do that, or some don’t.
It’s not like good examples of “belief wins over engagement with the rest of society” don’t exist, it’s just that the christianist cake-bakers are too lazy and hypocritical to do more than talk the talk.
So yes, they deserve all of the mockery they get.
I think the American cake-consuming public should also know whether gays, married or not, provide the labor that goes into baking a cake.
We’ll get to the pies later.
Did any LGBT citizens mill the flour used in the cake?
Did the bake shop engage, if you will pardon the expression, a gay commercial broker to lease the space the cakes use to bide their time before being ravaged by straight newlyweds and their families and guests?
Did any gay men or women give their lives on the battlefields during World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan to secure the American constitutional right to own a bakery and bake cakes.
You don’t see cake shops in North Korea, do you?
But wait, mandating truth in advertising via gummint fiat would be onerous regulation, or so say the same people who want to deny cake to men who date.
When Marie Antoinette purportedly issued the command “Let them eat cake”, did anyone raise their hand and object: “Well, except for the gays. And no croissants for them either. Come to think of it, the next sans-cullote who
sneaks an eclair to an effete member of the Court will be off to the Bastille to enjoy the conversation of the Marquis de Sade, who will show them novel ways of employing cake in the bedroom.
No, they didn’t. Because they knew she was talking about bread and who may have it and who mayn’t and they chopped off her head just below her pie hole.
I think the American cake-consuming public should also know whether gays, married or not, provide the labor that goes into baking a cake.
We’ll get to the pies later.
Did any LGBT citizens mill the flour used in the cake?
Did the bake shop engage, if you will pardon the expression, a gay commercial broker to lease the space the cakes use to bide their time before being ravaged by straight newlyweds and their families and guests?
Did any gay men or women give their lives on the battlefields during World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan to secure the American constitutional right to own a bakery and bake cakes.
You don’t see cake shops in North Korea, do you?
But wait, mandating truth in advertising via gummint fiat would be onerous regulation, or so say the same people who want to deny cake to men who date.
When Marie Antoinette purportedly issued the command “Let them eat cake”, did anyone raise their hand and object: “Well, except for the gays. And no croissants for them either. Come to think of it, the next sans-cullote who
sneaks an eclair to an effete member of the Court will be off to the Bastille to enjoy the conversation of the Marquis de Sade, who will show them novel ways of employing cake in the bedroom.
No, they didn’t. Because they knew she was talking about bread and who may have it and who mayn’t and they chopped off her head just below her pie hole.
I was kind of on board with you, russell. But then this popped into my head:
NO COLOREDS!!!
I was kind of on board with you, russell. But then this popped into my head:
NO COLOREDS!!!
Andrew Bacevich, West Point graduate:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/robert-e-lee-at-west-point/
I had occasion on my road-trip to drive up the Hudson Valley right past West Point and if I wasn’t on my way to visit my 91-year old uncle in the VA just north of there, I would have stopped in for the tour. I saw it as a child.
As an intellectual exercise, I can’t decide who was more of a traitor, Lee or Chelsea Manning.
Yet one received cake and the other the prison jello with canned fruit suspended in it.
Andrew Bacevich, West Point graduate:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/robert-e-lee-at-west-point/
I had occasion on my road-trip to drive up the Hudson Valley right past West Point and if I wasn’t on my way to visit my 91-year old uncle in the VA just north of there, I would have stopped in for the tour. I saw it as a child.
As an intellectual exercise, I can’t decide who was more of a traitor, Lee or Chelsea Manning.
Yet one received cake and the other the prison jello with canned fruit suspended in it.
Also seriously: “88” tattoos?! Is Marty a high priest of the Church of Both Sides Do It, or what?
Not just that, but people aren’t born Nazis. People decide to be Nazis. You don’t have to be a Nazi.
On the other hand, if you are born to parents who are black, you have no choice but to be black. If you are born gay, you have no choice but to be gay.
People do have some choice in religion, but it’s embedded deeply enough into some people’s identities and has been the basis for discrimination for … well, probably forever, such that protections are justified.
Being a Nazi, not so much. Fail.
Also seriously: “88” tattoos?! Is Marty a high priest of the Church of Both Sides Do It, or what?
Not just that, but people aren’t born Nazis. People decide to be Nazis. You don’t have to be a Nazi.
On the other hand, if you are born to parents who are black, you have no choice but to be black. If you are born gay, you have no choice but to be gay.
People do have some choice in religion, but it’s embedded deeply enough into some people’s identities and has been the basis for discrimination for … well, probably forever, such that protections are justified.
Being a Nazi, not so much. Fail.
and, as always, i think anyone who cites their religion in order to discriminate, but who is happy to publicly violate other tenets of their professed religion, does not get legal dispensation to discriminate.
do you tolerate women who speak in church? bake the fncking cake.
and, as always, i think anyone who cites their religion in order to discriminate, but who is happy to publicly violate other tenets of their professed religion, does not get legal dispensation to discriminate.
do you tolerate women who speak in church? bake the fncking cake.
NO COLOREDS!!!
Yep.
Really, to answer pollo’s question, my opinion is that if you open your door to all custom, then you open your door to all custom.
Full stop.
NO COLOREDS!!!
Yep.
Really, to answer pollo’s question, my opinion is that if you open your door to all custom, then you open your door to all custom.
Full stop.
Very presidential!!!
Very presidential!!!
hsh: NO COLOREDS!!!
Indeed.
cleek_etc.: i think anyone who cites their religion in order to discriminate, but who is happy to publicly violate other tenets of their professed religion, does not get legal dispensation to discriminate.
Repeating myself, but …
My version would be along a different parameter: do the cake-bakers discriminate against people who commit other kinds of sins? Oh, no? Gee…
This is more about homophobia than religion, which is a convenient after the fact justification. Besides homophobia, there’s also some culture war stuff. Lord knows the “Christians” (note that’s different from Christians) are the real victims here.
For the whole subject from a different angle: what about Catholic hospitals wanting to exclude birth control from their employees’ health insurance benefits?
P.S. Back to cleek: I think there are some people who practice, or try to practice, their religion faithfully. But I bet there’s not a cake-baker (standing in for businesspeople of all kinds) on earth who gives a flying banana about any customers’ sins except same-sex marriage.
hsh: NO COLOREDS!!!
Indeed.
cleek_etc.: i think anyone who cites their religion in order to discriminate, but who is happy to publicly violate other tenets of their professed religion, does not get legal dispensation to discriminate.
Repeating myself, but …
My version would be along a different parameter: do the cake-bakers discriminate against people who commit other kinds of sins? Oh, no? Gee…
This is more about homophobia than religion, which is a convenient after the fact justification. Besides homophobia, there’s also some culture war stuff. Lord knows the “Christians” (note that’s different from Christians) are the real victims here.
For the whole subject from a different angle: what about Catholic hospitals wanting to exclude birth control from their employees’ health insurance benefits?
P.S. Back to cleek: I think there are some people who practice, or try to practice, their religion faithfully. But I bet there’s not a cake-baker (standing in for businesspeople of all kinds) on earth who gives a flying banana about any customers’ sins except same-sex marriage.
‘ve gone on about this ad nauseam, but here it is again. This kind of stuff is happening because there is no longer a foundation of agreed facts and reality, as conveyed in schools, by the media, etc etc. Maybe it started with…
as always, i blame the internet.
if you have an opinion on something, the internet will back it up with things that sound like facts, and will then lead you to a group of people who agree. and there’s never a need to deal with people who disagree, as long as you don’t turn off your computer.
‘ve gone on about this ad nauseam, but here it is again. This kind of stuff is happening because there is no longer a foundation of agreed facts and reality, as conveyed in schools, by the media, etc etc. Maybe it started with…
as always, i blame the internet.
if you have an opinion on something, the internet will back it up with things that sound like facts, and will then lead you to a group of people who agree. and there’s never a need to deal with people who disagree, as long as you don’t turn off your computer.
hsh: the choice issue goes back to the first amendment (religious freedom) argument. Back during the gay rights wars in my state, people on the other side often cited the notion that gayness is a choice, people aren’t born that way, and choices shouldn’t be protected; if you didn’t want the consequences of being gay, don’t be gay, ha ha.
(Gay people had varying opinions on whether this was a good argument to get into, and whether arguing it wasn’t a choice was cowardly. But never mind that for now.)
If you told the opposition that religion was a choice too, the “first amendment blah blah blah” came out. “OUR choice is protected. Yours is not,” was the basic theme.
hsh: the choice issue goes back to the first amendment (religious freedom) argument. Back during the gay rights wars in my state, people on the other side often cited the notion that gayness is a choice, people aren’t born that way, and choices shouldn’t be protected; if you didn’t want the consequences of being gay, don’t be gay, ha ha.
(Gay people had varying opinions on whether this was a good argument to get into, and whether arguing it wasn’t a choice was cowardly. But never mind that for now.)
If you told the opposition that religion was a choice too, the “first amendment blah blah blah” came out. “OUR choice is protected. Yours is not,” was the basic theme.
My version would be along a different parameter: do the cake-bakers discriminate against people who commit other kinds of sins?
i like that one, too!
But I bet there’s not a cake-baker (standing in for businesspeople of all kinds) on earth who gives a flying banana about any customers’ sins except same-sex marriage.
exactly.
the “my religion says i can’t” is a BS, bad-faith (literally) argument. and the government has no business sanctioning that nonsense.
My version would be along a different parameter: do the cake-bakers discriminate against people who commit other kinds of sins?
i like that one, too!
But I bet there’s not a cake-baker (standing in for businesspeople of all kinds) on earth who gives a flying banana about any customers’ sins except same-sex marriage.
exactly.
the “my religion says i can’t” is a BS, bad-faith (literally) argument. and the government has no business sanctioning that nonsense.
I blame the internet too.
It use to be my entire life I had to sit thru holiday dinners and listen to conservatives bloviate on their tax burdens and “those people” and what we oughta do is we oughta to go in there and the budget be damned, while I passed the gravy, since fuck you wasn’t permitted at the dinner table.
Now, I can bloviate too at will and ruin the country.
I think Valerie Plame should buy the internet and kick all of us off the thing so I have more time to get the reading done.
I blame the internet too.
It use to be my entire life I had to sit thru holiday dinners and listen to conservatives bloviate on their tax burdens and “those people” and what we oughta do is we oughta to go in there and the budget be damned, while I passed the gravy, since fuck you wasn’t permitted at the dinner table.
Now, I can bloviate too at will and ruin the country.
I think Valerie Plame should buy the internet and kick all of us off the thing so I have more time to get the reading done.
But until then, I like me a survey of stupid pigfuckery courtesy of discourteous republicans:
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a57175/kansas-voter-suppression/
But until then, I like me a survey of stupid pigfuckery courtesy of discourteous republicans:
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a57175/kansas-voter-suppression/
And some are cowards that fear to be seen as too n-word-friendly, if they do not push for discrimination, although they themselves lack the specific prejudice.
It may be noteworthy that doing this can move you towards that specific prejudice. Consider the case of George Wallace. The first time he ran for office, he ran as a liberal on racial issues. (Granted, “liberal” in 1950s Alabama wasn’t what anyone today would consider liberal. But for the time and place….)
He lost and attributed his loss to his stance on race, saying: “They out-n*ggered me. I’ll never be out-n*ggered again!” And the rest is history. He embraced a position out of political convenience, not prejudice, but ended up practically the embodiment of prejudice.
And some are cowards that fear to be seen as too n-word-friendly, if they do not push for discrimination, although they themselves lack the specific prejudice.
It may be noteworthy that doing this can move you towards that specific prejudice. Consider the case of George Wallace. The first time he ran for office, he ran as a liberal on racial issues. (Granted, “liberal” in 1950s Alabama wasn’t what anyone today would consider liberal. But for the time and place….)
He lost and attributed his loss to his stance on race, saying: “They out-n*ggered me. I’ll never be out-n*ggered again!” And the rest is history. He embraced a position out of political convenience, not prejudice, but ended up practically the embodiment of prejudice.
It strikes me that mandating the government to legally enforce one’s personal prejudices is kinda’ getting this ‘freedom’ thing backwards.
Just sayin’
It strikes me that mandating the government to legally enforce one’s personal prejudices is kinda’ getting this ‘freedom’ thing backwards.
Just sayin’
I still think Areala’s suggestion was the best practical solution.
If you don’t want to serve gays, make that explicit. “We don’t serve gays”.
HSH makes exactly the point that was my reaction: we’ve tried “No Coloreds”, and it worked out badly.
This case may be different in that (in most places) there aren’t enough bigots to make it work out the same. But philosophically, it seems like a failed “solution.”
I still think Areala’s suggestion was the best practical solution.
If you don’t want to serve gays, make that explicit. “We don’t serve gays”.
HSH makes exactly the point that was my reaction: we’ve tried “No Coloreds”, and it worked out badly.
This case may be different in that (in most places) there aren’t enough bigots to make it work out the same. But philosophically, it seems like a failed “solution.”
Wallace is getting outniggered again in 2017:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-just-tweeted-about-the-debt-ceiling-and-retweeted-a-guy-who-quite-likes-racist-jokes-2017-08-24?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
The entire republican edifice must be nuked. Kill it.
There are good people on one side only.
Wallace is getting outniggered again in 2017:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-just-tweeted-about-the-debt-ceiling-and-retweeted-a-guy-who-quite-likes-racist-jokes-2017-08-24?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts
The entire republican edifice must be nuked. Kill it.
There are good people on one side only.
Count, thanks for that Andrew Bacevich link. He makes his point beautifully.
Count, thanks for that Andrew Bacevich link. He makes his point beautifully.
where oh where is that line?
Hmmmm….
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2014/10/apparently-oxford-education-isnt-used
where oh where is that line?
Hmmmm….
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2014/10/apparently-oxford-education-isnt-used
One off-the-aooarent-topic item from the Count’s link on voter suppression in Kansas: California recently passed a law mandating various things to address climate change. Among those voting in favor was the leader of the Assembly Republicans.
This, probably utterly unsurprisingly, generated demands that he be removed for apsotacy. In fact, the state Republican Committee voted to have him removed.
BUT, the Republican caucus in the Assembly refused (admittedly narrowly) to remove him. Those Republicans here who are actually interested in, and have a vested interest in, winning elections seem to be taking the point that kowtowing to the extremists is not a winning formula. Not before time, but better late than never.
One off-the-aooarent-topic item from the Count’s link on voter suppression in Kansas: California recently passed a law mandating various things to address climate change. Among those voting in favor was the leader of the Assembly Republicans.
This, probably utterly unsurprisingly, generated demands that he be removed for apsotacy. In fact, the state Republican Committee voted to have him removed.
BUT, the Republican caucus in the Assembly refused (admittedly narrowly) to remove him. Those Republicans here who are actually interested in, and have a vested interest in, winning elections seem to be taking the point that kowtowing to the extremists is not a winning formula. Not before time, but better late than never.
if you didn’t want the consequences of being gay, don’t be gay, ha ha.
If it was a choice, I would have chosen to be bisexual a long time ago. Why limit yourself?
Seriously, though, I don’t get why some heterosexual people can’t apply their own experience with their own sexuality to someone with a different sexuality. I can’t will myself into not being attracted to women, and I can’t will myself into being attracted to men.
(At least, I don’t think so. Even if I could, it would be really, really hard. Why would I bother?)
I have friends whose daughter is gay, which they didn’t know until she came out as a young adult. I was talking to her father, and he was telling me how he was upset at first – and actually mad at his daughter, like she was doing something to him, as though she had a choice.
I told him to imagine a parallel universe with an earth-like planet, with the main difference being that homosexuality was the accepted norm, with the vast majority of people being homosexual and society structured around homosexual relationships and marriage. I said, “Imagine you somehow wake up one day and find yourself on this planet. What would you do? Would you simply become gay? Do you think you could? How? Because that’s the same thing you want your daughter to do, only in reverse.”
if you didn’t want the consequences of being gay, don’t be gay, ha ha.
If it was a choice, I would have chosen to be bisexual a long time ago. Why limit yourself?
Seriously, though, I don’t get why some heterosexual people can’t apply their own experience with their own sexuality to someone with a different sexuality. I can’t will myself into not being attracted to women, and I can’t will myself into being attracted to men.
(At least, I don’t think so. Even if I could, it would be really, really hard. Why would I bother?)
I have friends whose daughter is gay, which they didn’t know until she came out as a young adult. I was talking to her father, and he was telling me how he was upset at first – and actually mad at his daughter, like she was doing something to him, as though she had a choice.
I told him to imagine a parallel universe with an earth-like planet, with the main difference being that homosexuality was the accepted norm, with the vast majority of people being homosexual and society structured around homosexual relationships and marriage. I said, “Imagine you somehow wake up one day and find yourself on this planet. What would you do? Would you simply become gay? Do you think you could? How? Because that’s the same thing you want your daughter to do, only in reverse.”
philosophically, it seems like a failed “solution.”
Yeah, you’re right. Consider it retracted.
Open your door for all custom, you accept all custom.
If that doesn’t work, do something else for a living.
philosophically, it seems like a failed “solution.”
Yeah, you’re right. Consider it retracted.
Open your door for all custom, you accept all custom.
If that doesn’t work, do something else for a living.
I noticed hairshirt linked the rump/obama eclipse thing ahead of me. Thank you.
Maybe the trouble with the internet is that folks don’t read it enough, rather than the other way around.
This question occurs to me: When Sears is purposefully driven to bankruptcy by klepto-capitalist rump-kisser Eddie Lampert and puts its remaining 140,000 employees on the streets, will Scott Pruitt and rump, first of all, notice, but second of all will they suggest the coal industry fire all of its overpaid employees in the country (51,000 at present, though Pruitt will tell you tens of millions) and hire the former Sears employees at minimum wage to increase productivity?
Hanh?
I noticed hairshirt linked the rump/obama eclipse thing ahead of me. Thank you.
Maybe the trouble with the internet is that folks don’t read it enough, rather than the other way around.
This question occurs to me: When Sears is purposefully driven to bankruptcy by klepto-capitalist rump-kisser Eddie Lampert and puts its remaining 140,000 employees on the streets, will Scott Pruitt and rump, first of all, notice, but second of all will they suggest the coal industry fire all of its overpaid employees in the country (51,000 at present, though Pruitt will tell you tens of millions) and hire the former Sears employees at minimum wage to increase productivity?
Hanh?
Bobbyp- hah! I have that LG&M post bookmarked on my browser for just such an occasion!
Bobbyp- hah! I have that LG&M post bookmarked on my browser for just such an occasion!
Here is SCOTUS on whether u can use the first amendment to get around things like civil rights laws and other law if general applicability: no.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith
Authored by Scalia no less.
Here is SCOTUS on whether u can use the first amendment to get around things like civil rights laws and other law if general applicability: no.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith
Authored by Scalia no less.
IANAL. If you tell me the CRA doesn’t cover bakeries, I am happy to defer to your greater knowledge.
Posted by: russell | August 24, 2017 at 09:38 AM
The *federal* CRA probably does not cover wedding cake bakeries, but many states and localities have expanded the coverage. The federal CRA just sets the floor.
This is more about homophobia than religion, which is a convenient after the fact justification. Besides homophobia, there’s also some culture war stuff. Lord knows the “Christians” (note that’s different from Christians) are the real victims here.
Posted by: JanieM | August 24, 2017 at 10:50 AM
I agree completely. As cautious as I am about overreach in this area, I think sexual orientation and previous condition of gender misalignment should be protected classes. While many state and local governments have extended the defined protective classes, the federal CRA has not. In general I’m fine with expanding the universe of protected classes, but concerned about expanding the list of public accomodations
For the whole subject from a different angle: what about Catholic hospitals wanting to exclude birth control from their employees’ health insurance benefits?
Posted by: JanieM | August 24, 2017 at 10:50 AM
I’m so bothered by the very notion of tying health care coverage to employment that I ignore concerns of government overreach in this area. Employers should have no ability to curtail health benefits. I’ve defended some unpopular SCOTUS decisions around here (e.g., Shelby County), but Hobby Lobby is one that really pisses me off.
Regarding the notion that business who discriminate need to advertise as such, I don’t hate the idea, but I don’t know that it’s necessary. In the age of Yelp and Facebook, a business will be tagged as discriminating regardless.
IANAL. If you tell me the CRA doesn’t cover bakeries, I am happy to defer to your greater knowledge.
Posted by: russell | August 24, 2017 at 09:38 AM
The *federal* CRA probably does not cover wedding cake bakeries, but many states and localities have expanded the coverage. The federal CRA just sets the floor.
This is more about homophobia than religion, which is a convenient after the fact justification. Besides homophobia, there’s also some culture war stuff. Lord knows the “Christians” (note that’s different from Christians) are the real victims here.
Posted by: JanieM | August 24, 2017 at 10:50 AM
I agree completely. As cautious as I am about overreach in this area, I think sexual orientation and previous condition of gender misalignment should be protected classes. While many state and local governments have extended the defined protective classes, the federal CRA has not. In general I’m fine with expanding the universe of protected classes, but concerned about expanding the list of public accomodations
For the whole subject from a different angle: what about Catholic hospitals wanting to exclude birth control from their employees’ health insurance benefits?
Posted by: JanieM | August 24, 2017 at 10:50 AM
I’m so bothered by the very notion of tying health care coverage to employment that I ignore concerns of government overreach in this area. Employers should have no ability to curtail health benefits. I’ve defended some unpopular SCOTUS decisions around here (e.g., Shelby County), but Hobby Lobby is one that really pisses me off.
Regarding the notion that business who discriminate need to advertise as such, I don’t hate the idea, but I don’t know that it’s necessary. In the age of Yelp and Facebook, a business will be tagged as discriminating regardless.
For the whole subject from a different angle: what about Catholic hospitals wanting to exclude birth control from their employees’ health insurance benefits?
or pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions because they don’t like the prescribed medication.
luckily, SCOTUS told those clowns to go get bent.
For the whole subject from a different angle: what about Catholic hospitals wanting to exclude birth control from their employees’ health insurance benefits?
or pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions because they don’t like the prescribed medication.
luckily, SCOTUS told those clowns to go get bent.
Like others here, I struggle with where to draw the line.
At one end are bakeries where none of the products are specialized. The jelly donuts may be exquisite, but there’s no custom orders (an accurate description of one bakery near me). That’s clearly “public” and discrimination should not be allowed.
At the other end, I know a woman who does nothing but custom cakes. Everything is negotiated before she starts designing. She turns people away regularly. I don’t know what her reasons are for declining some jobs. At this end there’s nothing “public” except the opportunity to negotiate, with the possibility that she declines to work for you.
Is it possible to separate the generic vs one-of-a-kind work? Or maybe better question, does mixing the two kinds of work somehow make the custom work public, with a different standard?
Like others here, I struggle with where to draw the line.
At one end are bakeries where none of the products are specialized. The jelly donuts may be exquisite, but there’s no custom orders (an accurate description of one bakery near me). That’s clearly “public” and discrimination should not be allowed.
At the other end, I know a woman who does nothing but custom cakes. Everything is negotiated before she starts designing. She turns people away regularly. I don’t know what her reasons are for declining some jobs. At this end there’s nothing “public” except the opportunity to negotiate, with the possibility that she declines to work for you.
Is it possible to separate the generic vs one-of-a-kind work? Or maybe better question, does mixing the two kinds of work somehow make the custom work public, with a different standard?
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if, in the case of bakeries and gays, one side has asked the Justices to explain how “we don’t serve gays” differs from “we don’t serve coloreds”?
If nothing else, it might be amusing to see what kind of contortions those ruling against the gays wishing to buy a cake get themselves into.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if, in the case of bakeries and gays, one side has asked the Justices to explain how “we don’t serve gays” differs from “we don’t serve coloreds”?
If nothing else, it might be amusing to see what kind of contortions those ruling against the gays wishing to buy a cake get themselves into.
I’ve defended some unpopular SCOTUS decisions around here (e.g., Shelby County), but Hobby Lobby is one that really pisses me off.
Haha. Shelby was a horrific and arbitrary decision, perhaps even ludicrous…..back to my LG&M bookmarks!
You know, I would expect reactionary judges to hand down reactionary decisions, but please, please…no lectures about ‘what the Founders thought’ and adherence to ‘originalism’ or even (most hilariously) ‘calling balls and strikes’.
I’ve defended some unpopular SCOTUS decisions around here (e.g., Shelby County), but Hobby Lobby is one that really pisses me off.
Haha. Shelby was a horrific and arbitrary decision, perhaps even ludicrous…..back to my LG&M bookmarks!
You know, I would expect reactionary judges to hand down reactionary decisions, but please, please…no lectures about ‘what the Founders thought’ and adherence to ‘originalism’ or even (most hilariously) ‘calling balls and strikes’.
Just because we can use some positive news here occasionally.
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/08/24/trump-administration-backs-off-national-monument-threat/
As you may be aware, the Interior Department (following a Presidential directive) has been reviewing the status of a couple dozen National Monuments, with an eye towards eliminating them. But today
There may be some tweaks to the borders of a few, but no substantial reductions. Even to the ones which most exercised President Trump — i.e. those created by President Obama.
Just because we can use some positive news here occasionally.
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/08/24/trump-administration-backs-off-national-monument-threat/
As you may be aware, the Interior Department (following a Presidential directive) has been reviewing the status of a couple dozen National Monuments, with an eye towards eliminating them. But today
There may be some tweaks to the borders of a few, but no substantial reductions. Even to the ones which most exercised President Trump — i.e. those created by President Obama.
My line would stop at privately negotiated professional services conducted behind closed doors….you know, wink wink “we are so terribly booked up now”, etc., where the discrimination is ‘he said-she said’ and thus virtually undetectable.
So I guess there is no reasonable way to stop that (in the legal sense).
But brick and mortar publicly accessible open to anybody who walks through the door? You’re in our public (and publicly funded) square, and the public should be able to make the rules there….not YOU.
If you want to have a magic fckking kingdom where you are god….stay home and do your thing to your heart’s content.
bobbyp, maximalist.
My line would stop at privately negotiated professional services conducted behind closed doors….you know, wink wink “we are so terribly booked up now”, etc., where the discrimination is ‘he said-she said’ and thus virtually undetectable.
So I guess there is no reasonable way to stop that (in the legal sense).
But brick and mortar publicly accessible open to anybody who walks through the door? You’re in our public (and publicly funded) square, and the public should be able to make the rules there….not YOU.
If you want to have a magic fckking kingdom where you are god….stay home and do your thing to your heart’s content.
bobbyp, maximalist.
Is it possible to separate the generic vs one-of-a-kind work?
Imagine a city sanctioned street fair where vendors set up stands to sell all their cute one of a kind custom made crap.
One of them puts out a little sign that says “we don’t sell to homos”.
Did the vendor cross a line?
Is it possible to separate the generic vs one-of-a-kind work?
Imagine a city sanctioned street fair where vendors set up stands to sell all their cute one of a kind custom made crap.
One of them puts out a little sign that says “we don’t sell to homos”.
Did the vendor cross a line?
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if, in the case of bakeries and gays, one side has asked the Justices to explain how “we don’t serve gays” differs from “we don’t serve coloreds”?
If nothing else, it might be amusing to see what kind of contortions those ruling against the gays wishing to buy a cake get themselves into.
Posted by: wj | August 24, 2017 at 01:03 PM
I tried to steer this away from religious freedom issues for purposes of discussing the scope of public accommodations. In fact, the actual Colorado wedding cake case very much deals with religious freedom issues. Per Leviticus, God hates gays but is down with the coloreds.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if, in the case of bakeries and gays, one side has asked the Justices to explain how “we don’t serve gays” differs from “we don’t serve coloreds”?
If nothing else, it might be amusing to see what kind of contortions those ruling against the gays wishing to buy a cake get themselves into.
Posted by: wj | August 24, 2017 at 01:03 PM
I tried to steer this away from religious freedom issues for purposes of discussing the scope of public accommodations. In fact, the actual Colorado wedding cake case very much deals with religious freedom issues. Per Leviticus, God hates gays but is down with the coloreds.
My line would stop at privately negotiated professional services conducted behind closed doors….you know, wink wink “we are so terribly booked up now”, etc., where the discrimination is ‘he said-she said’ and thus virtually undetectable.
This works for me.
Imagine a city sanctioned street fair where vendors set up stands to sell all their cute one of a kind custom made crap.
One of them puts out a little sign that says “we don’t sell to homos”.
If it’s already made, anyone can buy it. If someone is commissioning its creation, there should be more flexibility to refuse. (And the best refusal is, “I’m too busy!” Who can argue?)
My line would stop at privately negotiated professional services conducted behind closed doors….you know, wink wink “we are so terribly booked up now”, etc., where the discrimination is ‘he said-she said’ and thus virtually undetectable.
This works for me.
Imagine a city sanctioned street fair where vendors set up stands to sell all their cute one of a kind custom made crap.
One of them puts out a little sign that says “we don’t sell to homos”.
If it’s already made, anyone can buy it. If someone is commissioning its creation, there should be more flexibility to refuse. (And the best refusal is, “I’m too busy!” Who can argue?)
I told him to imagine a parallel universe with an earth-like planet, with the main difference being that homosexuality was the accepted norm, with the vast majority of people being homosexual and society structured around homosexual relationships and marriage. I said, “Imagine you somehow wake up one day and find yourself on this planet. What would you do? Would you simply become gay? Do you think you could? How? Because that’s the same thing you want your daughter to do, only in reverse.”
Excellently put thought experiment, hsh. For most of us, this stuff is almost too obvious to think about, but when faced with someone actually talkable to, this is a nicely constructed example.
I’m not weighing in on the right to freely exercise your religion stuff, because most people here have already said, as far as I am concerned, all there is to say. I’m thinking particularly of cleek and his point about selective observance: I can refuse you a cake because you’re gay, but I can and do serve adulterers, liars, and makers of graven images with gusto (and those prohibitions have much more force than Leviticus for both jews and christians). The protection to persecute and humiliate on the basis of any inborn characteristics makes me angry; I remember it done by the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa to justify apartheid, and variants of it are used to justify the oppression of anybody the relevant religio wants to oppress. Sorry if I offend, but I believe that if you truly believe in Jehovah, or Baal, or the FSM, that’s your own idiotic business, but woe should betide you if you impinge on anybody else’s rights or freedoms as a result. And when, as here, the extent and reach of those rights are being debated, there should not be exceptions to commonly agreed rights on the basis of religious belief. But I understand that in a country established partly because of religious persecution, this is a problematic view, so I am happy to shut up (not so’s you’d notice).
I told him to imagine a parallel universe with an earth-like planet, with the main difference being that homosexuality was the accepted norm, with the vast majority of people being homosexual and society structured around homosexual relationships and marriage. I said, “Imagine you somehow wake up one day and find yourself on this planet. What would you do? Would you simply become gay? Do you think you could? How? Because that’s the same thing you want your daughter to do, only in reverse.”
Excellently put thought experiment, hsh. For most of us, this stuff is almost too obvious to think about, but when faced with someone actually talkable to, this is a nicely constructed example.
I’m not weighing in on the right to freely exercise your religion stuff, because most people here have already said, as far as I am concerned, all there is to say. I’m thinking particularly of cleek and his point about selective observance: I can refuse you a cake because you’re gay, but I can and do serve adulterers, liars, and makers of graven images with gusto (and those prohibitions have much more force than Leviticus for both jews and christians). The protection to persecute and humiliate on the basis of any inborn characteristics makes me angry; I remember it done by the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa to justify apartheid, and variants of it are used to justify the oppression of anybody the relevant religio wants to oppress. Sorry if I offend, but I believe that if you truly believe in Jehovah, or Baal, or the FSM, that’s your own idiotic business, but woe should betide you if you impinge on anybody else’s rights or freedoms as a result. And when, as here, the extent and reach of those rights are being debated, there should not be exceptions to commonly agreed rights on the basis of religious belief. But I understand that in a country established partly because of religious persecution, this is a problematic view, so I am happy to shut up (not so’s you’d notice).
Per Leviticus, God hates gays but is down with the coloreds.
You forget the Curse of Ham. Genesis.
Per Leviticus, God hates gays but is down with the coloreds.
You forget the Curse of Ham. Genesis.
Yup, the Curse of Ham was what they used to justify apartheid.
Yup, the Curse of Ham was what they used to justify apartheid.
Until proven otherwise, I maintain that the whole review-the-national-monuments thing is a front: the only significant change will be to roll back enough of Basin and Range in Nevada to build the rail line to Yucca Mountain.
The rail line will be built. Yucca Mountain will be opened. There are enough (D) Senators under pressure from their local environmentalists and local power companies to get the spent fuel out of their states to pass such a bill; probably enough to override a filibuster. All it takes is a Majority Leader willing to bring such a bill to the Senate floor, and a President willing to sign it.
Until proven otherwise, I maintain that the whole review-the-national-monuments thing is a front: the only significant change will be to roll back enough of Basin and Range in Nevada to build the rail line to Yucca Mountain.
The rail line will be built. Yucca Mountain will be opened. There are enough (D) Senators under pressure from their local environmentalists and local power companies to get the spent fuel out of their states to pass such a bill; probably enough to override a filibuster. All it takes is a Majority Leader willing to bring such a bill to the Senate floor, and a President willing to sign it.
I had somehow missed this “feature” of the Texas voter ID law that the Circuit Court just threw out: Texas still does not permit federal or Texas state government photo IDs as voter IDs — even those it issues to its own employees. The mind boggles.
I had somehow missed this “feature” of the Texas voter ID law that the Circuit Court just threw out: Texas still does not permit federal or Texas state government photo IDs as voter IDs — even those it issues to its own employees. The mind boggles.
Does Genesis actually say the Ham or Canaan was dark skinned?
Does Genesis actually say the Ham or Canaan was dark skinned?
Until proven otherwise, I maintain that the whole review-the-national-monuments thing is a front: the only significant change will be to roll back enough of Basin and Range in Nevada to build the rail line to Yucca Mountain.
I confess that’s a possibility that hadn’t occurred to me. But until I see it happen, I’m going to stick with the assumption that it was (at least for Trump) all about trashing anything and everything that Obama did.
Until proven otherwise, I maintain that the whole review-the-national-monuments thing is a front: the only significant change will be to roll back enough of Basin and Range in Nevada to build the rail line to Yucca Mountain.
I confess that’s a possibility that hadn’t occurred to me. But until I see it happen, I’m going to stick with the assumption that it was (at least for Trump) all about trashing anything and everything that Obama did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham
No. But surely you’re not actually looking for rationality in religion?!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham
No. But surely you’re not actually looking for rationality in religion?!
I have not had a bible lesson since the mid-80s, so I was verifying my hazy memory. I was aware that the CoH was used as justification for “bad things”, but I couldn’t remember if it was an explicit horrible thing from the OT or something more convoluted.
I have not had a bible lesson since the mid-80s, so I was verifying my hazy memory. I was aware that the CoH was used as justification for “bad things”, but I couldn’t remember if it was an explicit horrible thing from the OT or something more convoluted.
If it was a choice, I would have chosen to be bisexual a long time ago. Why limit yourself?
Well, it is(was I guess) not necessarily a great choice. Really, you get the worst of both worlds often. You get the standard homophobia, plus judgement from a significant portion of the LG community that you are gay but just a coward, then whichever sex you are dating is worried that they can’t satisfy you sexually and are you really going to cheat to get satisfied, and then, to top it off, there are the LG community folks who decide you aren’t really gay enough and you are using being bi to be “cool”.
No bi on the gay softball team, the y literally ask when was the last time you had sex with a man, if more than a year you can’t play.
On the other hand the pool to choose from seems larger, it just shrinks to infinitesimal once you talk about being bi.
If it was a choice, I would have chosen to be bisexual a long time ago. Why limit yourself?
Well, it is(was I guess) not necessarily a great choice. Really, you get the worst of both worlds often. You get the standard homophobia, plus judgement from a significant portion of the LG community that you are gay but just a coward, then whichever sex you are dating is worried that they can’t satisfy you sexually and are you really going to cheat to get satisfied, and then, to top it off, there are the LG community folks who decide you aren’t really gay enough and you are using being bi to be “cool”.
No bi on the gay softball team, the y literally ask when was the last time you had sex with a man, if more than a year you can’t play.
On the other hand the pool to choose from seems larger, it just shrinks to infinitesimal once you talk about being bi.
On the other hand the pool to choose from seems larger, it just shrinks to infinitesimal once you talk about being bi.
Then why talk about it? Have you normally provided a list of your previous and potential sexual encounters to everyone you’ve had a sexual encounter with? Do you explicitly tell people you’re not bisexual? If not, do they ask, just to make sure? Or do you wear some sort of heterosexual insignia for convenience?
(assuming you’re heterosexual and not relating person softball-team experience)
On the other hand the pool to choose from seems larger, it just shrinks to infinitesimal once you talk about being bi.
Then why talk about it? Have you normally provided a list of your previous and potential sexual encounters to everyone you’ve had a sexual encounter with? Do you explicitly tell people you’re not bisexual? If not, do they ask, just to make sure? Or do you wear some sort of heterosexual insignia for convenience?
(assuming you’re heterosexual and not relating person softball-team experience)
Until proven otherwise, I maintain that the whole review-the-national-monuments thing is a front:
I can’t prove a thing, but that’s not going to stop me from offering an opinion. 😉
One of the monuments under review is Maine’s Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument, created by Obama not long before he left office.
Our dear Trump-lite governor (although he has assured us that he was Trump before Trump was Trump, so take your pick) hated that monument from the time it was created, and I’m sure has lobbied hard to get it removed. Certainly from the Maine point of view it has nothing to do with Yucca Mountain. Beyond that I don’t know.
LePage (the aforesaid Trump admirer) hates land trusts too. He tried hard to sabotage a project that “my” land trust had worked on for five years, but ultimately failed.
Until proven otherwise, I maintain that the whole review-the-national-monuments thing is a front:
I can’t prove a thing, but that’s not going to stop me from offering an opinion. 😉
One of the monuments under review is Maine’s Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument, created by Obama not long before he left office.
Our dear Trump-lite governor (although he has assured us that he was Trump before Trump was Trump, so take your pick) hated that monument from the time it was created, and I’m sure has lobbied hard to get it removed. Certainly from the Maine point of view it has nothing to do with Yucca Mountain. Beyond that I don’t know.
LePage (the aforesaid Trump admirer) hates land trusts too. He tried hard to sabotage a project that “my” land trust had worked on for five years, but ultimately failed.
“Then why talk about it?”
Well, the softball team does ask, no badge required. They are allowed 4 heterosexuals by league rules so they are pretty blunt.
Whether it was my experience or not, this seems an odd question. I can imagine if I was looking to get laid it would be an insignificant piece of information. In the early 1970’s probably less insignificant based on the AIDS fears.
It seems less insignificant for having a relationship. or, just wanting to be yourself.
“Then why talk about it?”
Well, the softball team does ask, no badge required. They are allowed 4 heterosexuals by league rules so they are pretty blunt.
Whether it was my experience or not, this seems an odd question. I can imagine if I was looking to get laid it would be an insignificant piece of information. In the early 1970’s probably less insignificant based on the AIDS fears.
It seems less insignificant for having a relationship. or, just wanting to be yourself.
It seems less insignificant for having a relationship.
Why? I’ve been married for 21 years, and I find it’s not a good idea to talk about other people I find sexually attractive. If you’re in a relationship, other sexual prospects should be even less important, regardless of their gender.
It seems less insignificant for having a relationship.
Why? I’ve been married for 21 years, and I find it’s not a good idea to talk about other people I find sexually attractive. If you’re in a relationship, other sexual prospects should be even less important, regardless of their gender.
So, I guess, the B in LGBT is just unnecessary as either way you happen to have met someone is already covered elsewhere.
Just make sure you don’t have sex with someone that might know someone else you’ve had sex with and the it’s no issue.
So, I guess, the B in LGBT is just unnecessary as either way you happen to have met someone is already covered elsewhere.
Just make sure you don’t have sex with someone that might know someone else you’ve had sex with and the it’s no issue.
I couldn’t remember if it was an explicit horrible thing from the OT or something more convoluted.
Ham looked at his daddy when he was nekkid.
The Old Testament is a pretty odd book in a lot of ways. A lot of stuff gets kind of mentioned in an off-hand way, and a few pages later you find yourself saying “wait, what…?”.
Nobody ate meat before Noah’s flood?
Who were these “Nephilim” – sons of god who came unto the daughters of men?
Besides wanting to go back in time and hang out with Neanderthals (assuming they’d have me), I sometimes wish I could go back and see what the hell was actually going on back there in Biblical Palestine.
The guy I’d really like to meet is Ezekiel. He laid down next to a brick with an iron pan in between him and the brick. For 390 days. Then he laid down on the other side for 40 days.
The Israelites were supposed to take away from this the idea that they were going to go into exile.
This is why I’m always nice to people I meet in the street who appear to be out of their freaking gourds. You just never know.
As far as LBGTQ and who needs to know what when, just be glad we no longer have the inter-species complication that sapiens (not our sapient) and neanderthalis had back in the day. The combinatorial explosion of options would blow our minds.
I couldn’t remember if it was an explicit horrible thing from the OT or something more convoluted.
Ham looked at his daddy when he was nekkid.
The Old Testament is a pretty odd book in a lot of ways. A lot of stuff gets kind of mentioned in an off-hand way, and a few pages later you find yourself saying “wait, what…?”.
Nobody ate meat before Noah’s flood?
Who were these “Nephilim” – sons of god who came unto the daughters of men?
Besides wanting to go back in time and hang out with Neanderthals (assuming they’d have me), I sometimes wish I could go back and see what the hell was actually going on back there in Biblical Palestine.
The guy I’d really like to meet is Ezekiel. He laid down next to a brick with an iron pan in between him and the brick. For 390 days. Then he laid down on the other side for 40 days.
The Israelites were supposed to take away from this the idea that they were going to go into exile.
This is why I’m always nice to people I meet in the street who appear to be out of their freaking gourds. You just never know.
As far as LBGTQ and who needs to know what when, just be glad we no longer have the inter-species complication that sapiens (not our sapient) and neanderthalis had back in the day. The combinatorial explosion of options would blow our minds.
Does Genesis actually say the Ham or Canaan was dark skinned?
If your entire economy and society is based on the idea that somebody else needs to go drag their behind out in the field and pick your cotton for you, on pain of beating mutilation or death, your can probably find a way to get pretty creative with the hermeneutics.
Does Genesis actually say the Ham or Canaan was dark skinned?
If your entire economy and society is based on the idea that somebody else needs to go drag their behind out in the field and pick your cotton for you, on pain of beating mutilation or death, your can probably find a way to get pretty creative with the hermeneutics.
“No bi on the gay softball team, the y literally ask when was the last time you had sex with a man, if more than a year you can’t play.”
Was that a stat, like batting average? Score!
Having played softball two or three times a week for 40 years on many competitive teams, I’ll wager the got-laid numbers were exaggerated considerably during the after game drinking bouts.
I’ll also bet if the person who can’t play because they didn’t have sex with a man for a year (why would you admit it? How would they check?) but who was a stellar ballplayer got picked up by another team in the league as a ringer for the playoffs.
There must be a lot of kidding about head-first slides into third on these teams. What, you couldn’t go all the way home and score?
I’ve never heard of a sex club who turned you away if you hadn’t made it to third during your softball career.
In my younger years on younger teams the heterosexual bravado bragging was impressive. You did what how many times? With who? Both of them? You’re playing short and batting cleanup today, mac.
If you missed a game BECAUSE you were having sex, we promoted you. And then asked for phone numbers. If you managed to point out both your wife AND your girlfriend sitting far away from each other in the bleachers, there was a lot of craning of necks and high fives in the dugout.
But, I kid right there. Pretty much.
To tell you the truth, with the frequency of play and the traveling out-of-town on weekends, the main complaint from the wives and girlfriends was that guys were too tired to perform the other thing.
Actually, what we had on our teams were the biggest liars about the subject. But they could play. So our recruitment efforts concentrated on liars.
Now, years later and older, if there was a sex quota to make the team, we couldn’t field a team. Between that and blown-out knees and pulled hammies and divorces, we have enough trouble getting guys physically ready.
True, a few of them might hurt themselves getting a little rambunctious in the rare sack time, but I suspect they pull that groin muscle trying to put on their spikes in the car in heavy traffic on the way to the game.
“No bi on the gay softball team, the y literally ask when was the last time you had sex with a man, if more than a year you can’t play.”
Was that a stat, like batting average? Score!
Having played softball two or three times a week for 40 years on many competitive teams, I’ll wager the got-laid numbers were exaggerated considerably during the after game drinking bouts.
I’ll also bet if the person who can’t play because they didn’t have sex with a man for a year (why would you admit it? How would they check?) but who was a stellar ballplayer got picked up by another team in the league as a ringer for the playoffs.
There must be a lot of kidding about head-first slides into third on these teams. What, you couldn’t go all the way home and score?
I’ve never heard of a sex club who turned you away if you hadn’t made it to third during your softball career.
In my younger years on younger teams the heterosexual bravado bragging was impressive. You did what how many times? With who? Both of them? You’re playing short and batting cleanup today, mac.
If you missed a game BECAUSE you were having sex, we promoted you. And then asked for phone numbers. If you managed to point out both your wife AND your girlfriend sitting far away from each other in the bleachers, there was a lot of craning of necks and high fives in the dugout.
But, I kid right there. Pretty much.
To tell you the truth, with the frequency of play and the traveling out-of-town on weekends, the main complaint from the wives and girlfriends was that guys were too tired to perform the other thing.
Actually, what we had on our teams were the biggest liars about the subject. But they could play. So our recruitment efforts concentrated on liars.
Now, years later and older, if there was a sex quota to make the team, we couldn’t field a team. Between that and blown-out knees and pulled hammies and divorces, we have enough trouble getting guys physically ready.
True, a few of them might hurt themselves getting a little rambunctious in the rare sack time, but I suspect they pull that groin muscle trying to put on their spikes in the car in heavy traffic on the way to the game.
If it makes you feel any better, Marty, I can’t actually make myself bisexual. Don’t worry. I’ll be fine.
If it makes you feel any better, Marty, I can’t actually make myself bisexual. Don’t worry. I’ll be fine.
I wasn’t feeling too bad about it….
I wasn’t feeling too bad about it….
If the frequency of sex was a marker for inclusion, I doubt many republicans could get elected. Not that they don’t have sex, but they can’t talk about it.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/08/donald-trump-and-the-debt-ceiling-stupid-or-evil/
Speaking of markers, I’ve been laying some down. Global warming, healthcare, etc.
Here’s another: This Fall will be the last time the republican party gets to fuck with the debt ceiling. We aren’t playing any more.
Next time you deliberately threaten to blackmail the country and kill its citizens to get your way, the next time you hang this over our heads, we will kill every fucking republican in the country.
Who is “we”. There are plenty of us. We’re done.
If the frequency of sex was a marker for inclusion, I doubt many republicans could get elected. Not that they don’t have sex, but they can’t talk about it.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/08/donald-trump-and-the-debt-ceiling-stupid-or-evil/
Speaking of markers, I’ve been laying some down. Global warming, healthcare, etc.
Here’s another: This Fall will be the last time the republican party gets to fuck with the debt ceiling. We aren’t playing any more.
Next time you deliberately threaten to blackmail the country and kill its citizens to get your way, the next time you hang this over our heads, we will kill every fucking republican in the country.
Who is “we”. There are plenty of us. We’re done.
Finally, I get to read at an ostensibly conservative outlet that Alexis de Tocqueville did something other than suck America’s dick in “Democracy in America”:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/face-it-trump-is-the-man-in-americas-mirror/
Finally, I get to read at an ostensibly conservative outlet that Alexis de Tocqueville did something other than suck America’s dick in “Democracy in America”:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/face-it-trump-is-the-man-in-americas-mirror/
Ladies and germs, the President of these United States:
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/23/trump-wants-to-lead-a-race-war/
More markers coming.
Ladies and germs, the President of these United States:
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/23/trump-wants-to-lead-a-race-war/
More markers coming.
“ostensibly conservative” … I like AmCon, but I’m careful to avoid crazy Uncle Pat and Rod Dreher unless I’m in the right mood. Daniel Larison is repetitive, but a good reminder of the value of restraint in foreign policy. The posters there are as sane as I can find on the right.
“ostensibly conservative” … I like AmCon, but I’m careful to avoid crazy Uncle Pat and Rod Dreher unless I’m in the right mood. Daniel Larison is repetitive, but a good reminder of the value of restraint in foreign policy. The posters there are as sane as I can find on the right.
Found this via a friend on FB. A deep meditation on the reality of protest and non-violence and of the places where that idealism breaks and slips.
https://radicaldiscipleship.net/2017/08/23/my-nonviolent-stance-was-met-with-heavily-armed-men/
“But I want you to understand what you’re asking of the people who take this necessary stance against white supremacy, the people who go to look evil in the face. You’re asking them to be beaten with brass knuckles, with bats, with fists. To be pounded into the ground, stomped on, and smashed. You’re asking them to bleed on the pavement and the grass. Some of them are going to die. And you’re asking them to do that without defending themselves.
Are you willing to do that? Are you going to to go out when the Nazis come here, to the Bay Area, next week? Are you going to offer your body to them? No? Are you willing to take a bat to the head? To be surrounded by angry young men who want nothing more than to beat you unconscious, like they did Deandre Harris? Are you going to rely upon a different type of violence – that imposed by the state – to protect you – even knowing it is a danger to your neighbors? To outsource the violence your safety requires to someone else? Or are you just not going to show up, at the rally or afterward? To choose passivity over pacifism – because let’s be clear, nonviolence is still about showing up.”
This account of Charlottesville and his reflection on the aftermath and how it has challenged his worldview resonates with the years of research I have done on the rhetoric and psychology of violence.
Naiveté is privilege.
Found this via a friend on FB. A deep meditation on the reality of protest and non-violence and of the places where that idealism breaks and slips.
https://radicaldiscipleship.net/2017/08/23/my-nonviolent-stance-was-met-with-heavily-armed-men/
“But I want you to understand what you’re asking of the people who take this necessary stance against white supremacy, the people who go to look evil in the face. You’re asking them to be beaten with brass knuckles, with bats, with fists. To be pounded into the ground, stomped on, and smashed. You’re asking them to bleed on the pavement and the grass. Some of them are going to die. And you’re asking them to do that without defending themselves.
Are you willing to do that? Are you going to to go out when the Nazis come here, to the Bay Area, next week? Are you going to offer your body to them? No? Are you willing to take a bat to the head? To be surrounded by angry young men who want nothing more than to beat you unconscious, like they did Deandre Harris? Are you going to rely upon a different type of violence – that imposed by the state – to protect you – even knowing it is a danger to your neighbors? To outsource the violence your safety requires to someone else? Or are you just not going to show up, at the rally or afterward? To choose passivity over pacifism – because let’s be clear, nonviolence is still about showing up.”
This account of Charlottesville and his reflection on the aftermath and how it has challenged his worldview resonates with the years of research I have done on the rhetoric and psychology of violence.
Naiveté is privilege.
That was powerful, nous.
I didn’t see the NRA counseling those who were peacefully protesting against the fascists in Charlottesville to carry weapons of war to defend themselves, as the NRA wants everyone to do in public.
I expect it was because so many of the fascists in Charlottesville are NRA members in good standing and the NRA is only interested in providing self defense with deadly force to the right kind of people, of which we are not.
Frankly, as rump is prone to preface every one of his utterances like maybe we doubt he is being frank, I believe journalists should carry weapons on their persons and when rump’s henchman put them in cages and then he taunts them as being something other than American, they should use those weapons on their attackers.
If corporations are people and money is speech, why not bullets too.
That was powerful, nous.
I didn’t see the NRA counseling those who were peacefully protesting against the fascists in Charlottesville to carry weapons of war to defend themselves, as the NRA wants everyone to do in public.
I expect it was because so many of the fascists in Charlottesville are NRA members in good standing and the NRA is only interested in providing self defense with deadly force to the right kind of people, of which we are not.
Frankly, as rump is prone to preface every one of his utterances like maybe we doubt he is being frank, I believe journalists should carry weapons on their persons and when rump’s henchman put them in cages and then he taunts them as being something other than American, they should use those weapons on their attackers.
If corporations are people and money is speech, why not bullets too.
I agree, nous. The article is an important read. Thanks.
I agree, nous. The article is an important read. Thanks.
Back to wedding cakes: I have always wondered whether a man who makes a significant part of his living decorating wedding cakes isn’t at least a bit gay.
–TP
Back to wedding cakes: I have always wondered whether a man who makes a significant part of his living decorating wedding cakes isn’t at least a bit gay.
–TP
TLDR: White Christians, if you aren’t willing to personally take a bat to the head, shut up about antifa.
The article linked by nous was important but I can’t fully subscribe.
I’m less down on antifa than I am on the city government of C’ville.
Let’s get out of the way the disclaimer that any culpability that can be attached to antifa and the local/state government is a rounding error compared to the unite the right assholes.
The peaceful counterdemonstrators would have never been put in the position they found themselves in if the local/state government had not so badly mismanaged this. I’m a huge freedom of expression advocate, but the 1st Amendment does not trump public safety. Skokie, Forsyth County, New Hampshire and any other case that I’ve seen all allow local governments to condition permits for marches on being able to adequately ensure public safety. What was C’ville thinking?
The author of the essay would have never subjected to violence if C’ville had either denied the permit or followed the playbook used by Boston.
I live in Orlando. When Westboro Baptist Church came to protest Pulse memorial services, counter-demonstrators dressed as angels with large wings and held up rainbow banners to block hateful signs and sang Amazing Grace to drown out the hateful chants. Orlando provided enough police protection to allow a peaceful counterdemonstration. Granted, WBC is not nearly as threatening as the Unite the Right group of social rejects (setting aside the damnation of one’s immortal soul), but that just highlights the fact that if local government can’t provide an adequate level of public safety, then deny the permit.
Bottom line: I’m not a big fan of antifa because I’ve heard enough antidotes to suggest that they are not all reluctant defenders of the nonviolent. Some of them (based on their history), come looking for trouble. The fact that they did some good and are not nearly as bad as the white supremacists does not change that.
TLDR: White Christians, if you aren’t willing to personally take a bat to the head, shut up about antifa.
The article linked by nous was important but I can’t fully subscribe.
I’m less down on antifa than I am on the city government of C’ville.
Let’s get out of the way the disclaimer that any culpability that can be attached to antifa and the local/state government is a rounding error compared to the unite the right assholes.
The peaceful counterdemonstrators would have never been put in the position they found themselves in if the local/state government had not so badly mismanaged this. I’m a huge freedom of expression advocate, but the 1st Amendment does not trump public safety. Skokie, Forsyth County, New Hampshire and any other case that I’ve seen all allow local governments to condition permits for marches on being able to adequately ensure public safety. What was C’ville thinking?
The author of the essay would have never subjected to violence if C’ville had either denied the permit or followed the playbook used by Boston.
I live in Orlando. When Westboro Baptist Church came to protest Pulse memorial services, counter-demonstrators dressed as angels with large wings and held up rainbow banners to block hateful signs and sang Amazing Grace to drown out the hateful chants. Orlando provided enough police protection to allow a peaceful counterdemonstration. Granted, WBC is not nearly as threatening as the Unite the Right group of social rejects (setting aside the damnation of one’s immortal soul), but that just highlights the fact that if local government can’t provide an adequate level of public safety, then deny the permit.
Bottom line: I’m not a big fan of antifa because I’ve heard enough antidotes to suggest that they are not all reluctant defenders of the nonviolent. Some of them (based on their history), come looking for trouble. The fact that they did some good and are not nearly as bad as the white supremacists does not change that.
What was C’ville thinking?
C’ville did deny the permit. The denial was challenged in court, and the city lost.
I’m not a fan of antifa either, but nous’s article about nonviolence, and people who are pacifists but rely on other people to do violence for them, is apt. That’s not to say that nonviolence is a bad strategy, and I don’t think that the author was arguing that. It’s just that before you judge people’s strategy, you should have some experience in the fight.
I plead guilty to have been absent for the fascists (and the KKK, for that matter). Hoping they get it over with and go away hasn’t really worked very well.
What was C’ville thinking?
C’ville did deny the permit. The denial was challenged in court, and the city lost.
I’m not a fan of antifa either, but nous’s article about nonviolence, and people who are pacifists but rely on other people to do violence for them, is apt. That’s not to say that nonviolence is a bad strategy, and I don’t think that the author was arguing that. It’s just that before you judge people’s strategy, you should have some experience in the fight.
I plead guilty to have been absent for the fascists (and the KKK, for that matter). Hoping they get it over with and go away hasn’t really worked very well.
I did attend this event, however. News of it was spread mostly by word of mouth so it wouldn’t attract fascists.
I did attend this event, however. News of it was spread mostly by word of mouth so it wouldn’t attract fascists.
Also, I have been a huge contributor to ACLU, although I have my ups and downs doing it because I don’t always agree with their decisions. I disagree strongly with their position in this case – the city was ill-equipped to deal with these armed and dangerous assholes, and merely requested that the “festivities” be moved to a place where the violence, if any, would be easier to contain.
That said, the C’ville police didn’t cover themselves with glory, although I can’t really judge them since they aren’t an army, and the Unite the Right participants looked very much like one.
The NRA must have gotten a real thrill up their leg over C’ville.
Also, I have been a huge contributor to ACLU, although I have my ups and downs doing it because I don’t always agree with their decisions. I disagree strongly with their position in this case – the city was ill-equipped to deal with these armed and dangerous assholes, and merely requested that the “festivities” be moved to a place where the violence, if any, would be easier to contain.
That said, the C’ville police didn’t cover themselves with glory, although I can’t really judge them since they aren’t an army, and the Unite the Right participants looked very much like one.
The NRA must have gotten a real thrill up their leg over C’ville.
By the way, Pollo de muerte, now that you’ve read up, and knew what the city and the police had to face, what would you have counseled?
By the way, Pollo de muerte, now that you’ve read up, and knew what the city and the police had to face, what would you have counseled?
“Back to wedding cakes: I have always wondered whether a man who makes a significant part of his living decorating wedding cakes isn’t at least a bit gay.”
If he is a gay alt-right man who supports rump, he could decorate wedding cakes for a living AND refuse to provide one for his own wedding or for any of his friends’ weddings on account of his rumpist christian inclinations and achieve the perfect, plangent, cracked incoherence of the republican coalition today.
You can believe any old grab bag of things and do the exact opposite and earn yourself a participation trophy in today’s republican party.
rump said he is the least antisemitic and the least racist individual on the face of the Earth you’ve ever seen.
Less than I am, but I don’t count. Less than Doctor Science. Less than Martin Luther King and less than Martin Buber. Less than Elie Wiesel. Less than Christ himself. Less than James Brown. The leastest of them all.
Less than every single republican conservative in the country. If I was of them, I’d take umbrage at those remarks.
I don’t hear any.
David Duke is preparing his tortured response as we speak.
“Back to wedding cakes: I have always wondered whether a man who makes a significant part of his living decorating wedding cakes isn’t at least a bit gay.”
If he is a gay alt-right man who supports rump, he could decorate wedding cakes for a living AND refuse to provide one for his own wedding or for any of his friends’ weddings on account of his rumpist christian inclinations and achieve the perfect, plangent, cracked incoherence of the republican coalition today.
You can believe any old grab bag of things and do the exact opposite and earn yourself a participation trophy in today’s republican party.
rump said he is the least antisemitic and the least racist individual on the face of the Earth you’ve ever seen.
Less than I am, but I don’t count. Less than Doctor Science. Less than Martin Luther King and less than Martin Buber. Less than Elie Wiesel. Less than Christ himself. Less than James Brown. The leastest of them all.
Less than every single republican conservative in the country. If I was of them, I’d take umbrage at those remarks.
I don’t hear any.
David Duke is preparing his tortured response as we speak.
I think it would be fun if Mike Pence stood up and said, in support of rump’s remarks, that he Mike Pence, is in fact more racist and antisemitic than the sun god rump, who the former is blessed to serve and carry out the latter’s racist, antisemitic agenda.
Instead, I think we’ll see a sort of What’s My Line competition with republican conservatives everywhere walking to the microphone and introducing themselves as “I am the least racist and antisemitic individual you’ve ever seen.”
“I am the least racist and antisemitic individual you’ve ever seen.”
“I am the least racist and antisemitic individual you’ve ever seen.”
Then someone, probably Newt Gingrich, will screw it all up and say “Some of my best friends are the least racist and antisemitic individuals you’ve ever seen.”
Then we the panel get to ask questions to ferret out the real item.
I think it would be fun if Mike Pence stood up and said, in support of rump’s remarks, that he Mike Pence, is in fact more racist and antisemitic than the sun god rump, who the former is blessed to serve and carry out the latter’s racist, antisemitic agenda.
Instead, I think we’ll see a sort of What’s My Line competition with republican conservatives everywhere walking to the microphone and introducing themselves as “I am the least racist and antisemitic individual you’ve ever seen.”
“I am the least racist and antisemitic individual you’ve ever seen.”
“I am the least racist and antisemitic individual you’ve ever seen.”
Then someone, probably Newt Gingrich, will screw it all up and say “Some of my best friends are the least racist and antisemitic individuals you’ve ever seen.”
Then we the panel get to ask questions to ferret out the real item.
Natch, of course, rump will cite his mentor, the evil, ruthless Roy Cohn, universally despised for his individual villainy, the bastard, apart from any group identification the man claimed, as evidence of his pro-Jewish sympathies.
Which is par for the course among the republican party, find the biggest assholes and the dumbest, incompetent ruthless villains and killers from every walk of life and hire them to make everyone look bad.
Natch, of course, rump will cite his mentor, the evil, ruthless Roy Cohn, universally despised for his individual villainy, the bastard, apart from any group identification the man claimed, as evidence of his pro-Jewish sympathies.
Which is par for the course among the republican party, find the biggest assholes and the dumbest, incompetent ruthless villains and killers from every walk of life and hire them to make everyone look bad.
What struck me about the non-violence story was the guilt that the activist felt for putting himself in a position where the only thing protecting him from violence was the willingness of someone else to take on the burden of his defense through counter-violence. It’s akin to survivors guilt in many ways. And while I’m sure there are antifa with an unhealthy yearning for violence, I can say from being in the middle of these sorts of confrontations in Denver in the mid-90s that a huge number of the people standing in the way of mayhem are sick to their stomachs and scared as hell, hoping that someone else pushes the racists back before the violence spills past the vanguard. But the racists won’t stop just because they are meeting no physical resistance, so it’s important that those scared people are standing with the vanguard, regardless that a few of their comrades share their opponents joy in mayhem. It’s just important that the problematic comrades not be the ones in charge and not be the only ones mucking in. Reluctance must lead.
What struck me about the non-violence story was the guilt that the activist felt for putting himself in a position where the only thing protecting him from violence was the willingness of someone else to take on the burden of his defense through counter-violence. It’s akin to survivors guilt in many ways. And while I’m sure there are antifa with an unhealthy yearning for violence, I can say from being in the middle of these sorts of confrontations in Denver in the mid-90s that a huge number of the people standing in the way of mayhem are sick to their stomachs and scared as hell, hoping that someone else pushes the racists back before the violence spills past the vanguard. But the racists won’t stop just because they are meeting no physical resistance, so it’s important that those scared people are standing with the vanguard, regardless that a few of their comrades share their opponents joy in mayhem. It’s just important that the problematic comrades not be the ones in charge and not be the only ones mucking in. Reluctance must lead.
Reluctance must lead.
Incredibly wise. But sometimes it has to lead decisively, against its nature.
Reluctance must lead.
Incredibly wise. But sometimes it has to lead decisively, against its nature.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/donald-trumps-true-allegiances
I’ve nothing to add, unless it’s enriched uranium shoved up republican assholes.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/donald-trumps-true-allegiances
I’ve nothing to add, unless it’s enriched uranium shoved up republican assholes.
I long to to be bear cub who survives republican vermin, so I can eat republican children and the wombs of their vermin mothers:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/they-want-to-destroy-everything.html
Kill all of them.
I long to to be bear cub who survives republican vermin, so I can eat republican children and the wombs of their vermin mothers:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/they-want-to-destroy-everything.html
Kill all of them.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-alt-right-is-not-who-you-think-it-is/
The republican party has done its job of galvanizing racist America.
Now you die.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-alt-right-is-not-who-you-think-it-is/
The republican party has done its job of galvanizing racist America.
Now you die.
Trump vs the GOP
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-exactly-what-republicans-are-not/2017/08/24/9909a320-8832-11e7-a50f-e0d4e6ec070a_story.html?tid=hybrid_collaborative_2_na&utm_term=.78777431d984
Trump vs the GOP
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-exactly-what-republicans-are-not/2017/08/24/9909a320-8832-11e7-a50f-e0d4e6ec070a_story.html?tid=hybrid_collaborative_2_na&utm_term=.78777431d984
I don’t support antifa, but as mentioned elsewhere I recognize the moral difference between fighting to eliminate other people, and fighting people who are fighting to eliminate other people.
In other contexts, antifa would, correctly, be seen as a legitimate resistance.
There are approaches and techniques for confronting violent people in a non-violent way. They all involve risk. As we have seen what the white supremos are capable of, they may involve great risk.
You might die.
If folks are interested in this, there are resources for information and training. DO NOT try it without getting some kind of training.
The account the author of nous’ piece gives of antifa intervening to prevent non-violent protestors from coming to harm in C’ville is one that I have heard from various sources. Primarily from clergy who were there, or folks who marched with them.
Apparently, they saved some folks from a serious beating, and may have saved lives.
They are provocative and in some cases that causes fights that didn’t necessarily need to happen. That said, they don’t attack J random civilians. The two groups – antifa and violent right wingers – are not comparable.
Do not attempt to confront white supremacists or white nationalists unless you have had some training in non-violent confrontation. They are violent mf’ers and you may get seriously hurt. They *want* to hurt you. Don’t grant their wish.
The thing that concerns me more than the Hitler Youth frat boys are the free-lance militias that show up at stuff like this.
The C’ville police were apparently outgunned. No wonder they were reluctant to wade in.
How the hell we have gotten to the place where we tolerate literal private armies parading around public spaces is beyond me. Or, not beyond me, we all know how it came about. It is a profoundly dangerous situation.
I don’t support antifa, but as mentioned elsewhere I recognize the moral difference between fighting to eliminate other people, and fighting people who are fighting to eliminate other people.
In other contexts, antifa would, correctly, be seen as a legitimate resistance.
There are approaches and techniques for confronting violent people in a non-violent way. They all involve risk. As we have seen what the white supremos are capable of, they may involve great risk.
You might die.
If folks are interested in this, there are resources for information and training. DO NOT try it without getting some kind of training.
The account the author of nous’ piece gives of antifa intervening to prevent non-violent protestors from coming to harm in C’ville is one that I have heard from various sources. Primarily from clergy who were there, or folks who marched with them.
Apparently, they saved some folks from a serious beating, and may have saved lives.
They are provocative and in some cases that causes fights that didn’t necessarily need to happen. That said, they don’t attack J random civilians. The two groups – antifa and violent right wingers – are not comparable.
Do not attempt to confront white supremacists or white nationalists unless you have had some training in non-violent confrontation. They are violent mf’ers and you may get seriously hurt. They *want* to hurt you. Don’t grant their wish.
The thing that concerns me more than the Hitler Youth frat boys are the free-lance militias that show up at stuff like this.
The C’ville police were apparently outgunned. No wonder they were reluctant to wade in.
How the hell we have gotten to the place where we tolerate literal private armies parading around public spaces is beyond me. Or, not beyond me, we all know how it came about. It is a profoundly dangerous situation.
C’ville did deny the permit. The denial was challenged in court, and the city lost.
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 08:31 PM
From the order granting the motion for injunction:
I repeat: C’ville screwed up. Public safety is a valid reason to restrict the free speech and freedom of assembly rights of the Unite the Right demonstrators, but you need to show up with some evidence. They knew this was potentially bad enough to attempt moving the demonstration, but then wiffed at the hearing. They knew enough to have a large presence of peace officers, but for some reason they just stood around and didn’t keep the peace.
C’VILLE
SCREWED
UP.
Also, I have been a huge contributor to ACLU, although I have my ups and downs doing it because I don’t always agree with their decisions. I disagree strongly with their position in this case – the city was ill-equipped to deal with these armed and dangerous assholes, and merely requested that the “festivities” be moved to a place where the violence, if any, would be easier to contain.
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 08:46 PM
I also support the ACLU, but I don’t blame them one bit for this. We have an adversarial system of justice. It was up to C’ville to show up with something, *anything*, by way of evidence. ACLU had a client and zealously represented the interests of that client. Defending the free-speech rights of the most reprehensible of us is the ACLU’s most vital function and I won’t hold it against them that C’ville took a dive. As far as I’m concerned, the jewish attorney who represented the Nazis in the Skokie case is a real life Atticus Finch.
By the way, Pollo de muerte, now that you’ve read up, and knew what the city and the police had to face, what would you have counseled?
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 09:03 PM
I would have counseled showing up at an evidentiary hearing with some fucking *evidence*.
Boston got it right: Allow the demonstration, but put controls in place to maintain a buffer between demonstrators and counter-demonstrators; enforce a “no weapons” policy; shut things down at the first sign of trouble, and have enough of a force there to accomplish these goals. Boston Mayor: “No weapons, no backpacks, no sticks. We are going to have a zero-tolerance policy. If anyone gets out of control — at all — it will be shut down.” That’s how you do it.
C’ville did deny the permit. The denial was challenged in court, and the city lost.
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 08:31 PM
From the order granting the motion for injunction:
I repeat: C’ville screwed up. Public safety is a valid reason to restrict the free speech and freedom of assembly rights of the Unite the Right demonstrators, but you need to show up with some evidence. They knew this was potentially bad enough to attempt moving the demonstration, but then wiffed at the hearing. They knew enough to have a large presence of peace officers, but for some reason they just stood around and didn’t keep the peace.
C’VILLE
SCREWED
UP.
Also, I have been a huge contributor to ACLU, although I have my ups and downs doing it because I don’t always agree with their decisions. I disagree strongly with their position in this case – the city was ill-equipped to deal with these armed and dangerous assholes, and merely requested that the “festivities” be moved to a place where the violence, if any, would be easier to contain.
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 08:46 PM
I also support the ACLU, but I don’t blame them one bit for this. We have an adversarial system of justice. It was up to C’ville to show up with something, *anything*, by way of evidence. ACLU had a client and zealously represented the interests of that client. Defending the free-speech rights of the most reprehensible of us is the ACLU’s most vital function and I won’t hold it against them that C’ville took a dive. As far as I’m concerned, the jewish attorney who represented the Nazis in the Skokie case is a real life Atticus Finch.
By the way, Pollo de muerte, now that you’ve read up, and knew what the city and the police had to face, what would you have counseled?
Posted by: sapient | August 24, 2017 at 09:03 PM
I would have counseled showing up at an evidentiary hearing with some fucking *evidence*.
Boston got it right: Allow the demonstration, but put controls in place to maintain a buffer between demonstrators and counter-demonstrators; enforce a “no weapons” policy; shut things down at the first sign of trouble, and have enough of a force there to accomplish these goals. Boston Mayor: “No weapons, no backpacks, no sticks. We are going to have a zero-tolerance policy. If anyone gets out of control — at all — it will be shut down.” That’s how you do it.
nous-
I’m not judging the feelings of the counter-demontrator who penned the essay. I honor his exercise of his free speech rights in the most extreme of circumstance. I have a rule that I almost never judge the reactions of victims of violence or their families. Even if I think their feelings make for bad public policy, I will not allow my difference of opinion to metastasize into a larger judgment.
I just can’t subscribe to the “shut up about antifa” conclusion. I just can’t.
nous-
I’m not judging the feelings of the counter-demontrator who penned the essay. I honor his exercise of his free speech rights in the most extreme of circumstance. I have a rule that I almost never judge the reactions of victims of violence or their families. Even if I think their feelings make for bad public policy, I will not allow my difference of opinion to metastasize into a larger judgment.
I just can’t subscribe to the “shut up about antifa” conclusion. I just can’t.
They are provocative and in some cases that causes fights that didn’t necessarily need to happen. That said, they don’t attack J random civilians. The two groups – antifa and violent right wingers – are not comparable.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 05:43 AM
I’m not comparing them at all, but just because antifa is not within the same culpability time zone as the white supremacists it does not follow that they are above reproach.
Do not attempt to confront white supremacists or white nationalists unless you have had some training in non-violent confrontation. They are violent mf’ers and you may get seriously hurt. They *want* to hurt you. Don’t grant their wish.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 05:43 AM
A corollary to this is white supremacists want violence and will look for an excuse to engage in it. Antifa gives them that excuse.
The C’ville police were apparently outgunned. No wonder they were reluctant to wade in.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 05:43 AM
I can’t reach this conclusion based on current evidence. There were lots of local and state peace officers in C’ville. I’m not sure why they held back. I’d like answers to this.
They are provocative and in some cases that causes fights that didn’t necessarily need to happen. That said, they don’t attack J random civilians. The two groups – antifa and violent right wingers – are not comparable.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 05:43 AM
I’m not comparing them at all, but just because antifa is not within the same culpability time zone as the white supremacists it does not follow that they are above reproach.
Do not attempt to confront white supremacists or white nationalists unless you have had some training in non-violent confrontation. They are violent mf’ers and you may get seriously hurt. They *want* to hurt you. Don’t grant their wish.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 05:43 AM
A corollary to this is white supremacists want violence and will look for an excuse to engage in it. Antifa gives them that excuse.
The C’ville police were apparently outgunned. No wonder they were reluctant to wade in.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 05:43 AM
I can’t reach this conclusion based on current evidence. There were lots of local and state peace officers in C’ville. I’m not sure why they held back. I’d like answers to this.
FWIW, I didn’t realize that I was parroting public statements made by the ACLU when I posted in response to sapient above.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/14/543462419/charlottesville-violence-highlights-cities-struggle-to-balance-rights-and-safety
Disclosure: I’ve donated to and volunteered legal services for the ACLU, but I don’t always agree with them. Whether and how much that adds some NaCl to my comments above is an exercise for the reader.
FWIW, I didn’t realize that I was parroting public statements made by the ACLU when I posted in response to sapient above.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/14/543462419/charlottesville-violence-highlights-cities-struggle-to-balance-rights-and-safety
Disclosure: I’ve donated to and volunteered legal services for the ACLU, but I don’t always agree with them. Whether and how much that adds some NaCl to my comments above is an exercise for the reader.
The GOP bulldozed John Danforth’s statue years ago.
If John Danforth, a fine human being, had thrown his hat into the ring for the Presidency in 2016, rump, with the full, violent support of the republican base, would have depantsed him, as he and they did every other loser that travesty of a party coughed up.
End of rejoinder to wj’s Danforth cite and on to my more scattershot tongue lashing.
The GOP built rump and his bowel movement of a constituency out of the racist, anti-government, confederate, John Birch, talk radio, factless, corporate cocksucking money grubbing vermin it has courted, massaged, encouraged, incited, and armed since Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon.
Someone wanna ask me again why I voted for the flawed Hillary Clinton? Same reason German Jews longed to keep the flawed von Hindenberg on life support in 1934.
They could smell the ovens even then. So can I.
I’d have elected the flat spare tire in the trunk of my 1996 Tercel over the dumbass virulently hateful, contemptible filth you lot vomit up.
The GOP bulldozed John Danforth’s statue years ago.
If John Danforth, a fine human being, had thrown his hat into the ring for the Presidency in 2016, rump, with the full, violent support of the republican base, would have depantsed him, as he and they did every other loser that travesty of a party coughed up.
End of rejoinder to wj’s Danforth cite and on to my more scattershot tongue lashing.
The GOP built rump and his bowel movement of a constituency out of the racist, anti-government, confederate, John Birch, talk radio, factless, corporate cocksucking money grubbing vermin it has courted, massaged, encouraged, incited, and armed since Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon.
Someone wanna ask me again why I voted for the flawed Hillary Clinton? Same reason German Jews longed to keep the flawed von Hindenberg on life support in 1934.
They could smell the ovens even then. So can I.
I’d have elected the flat spare tire in the trunk of my 1996 Tercel over the dumbass virulently hateful, contemptible filth you lot vomit up.
Anyone care to explain why rump chose to be the standard bearer of the republican party?
What did he see in republicans and conservatives that he found so hospitable to his brand of hateful, national ruin?
He sniffed you lot up and and down and liked the stench.
Live with it, fuckers.
Anyone care to explain why rump chose to be the standard bearer of the republican party?
What did he see in republicans and conservatives that he found so hospitable to his brand of hateful, national ruin?
He sniffed you lot up and and down and liked the stench.
Live with it, fuckers.
it does not follow that they are above reproach.
i do not disagree. just pushing back on the (to my eye) false equivalence. neither am i saying you are pushing the (to me) false equivalence, it’s just out there.
i’m also an active aclu supporter, and likewise don’t agree with everything they do. i don’t always agree with everything i do, so it causes me no cognitive dissonance. perfect, enemy, good.
mostly my message is stay the hell away from obvious violent bastards unless you know what you’re about.
the hardest part in the non-violent thing is keeping your own head and not being provoked into some kind of reaction. it’s freaking hard, it doesn’t come naturally. takes some learning and practice.
know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em. mostly, know yourself and what your personal limits and boundaries are. it’s hard and takes work.
it’s above my pay grade, i know some folks who do / have done this stuff, and they are heroes.
i have been thinking about getting some training, but i may not be cut out for it. too freaking irascible.
not yet a buddha, y’all.
funny times we live in.
it does not follow that they are above reproach.
i do not disagree. just pushing back on the (to my eye) false equivalence. neither am i saying you are pushing the (to me) false equivalence, it’s just out there.
i’m also an active aclu supporter, and likewise don’t agree with everything they do. i don’t always agree with everything i do, so it causes me no cognitive dissonance. perfect, enemy, good.
mostly my message is stay the hell away from obvious violent bastards unless you know what you’re about.
the hardest part in the non-violent thing is keeping your own head and not being provoked into some kind of reaction. it’s freaking hard, it doesn’t come naturally. takes some learning and practice.
know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em. mostly, know yourself and what your personal limits and boundaries are. it’s hard and takes work.
it’s above my pay grade, i know some folks who do / have done this stuff, and they are heroes.
i have been thinking about getting some training, but i may not be cut out for it. too freaking irascible.
not yet a buddha, y’all.
funny times we live in.
you need to show up with some evidence.
What evidence, Pollo de muerte, would you have presented on behalf of the City Council that would not have been “merely speculative”?
enforce a “no weapons” policy;
How does the city enforce a gun ban when people have the right to carry?
It looks like the ACLU is having some regrets.
Again, I support ACLU, and the right of people like Kessler to speak. I don’t support his right to lead a mini-army. I think we agree on that. What I’m not inclined to do is to impose more blame on the victim (the city) than it deserves. Virginia’s gun laws are not like Boston’s. You cannot compare the two situations.
you need to show up with some evidence.
What evidence, Pollo de muerte, would you have presented on behalf of the City Council that would not have been “merely speculative”?
enforce a “no weapons” policy;
How does the city enforce a gun ban when people have the right to carry?
It looks like the ACLU is having some regrets.
Again, I support ACLU, and the right of people like Kessler to speak. I don’t support his right to lead a mini-army. I think we agree on that. What I’m not inclined to do is to impose more blame on the victim (the city) than it deserves. Virginia’s gun laws are not like Boston’s. You cannot compare the two situations.
“A corollary to this is white supremacists want violence and will look for an excuse to engage in it. Antifa gives them that excuse.”
So does a counter-protester clearing their throat in a ‘provocative way’. The neoNazis want excuse for violence? They’ll find one.
It’s just that without antifa, and with cops standing aside, the victims will have NO ONE to fight back on their side. Lambs to the slaughter.
If, as a result of Alte-Reich terrorism, the authorities come down hard and squash the Alte-Reich like bugs, then the slaughtered lambs will have served a greater purpose. But if not? Better that antifa go all “Dresden” on the Nazis.
“A corollary to this is white supremacists want violence and will look for an excuse to engage in it. Antifa gives them that excuse.”
So does a counter-protester clearing their throat in a ‘provocative way’. The neoNazis want excuse for violence? They’ll find one.
It’s just that without antifa, and with cops standing aside, the victims will have NO ONE to fight back on their side. Lambs to the slaughter.
If, as a result of Alte-Reich terrorism, the authorities come down hard and squash the Alte-Reich like bugs, then the slaughtered lambs will have served a greater purpose. But if not? Better that antifa go all “Dresden” on the Nazis.
the guys who held the rally in boston held alomst exactly the same rally, in the same location, in May. the roster of speakers was different, but that’s because aft Charlottesville the organizers either booted the nutjobs they originally had scheduled, or the nutjobs canceled or were no-shows. in at least one case, a no-show likely due to outstanding warrants.
almost nobody showed up in May. the cops kept people apart, but there was no barrier fence. no restrictions on backpacks, signs with sticks, etc.
the notable difference between boston and c’ville was that c’ville happened first, so boston had a heads up. hindsight is 20/20.
also, to their credit, the boston organizers were clear, early and often, that violent agitators were unwelcome.
the guys who held the rally in boston held alomst exactly the same rally, in the same location, in May. the roster of speakers was different, but that’s because aft Charlottesville the organizers either booted the nutjobs they originally had scheduled, or the nutjobs canceled or were no-shows. in at least one case, a no-show likely due to outstanding warrants.
almost nobody showed up in May. the cops kept people apart, but there was no barrier fence. no restrictions on backpacks, signs with sticks, etc.
the notable difference between boston and c’ville was that c’ville happened first, so boston had a heads up. hindsight is 20/20.
also, to their credit, the boston organizers were clear, early and often, that violent agitators were unwelcome.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-alt-right-is-not-who-you-think-it-is/
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-alt-right-is-not-who-you-think-it-is/
What evidence, Pollo de muerte, would you have presented on behalf of the City Council that would not have been “merely speculative”?
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 07:58 AM
How hard would it have been to find postings on Stormfront re: shields and clubs and how to comply with VA’s carry laws? That’s just off the top of my head. The evidentiary standards at a preliminary injunction hearing are relaxed compared to a full-blown trial. Also, governmental entities looking out for public safety concerns get the benefit of the doubt. That does not mean that you can ask the court to take judicial notice; you need to show up with something.
How does the city enforce a gun ban when people have the right to carry?
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 07:58 AM
I’m not licensed in VA, but AFAIK a permit to hold a demonstration can be conditioned on leaving weapons home without violating the 2nd Amendment and any state law that I’m aware of.
It looks like the ACLU is having some regrets.
An ACLU attorney says the organization will be very cautious going forward in representing armed protest groups in the wake of the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia.
What resulted from the backlash was an announcement that the ACLU will no longer stand with hate groups seeking to march with weapons, as some of those in Charlottesville did.
“If people are gathering armed to the hilt and hoping for violence, I think the ACLU would be doing damage to our free-speech rights in the long term,” Rowland said.
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 07:58 AM
That’s a completely appropriate response. If the ACLU can’t count on local governments to competently manage these situations, then you need to account for that.
What evidence, Pollo de muerte, would you have presented on behalf of the City Council that would not have been “merely speculative”?
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 07:58 AM
How hard would it have been to find postings on Stormfront re: shields and clubs and how to comply with VA’s carry laws? That’s just off the top of my head. The evidentiary standards at a preliminary injunction hearing are relaxed compared to a full-blown trial. Also, governmental entities looking out for public safety concerns get the benefit of the doubt. That does not mean that you can ask the court to take judicial notice; you need to show up with something.
How does the city enforce a gun ban when people have the right to carry?
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 07:58 AM
I’m not licensed in VA, but AFAIK a permit to hold a demonstration can be conditioned on leaving weapons home without violating the 2nd Amendment and any state law that I’m aware of.
It looks like the ACLU is having some regrets.
An ACLU attorney says the organization will be very cautious going forward in representing armed protest groups in the wake of the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia.
What resulted from the backlash was an announcement that the ACLU will no longer stand with hate groups seeking to march with weapons, as some of those in Charlottesville did.
“If people are gathering armed to the hilt and hoping for violence, I think the ACLU would be doing damage to our free-speech rights in the long term,” Rowland said.
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 07:58 AM
That’s a completely appropriate response. If the ACLU can’t count on local governments to competently manage these situations, then you need to account for that.
the notable difference between boston and c’ville was that c’ville happened first, so boston had a heads up. hindsight is 20/20.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 08:10 AM
Point taken, but it’s not like C’ville didn’t know there was a threat of violence. I honestly feel that knowing what they knew before hand, their response was terribad.
the notable difference between boston and c’ville was that c’ville happened first, so boston had a heads up. hindsight is 20/20.
Posted by: russell | August 25, 2017 at 08:10 AM
Point taken, but it’s not like C’ville didn’t know there was a threat of violence. I honestly feel that knowing what they knew before hand, their response was terribad.
Another angle on those religious freedom [sic] lawsuits, from today’s paper in my neck of the woods.
Another angle on those religious freedom [sic] lawsuits, from today’s paper in my neck of the woods.
JanieM … I have to drive by the Holy Land Experience on a weekly basis.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/religion/os-holy-land-experience-tax-breaks-20160225-story.html
I’m ready to end the entire concept of tax exempt status just to stamp out this kind of crap.
JanieM … I have to drive by the Holy Land Experience on a weekly basis.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/religion/os-holy-land-experience-tax-breaks-20160225-story.html
I’m ready to end the entire concept of tax exempt status just to stamp out this kind of crap.
AFAIK a permit to hold a demonstration can be conditioned on leaving weapons home without violating the 2nd Amendment and any state law that I’m aware of.
Could you show me an example of an open carry state where that’s happened? This is Dahlia Lithwick, who has been a prominent Charlottesville citizen, on the gun issue. In it, she links to pleadings by the city showing that, yes, there was evidence (“merely speculative”, of course) that there would be trouble.
So you don’t live in Charlottesville, are not licensed to practice here, but based on your legal experience (which apparently doesn’t qualify you to opine on the major issue here – Virginia’s gun laws) you want to trash Charlottesville’s city government. You’re certainly entitled to your view.
AFAIK a permit to hold a demonstration can be conditioned on leaving weapons home without violating the 2nd Amendment and any state law that I’m aware of.
Could you show me an example of an open carry state where that’s happened? This is Dahlia Lithwick, who has been a prominent Charlottesville citizen, on the gun issue. In it, she links to pleadings by the city showing that, yes, there was evidence (“merely speculative”, of course) that there would be trouble.
So you don’t live in Charlottesville, are not licensed to practice here, but based on your legal experience (which apparently doesn’t qualify you to opine on the major issue here – Virginia’s gun laws) you want to trash Charlottesville’s city government. You’re certainly entitled to your view.
I hope American Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, Jews, Scientologists, Mormons, and the Church of the Latter Day Whackadoodle Worshipers of Satan’s Dildo take a page from the so-called Christian grifters grifting school districts and municipalities into handing over the big bucks with constitutional protection from shit republicans and figure out how to ka-ching this slot machine for the big bucks too.
Seems God the American has a lever on him to pull and come up cherries across the board for the jackpot.
These are infidels. Cheating, lying, thieving infidels.
Remove all tax exempt status on religion.
Then throw their children out of the public schools and discriminate against them.
Fuck them and the dinosaur they rode in on.
Fuck their First Amendment rights. They can resort to Second Amendment solutions and then we can defend ourselves and kill them.
I hear Gingrich has a new, shiny send him money grift cooking right now to fuck and demonize liberals, blacks, Mexicans, and just about anyone who looks cross-eyed at rump.
You can always send Ron Paul some money to tell you to buy gold or not.
I’m not sure why he wants my dollars for his gold, given his hatred of fiat currencies, but maybe he wants to buy a new Fiat to drive into crowds who hate his guts.
I hope American Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, Jews, Scientologists, Mormons, and the Church of the Latter Day Whackadoodle Worshipers of Satan’s Dildo take a page from the so-called Christian grifters grifting school districts and municipalities into handing over the big bucks with constitutional protection from shit republicans and figure out how to ka-ching this slot machine for the big bucks too.
Seems God the American has a lever on him to pull and come up cherries across the board for the jackpot.
These are infidels. Cheating, lying, thieving infidels.
Remove all tax exempt status on religion.
Then throw their children out of the public schools and discriminate against them.
Fuck them and the dinosaur they rode in on.
Fuck their First Amendment rights. They can resort to Second Amendment solutions and then we can defend ourselves and kill them.
I hear Gingrich has a new, shiny send him money grift cooking right now to fuck and demonize liberals, blacks, Mexicans, and just about anyone who looks cross-eyed at rump.
You can always send Ron Paul some money to tell you to buy gold or not.
I’m not sure why he wants my dollars for his gold, given his hatred of fiat currencies, but maybe he wants to buy a new Fiat to drive into crowds who hate his guts.
Hey, McK – if you’re following along…
GET THEE TO HIGH GROUND!!
Be safe out there, alla you TX folks.
Hey, McK – if you’re following along…
GET THEE TO HIGH GROUND!!
Be safe out there, alla you TX folks.
I’m ready to end the entire concept of tax exempt status just to stamp out this kind of crap.
I’m there with you on that one. Tax exemptions can serve a useful purpose, but they tend to have high social and political flammability risks and should come with MSDS sheets.
Also note: You don’t see conservatives in high dungeon about these trial lawyers!
I’m ready to end the entire concept of tax exempt status just to stamp out this kind of crap.
I’m there with you on that one. Tax exemptions can serve a useful purpose, but they tend to have high social and political flammability risks and should come with MSDS sheets.
Also note: You don’t see conservatives in high dungeon about these trial lawyers!
Two things about this, from the Lithwick cite:
1. To be honest, I’m unclear on who the hell the guys wearing camo and carrying AR’s were. Thank god they did not open fire. Whoever they were, they had no business there.
2. In terms of military organization, “dozens”, depending on how many dozens, is somewhere between a platoon and a company. That’s a formidable force.
I’d like antifa to stay home. I’d like these guys to stay in another time zone.
Two things about this, from the Lithwick cite:
1. To be honest, I’m unclear on who the hell the guys wearing camo and carrying AR’s were. Thank god they did not open fire. Whoever they were, they had no business there.
2. In terms of military organization, “dozens”, depending on how many dozens, is somewhere between a platoon and a company. That’s a formidable force.
I’d like antifa to stay home. I’d like these guys to stay in another time zone.
Some are worried we have a Russian mole/fellow traveler heading up the CIA:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/concerns-pompeo-fbi-russia-probe
Some are worried we have a Russian mole/fellow traveler heading up the CIA:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/concerns-pompeo-fbi-russia-probe
I just emailed McTX minutes before seeing Russell’s post, wishing him a dry one too.
But if not, I’m gratified Texas has not yet seceded from the Union so that my tax dollars can help my friends out during this spot of trouble.
I just emailed McTX minutes before seeing Russell’s post, wishing him a dry one too.
But if not, I’m gratified Texas has not yet seceded from the Union so that my tax dollars can help my friends out during this spot of trouble.
Lithwick also says:
It’s my understanding that speech that presents an incitement to immediate violence *is not* protected by the 1st A. I invite the lawyers to weigh in.
Nazis marching unarmed in Skokie is insulting. It’s protected.
Nazis, or merely white supremacists, or pretty much anyone, marching with shields and pipes and bats, let alone firearms, seems, to me, to be an incitement to immediate violence. Or at least to come damned close to it, or to push otherwise merely offensive speech over the line.
Lithwick also says:
It’s my understanding that speech that presents an incitement to immediate violence *is not* protected by the 1st A. I invite the lawyers to weigh in.
Nazis marching unarmed in Skokie is insulting. It’s protected.
Nazis, or merely white supremacists, or pretty much anyone, marching with shields and pipes and bats, let alone firearms, seems, to me, to be an incitement to immediate violence. Or at least to come damned close to it, or to push otherwise merely offensive speech over the line.
Could you show me an example of an open carry state where that’s happened? This is Dahlia Lithwick, who has been a prominent Charlottesville citizen, on the gun issue. In it, she links to pleadings by the city showing that, yes, there was evidence (“merely speculative”, of course) that there would be trouble.
So you don’t live in Charlottesville, are not licensed to practice here, but based on your legal experience (which apparently doesn’t qualify you to opine on the major issue here – Virginia’s gun laws) you want to trash Charlottesville’s city government. You’re certainly entitled to your view.
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 10:54 AM
I don’t have time to research it today, but it really shouldn’t matter. If the state/local weapons laws make it impossible to mandate a weapons-free condition for a permit (which doesn’t make sense for a variety of legal reasons but let’s go with it for now), then C’ville would have had an even easier time making the public safety argument …
“Judge, VA law won’t allow us condition the permit on leaving weapons at home and we have offered evidence that the demonstrators and counter-demonstrators will be armed.”
The judge called C’ville’s attorneys out on their lack of evidence and the ACLU said the same. This was not a no-win situation for C’ville. I don’t have anything against C’ville, but this was mishandled.
Could you show me an example of an open carry state where that’s happened? This is Dahlia Lithwick, who has been a prominent Charlottesville citizen, on the gun issue. In it, she links to pleadings by the city showing that, yes, there was evidence (“merely speculative”, of course) that there would be trouble.
So you don’t live in Charlottesville, are not licensed to practice here, but based on your legal experience (which apparently doesn’t qualify you to opine on the major issue here – Virginia’s gun laws) you want to trash Charlottesville’s city government. You’re certainly entitled to your view.
Posted by: sapient | August 25, 2017 at 10:54 AM
I don’t have time to research it today, but it really shouldn’t matter. If the state/local weapons laws make it impossible to mandate a weapons-free condition for a permit (which doesn’t make sense for a variety of legal reasons but let’s go with it for now), then C’ville would have had an even easier time making the public safety argument …
“Judge, VA law won’t allow us condition the permit on leaving weapons at home and we have offered evidence that the demonstrators and counter-demonstrators will be armed.”
The judge called C’ville’s attorneys out on their lack of evidence and the ACLU said the same. This was not a no-win situation for C’ville. I don’t have anything against C’ville, but this was mishandled.
“Judge, VA law won’t allow us condition the permit on leaving weapons at home and we have offered evidence that the demonstrators and counter-demonstrators will be armed.”
Since they did offer evidence (speculative, of course, since it concerned events that were predicted), the judge should have been persuaded to move the rally. He wasn’t.
The judge called C’ville’s attorneys out on their lack of evidence and the ACLU said the same
The evidence wasn’t good enough for the judge, and the ACLU was representing the other side. There was evidence. You seem to believe that you could have offered better evidence, but you’re not saying what it would be. That’s nice.
“Judge, VA law won’t allow us condition the permit on leaving weapons at home and we have offered evidence that the demonstrators and counter-demonstrators will be armed.”
Since they did offer evidence (speculative, of course, since it concerned events that were predicted), the judge should have been persuaded to move the rally. He wasn’t.
The judge called C’ville’s attorneys out on their lack of evidence and the ACLU said the same
The evidence wasn’t good enough for the judge, and the ACLU was representing the other side. There was evidence. You seem to believe that you could have offered better evidence, but you’re not saying what it would be. That’s nice.
As so often, this may well have been a learning experience for Charlottesville. The may has screwed up, simply because they hadn’t faced the situation before, and weren’t aware of the experience of other cities who had had experience with it.
Not to say that they shouldn’t have done better. Just that all of us have found ourselves in situation which we handled badly . . . and in retrospect would have handled differently.
As so often, this may well have been a learning experience for Charlottesville. The may has screwed up, simply because they hadn’t faced the situation before, and weren’t aware of the experience of other cities who had had experience with it.
Not to say that they shouldn’t have done better. Just that all of us have found ourselves in situation which we handled badly . . . and in retrospect would have handled differently.
sapient-
I’m not trying to ignore you or leave in a huff, but I have some deadlines today and this will be my last post for a while. It appears that you live in or near C’ville and I certainly didn’t mean to disparage your home. My issue is with the failings of a small group of public servants in C’ville.
From the order granting the motion for injunction:
That does not sound like insufficient evidence to me. It sounds like no evidence. The city could have called the organizers of the demonstration and cross examined them on various posts from stormfront and other racist websites. They could have simply asked the organizers if they have taken any steps to ask participants to keep weapons at home.
Look, I don’t have a transcript of the hearing but everything points to a bad job by C’ville’s attorneys. If you think I’ve gone off halfcocked on this and want to ignore my opinion, that’s your right.
sapient-
I’m not trying to ignore you or leave in a huff, but I have some deadlines today and this will be my last post for a while. It appears that you live in or near C’ville and I certainly didn’t mean to disparage your home. My issue is with the failings of a small group of public servants in C’ville.
From the order granting the motion for injunction:
That does not sound like insufficient evidence to me. It sounds like no evidence. The city could have called the organizers of the demonstration and cross examined them on various posts from stormfront and other racist websites. They could have simply asked the organizers if they have taken any steps to ask participants to keep weapons at home.
Look, I don’t have a transcript of the hearing but everything points to a bad job by C’ville’s attorneys. If you think I’ve gone off halfcocked on this and want to ignore my opinion, that’s your right.
How Hurricane Harvey reveals the stupid in our stupid healthcare system:
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/08/25/harvey-evacuations-and-narrow-networks/
How Hurricane Harvey reveals the stupid in our stupid healthcare system:
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/08/25/harvey-evacuations-and-narrow-networks/
The may has screwed up, simply because they hadn’t faced the situation before, and weren’t aware of the experience of other cities who had had experience with it.
I think you’re right that they didn’t have experience with it, but I’m not sure that “experience” is the answer here. For example, this happened. It’s really difficult for even the best police departments to get a grip on the problem of people who are allowed to bring weapons to public demonstrations.
It’s my understanding that speech that presents an incitement to immediate violence *is not* protected by the 1st A. I invite the lawyers to weigh in.
There’s an argument for that, but open carry, and being dressed for war, is not considered an incitement apparently. Guns have won (for now).
The may has screwed up, simply because they hadn’t faced the situation before, and weren’t aware of the experience of other cities who had had experience with it.
I think you’re right that they didn’t have experience with it, but I’m not sure that “experience” is the answer here. For example, this happened. It’s really difficult for even the best police departments to get a grip on the problem of people who are allowed to bring weapons to public demonstrations.
It’s my understanding that speech that presents an incitement to immediate violence *is not* protected by the 1st A. I invite the lawyers to weigh in.
There’s an argument for that, but open carry, and being dressed for war, is not considered an incitement apparently. Guns have won (for now).
russell and PdM: I don’t see how anyone has claimed that antifa are beyond reproach. What I saw in that essay was someone who was there telling people who were not there that they lacked the proper perspective from which to judge the antifa in those circumstances. That’s a pretty common sentiment amongst any group shaped by violent conflict. Violence is corrosive, but it is also sometimes required. People suffer moral injury in the course of standing up for what is right, and that injury accrues and corrodes. That’s why I subscribe to Martha Nussbaum’s idea of moral luck. Our character is contingent on a lot of external things. We are contingent creatures.
I am not, nor have I ever been, part of an organized antifa group. I was, however, part of a larger community of punks and rivetheads and whatnot that hung out in the punk clubs and coffee shops in 90s Denver. When the Hammerskins came into one of our places they would try to take it over by intimidation or by force. Antifa wasn’t a group, it was just the unspoken determination that no one was chasing out anyone because of WP poison. We showed up and we took up space and we refused to back down. Fights happened. Blood was shed. I use passive voice there because I was never in one of those fights and don’t know who got into them. But I did see the violence and I did see the blood. And had the violence happened in a slightly different manner, I would have been in the middle of it as a participant.
But it was never a matter of choosing violence or non-violence. It was a matter of choosing to go or not to go. It was a matter of choosing to give a ride or walk with a Mexican or black skin or a queercore or vegan straghtedge so that they didn’t have to walk to the club on their own or stay home. They had to go. To not go was to give the Hammerskins that place and to give up our community. So the vulnerable kept showing up and we kept putting bodies around them so that they would not get jumped and curb stomped. Some of us carried knives or chains or batons because the Hammerskins carried those things and had no qualms about using them.
I’d love for more people to get training in non-violence. I was an associate of the Center for Peace and Conflict Studies as a grad student and there’s a lot to learn. But I also have several years of eskrima training and have an idea how to defend myself and others if peaceful protest (or managed conflict, as it were) breaks down and the peckerwoods get the violence they crave.
But I hope that my moral luck holds and I’m spared that once again.
There’s plenty of things for which antifa brigades can be criticized, and the black block style agitation does cause some serious PR problems for the peaceful left. But I’m not as convinced that the peaceful left are able to contain groups like the Hammerskins.
russell and PdM: I don’t see how anyone has claimed that antifa are beyond reproach. What I saw in that essay was someone who was there telling people who were not there that they lacked the proper perspective from which to judge the antifa in those circumstances. That’s a pretty common sentiment amongst any group shaped by violent conflict. Violence is corrosive, but it is also sometimes required. People suffer moral injury in the course of standing up for what is right, and that injury accrues and corrodes. That’s why I subscribe to Martha Nussbaum’s idea of moral luck. Our character is contingent on a lot of external things. We are contingent creatures.
I am not, nor have I ever been, part of an organized antifa group. I was, however, part of a larger community of punks and rivetheads and whatnot that hung out in the punk clubs and coffee shops in 90s Denver. When the Hammerskins came into one of our places they would try to take it over by intimidation or by force. Antifa wasn’t a group, it was just the unspoken determination that no one was chasing out anyone because of WP poison. We showed up and we took up space and we refused to back down. Fights happened. Blood was shed. I use passive voice there because I was never in one of those fights and don’t know who got into them. But I did see the violence and I did see the blood. And had the violence happened in a slightly different manner, I would have been in the middle of it as a participant.
But it was never a matter of choosing violence or non-violence. It was a matter of choosing to go or not to go. It was a matter of choosing to give a ride or walk with a Mexican or black skin or a queercore or vegan straghtedge so that they didn’t have to walk to the club on their own or stay home. They had to go. To not go was to give the Hammerskins that place and to give up our community. So the vulnerable kept showing up and we kept putting bodies around them so that they would not get jumped and curb stomped. Some of us carried knives or chains or batons because the Hammerskins carried those things and had no qualms about using them.
I’d love for more people to get training in non-violence. I was an associate of the Center for Peace and Conflict Studies as a grad student and there’s a lot to learn. But I also have several years of eskrima training and have an idea how to defend myself and others if peaceful protest (or managed conflict, as it were) breaks down and the peckerwoods get the violence they crave.
But I hope that my moral luck holds and I’m spared that once again.
There’s plenty of things for which antifa brigades can be criticized, and the black block style agitation does cause some serious PR problems for the peaceful left. But I’m not as convinced that the peaceful left are able to contain groups like the Hammerskins.
I should probably add here that the reason I bring up the Denver thing is because when I went to do research on antifa a few months ago, I ran across stories that mentioned these events in Denver. I never even heard the phrase antifa or knew there were organized groups that did this sort of thing. Looking at those articles in retrospect, though, it seems as if I was antifa and never knew it, even though I never threw a punch. The history the articles described was my history.
I should probably add here that the reason I bring up the Denver thing is because when I went to do research on antifa a few months ago, I ran across stories that mentioned these events in Denver. I never even heard the phrase antifa or knew there were organized groups that did this sort of thing. Looking at those articles in retrospect, though, it seems as if I was antifa and never knew it, even though I never threw a punch. The history the articles described was my history.
More stupid, a hurricane of stupid, a rising wall of liquid stupid, as conservative principles are established throughout the government, we’re told.
https://www.usnews.com/news/news/articles/2017-07-03/forecaster-says-budget-cuts-could-hurt-hurricane-predictions
This hurricane seems to wants to do more with more, while we are forced to forced to do nothing with less.
Hello, may I please speak to the head of FEMA?
Talk to the hand.
I’m reading Nussbaum’s “The Fragility of Goodness” at the moment. A bit of heavy going made heavier by very small typeface, but I’ll stick with it.
More stupid, a hurricane of stupid, a rising wall of liquid stupid, as conservative principles are established throughout the government, we’re told.
https://www.usnews.com/news/news/articles/2017-07-03/forecaster-says-budget-cuts-could-hurt-hurricane-predictions
This hurricane seems to wants to do more with more, while we are forced to forced to do nothing with less.
Hello, may I please speak to the head of FEMA?
Talk to the hand.
I’m reading Nussbaum’s “The Fragility of Goodness” at the moment. A bit of heavy going made heavier by very small typeface, but I’ll stick with it.
One other item on the Fall (September) legislative agenda, in addition to the budget and the debt ceiling:
Reauthorize a flood insurance program
Do you suppose that events in Texas will help motivate Congress to support that case Federal government overreach?
One other item on the Fall (September) legislative agenda, in addition to the budget and the debt ceiling:
Reauthorize a flood insurance program
Do you suppose that events in Texas will help motivate Congress to support that case Federal government overreach?
Hey, McK – if you’re following along…
GET THEE TO HIGH GROUND!!
Be safe out there, alla you TX folks.
Thanks. Subject to how the flooding shakes out, we should be ok, but the outsized rain forecasts could make this one a bit different. As I told the Count, normally, when we flood, the floodwaters run out the bayous and rivers to the bays and the gulf. With a storm surge covering most of the coast and pushing huge amounts of water inland, it looks like there will be no place for the water to go. The forecast is for 20 plus inches of rain over the next 3-5 days. So, could be interesting. On the flip side, there is usually a lot of hype to go along with the real story. The storm surge looks like a real thing, and the rain could be real too. The experts are concerned about the storm bouncing off the coast, reforming and coming ashore again. We had that about 20 or so years back with Allison. The flooding was epic. Part of living near an ocean that warms up every summer.
The real threat is between Corpus Christi and Victoria. Those people are in a world of hurt and the highways are jammed with people trying to get to high ground.
Hey, McK – if you’re following along…
GET THEE TO HIGH GROUND!!
Be safe out there, alla you TX folks.
Thanks. Subject to how the flooding shakes out, we should be ok, but the outsized rain forecasts could make this one a bit different. As I told the Count, normally, when we flood, the floodwaters run out the bayous and rivers to the bays and the gulf. With a storm surge covering most of the coast and pushing huge amounts of water inland, it looks like there will be no place for the water to go. The forecast is for 20 plus inches of rain over the next 3-5 days. So, could be interesting. On the flip side, there is usually a lot of hype to go along with the real story. The storm surge looks like a real thing, and the rain could be real too. The experts are concerned about the storm bouncing off the coast, reforming and coming ashore again. We had that about 20 or so years back with Allison. The flooding was epic. Part of living near an ocean that warms up every summer.
The real threat is between Corpus Christi and Victoria. Those people are in a world of hurt and the highways are jammed with people trying to get to high ground.
The Fragility of Goodness was one of the foundational works for my dissertation. I’m not one to say whether or not her interpretation of the Plato/Aristotle argument is spot on — not my field of expertise — butI found her thoughts on contingency and loss to be both moving and convincing.
Nussbaum’s ideas about moral luck were also foundational for Jonathan Shay’s work on moral injury and PTSD in Achilles In Vietnam.
There’s much in both that has kept me thinking for well over a decade now.
The Fragility of Goodness was one of the foundational works for my dissertation. I’m not one to say whether or not her interpretation of the Plato/Aristotle argument is spot on — not my field of expertise — butI found her thoughts on contingency and loss to be both moving and convincing.
Nussbaum’s ideas about moral luck were also foundational for Jonathan Shay’s work on moral injury and PTSD in Achilles In Vietnam.
There’s much in both that has kept me thinking for well over a decade now.
Nous – thank you for your comment.
I don’t know that many folks in the anarchist world personally, but my impression is that many of the older folks – over 30 – involved in antifa came there from backgrounds similar to yours.
Some others maybe via Occupy. Or, some of the same folks were also involved in Occupy.
My own exposure to the dynamics of non-violent action come through friends who were involved in political and social action via their involvement with Catholic Worker and related groups. I was not a participant, nor did I do any of the training.
Even if your approach and your intention is non-violent, I think there is value in having basic self-defense training. Escrima is a good choice, also some grappling styles such as Aikido which offer the option of defending yourself without necessarily killing or permanently disabling your opponent.
If nothing else, it gives you exposure to keeping your head in conflict.
Thanks again for you thoughts.
Nous – thank you for your comment.
I don’t know that many folks in the anarchist world personally, but my impression is that many of the older folks – over 30 – involved in antifa came there from backgrounds similar to yours.
Some others maybe via Occupy. Or, some of the same folks were also involved in Occupy.
My own exposure to the dynamics of non-violent action come through friends who were involved in political and social action via their involvement with Catholic Worker and related groups. I was not a participant, nor did I do any of the training.
Even if your approach and your intention is non-violent, I think there is value in having basic self-defense training. Escrima is a good choice, also some grappling styles such as Aikido which offer the option of defending yourself without necessarily killing or permanently disabling your opponent.
If nothing else, it gives you exposure to keeping your head in conflict.
Thanks again for you thoughts.
Nous – thank you for your comments. (ed.)
Seconded!
Nous – thank you for your comments. (ed.)
Seconded!
McKinney,
I heard talk of a 12 ft. surge this am on the radio. Good luck, and keep you head down. No golf for you tomorrow.
McKinney,
I heard talk of a 12 ft. surge this am on the radio. Good luck, and keep you head down. No golf for you tomorrow.
Agreed, russell. The whole reason I sought training in the first place was because of the very real possibility that some disturbed individual might bust into my classroom with violence on his mind. I needed to have some perspective on what to do in such a situation to minimize harm as much as was within my own power.
As for the rest, I really have no choice but to be involved. I’m a mature white metalhead with viking tattoos and an interest in Scandinavian music. I go lots of places where WP tend to show up in mixed crowds and am very conscious of the fact that both sides will assume by my appearance that I am a WP ally. That tends to heighten one’s situational awareness.
But more than half of the students in my classroom are a minority of some stripe and I have to make a public show of solidarity for them. And those public shows of solidarity lead to interesting conversations with the white males in my classroom who have been sliding toward the alt-right/MRA/white grievance point of view because in those moments I become a visible alternative identity for them.
Agreed, russell. The whole reason I sought training in the first place was because of the very real possibility that some disturbed individual might bust into my classroom with violence on his mind. I needed to have some perspective on what to do in such a situation to minimize harm as much as was within my own power.
As for the rest, I really have no choice but to be involved. I’m a mature white metalhead with viking tattoos and an interest in Scandinavian music. I go lots of places where WP tend to show up in mixed crowds and am very conscious of the fact that both sides will assume by my appearance that I am a WP ally. That tends to heighten one’s situational awareness.
But more than half of the students in my classroom are a minority of some stripe and I have to make a public show of solidarity for them. And those public shows of solidarity lead to interesting conversations with the white males in my classroom who have been sliding toward the alt-right/MRA/white grievance point of view because in those moments I become a visible alternative identity for them.
“I am the least racist and antisemitic person you’ll ever see”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/he-screams-about-race-traitorsand-trump-loves-him?via=newsletter&source=DDMorning
“That’s why I hire the most racist and antisemitic people you’ll ever see to run the U.S. Government”
I’d like to see Antifa remain at home too, but let’s keep them on speed-dial.
We’re in grave danger.
“I am the least racist and antisemitic person you’ll ever see”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/he-screams-about-race-traitorsand-trump-loves-him?via=newsletter&source=DDMorning
“That’s why I hire the most racist and antisemitic people you’ll ever see to run the U.S. Government”
I’d like to see Antifa remain at home too, but let’s keep them on speed-dial.
We’re in grave danger.
But more than half of the students in my classroom are a minority of some stripe and I have to make a public show of solidarity for them. And those public shows of solidarity lead to interesting conversations with the white males in my classroom who have been sliding toward the alt-right/MRA/white grievance point of view because in those moments I become a visible alternative identity for them.
Wow. Your participation in this thread (and in the work that you do) is deeply appreciated.
But more than half of the students in my classroom are a minority of some stripe and I have to make a public show of solidarity for them. And those public shows of solidarity lead to interesting conversations with the white males in my classroom who have been sliding toward the alt-right/MRA/white grievance point of view because in those moments I become a visible alternative identity for them.
Wow. Your participation in this thread (and in the work that you do) is deeply appreciated.
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/17/the-angry-white-boys-know-what-they-want/
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/08/17/the-angry-white-boys-know-what-they-want/
I want to add my deep appreciation for nous’s comments.
A particular passage struck me: But it was never a matter of choosing violence or non-violence. It was a matter of choosing to go or not to go.
I “came out” as gay in the Kennebec Journal (hometown paper of the capital city of Maine, even if it is a city of < 20,000 people) in an op-ed in the early nineties. People told me I was ever so brave to do that, but I didn't perceive myself as brave (I'm pretty chickenshit, actually), I was just stubborn. It came time to say "It's my world too" -- and I said it I was cautioned ahead of time that I might get semi-violent pushback (tires had been slashed...), and I had little kids at the time so I took careful thought in relation to that possibility, and discussed it with their dad. Our conclusion was that the threat of violence was minuscule, and I think we would have made a different decision if we had felt it to be substantial and real. I can put myself at risk if I want to (not that I'm likely to put myself at physical risk, TBH), but I wasn't going to put my little kids at risk at that time and for that immediate purpose. I will also echo russell in saying that I'm probably too cranky and apt to lose my temper to put myself much in the way of direct confrontations, even (or especially?) verbal ones. I'm not quick of tongue and I don't keep my temper well so that's a bad combination. I have had enough dabbling in conflict work to know training can help....so I'm thinking about going back to it at some point. As for putting myself in the way of physical violence -- I'm not brave enough for that. I don't know what would push me that far.... Great admiration for nous -- you might be a role model for other folks than the young guys leaning toward the alt-right constellation. 🙂
I want to add my deep appreciation for nous’s comments.
A particular passage struck me: But it was never a matter of choosing violence or non-violence. It was a matter of choosing to go or not to go.
I “came out” as gay in the Kennebec Journal (hometown paper of the capital city of Maine, even if it is a city of < 20,000 people) in an op-ed in the early nineties. People told me I was ever so brave to do that, but I didn't perceive myself as brave (I'm pretty chickenshit, actually), I was just stubborn. It came time to say "It's my world too" -- and I said it I was cautioned ahead of time that I might get semi-violent pushback (tires had been slashed...), and I had little kids at the time so I took careful thought in relation to that possibility, and discussed it with their dad. Our conclusion was that the threat of violence was minuscule, and I think we would have made a different decision if we had felt it to be substantial and real. I can put myself at risk if I want to (not that I'm likely to put myself at physical risk, TBH), but I wasn't going to put my little kids at risk at that time and for that immediate purpose. I will also echo russell in saying that I'm probably too cranky and apt to lose my temper to put myself much in the way of direct confrontations, even (or especially?) verbal ones. I'm not quick of tongue and I don't keep my temper well so that's a bad combination. I have had enough dabbling in conflict work to know training can help....so I'm thinking about going back to it at some point. As for putting myself in the way of physical violence -- I'm not brave enough for that. I don't know what would push me that far.... Great admiration for nous -- you might be a role model for other folks than the young guys leaning toward the alt-right constellation. 🙂
yes, nous is a better man than I am.
The Play-Doh was for reinforcing the levees:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/last-year-at-just-about-this-time.html
yes, nous is a better man than I am.
The Play-Doh was for reinforcing the levees:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/last-year-at-just-about-this-time.html
Well done, nous.
Would you consider putting together a front-page piece about your experience? then and now, or then, or now.
I think it would be of interest. I know I would be interested. Doesn’t have to be long.
Well done, nous.
Would you consider putting together a front-page piece about your experience? then and now, or then, or now.
I think it would be of interest. I know I would be interested. Doesn’t have to be long.
Also, you and hairshirt should chat about music.
Just saying.
🙂
Also, you and hairshirt should chat about music.
Just saying.
🙂
I’ll see if I can put some thoughts together and email the kitty if I get something that holds together. (RL willing…heading out of the country in a few days and have work deadlines looming before then).
I’ll see if I can put some thoughts together and email the kitty if I get something that holds together. (RL willing…heading out of the country in a few days and have work deadlines looming before then).
Also, you and hairshirt should chat about music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fbq7Fn_uK4
Also, you and hairshirt should chat about music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fbq7Fn_uK4
Just back in the North Country after a horrible, traffic-filled 6-hour drive up the M1, much worse than usual because it’s the start of a 3-day holiday weekend.
I second (third even, as Snagglepuss used to say) all the appreciative comments about nous.
Just back in the North Country after a horrible, traffic-filled 6-hour drive up the M1, much worse than usual because it’s the start of a 3-day holiday weekend.
I second (third even, as Snagglepuss used to say) all the appreciative comments about nous.
See ya monday:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx1_6F-nCaw
See ya monday:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx1_6F-nCaw
Do the backstroke, suckers:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-texas-good-luck-everybody
He’s kidnapping a little girl and no one is doing a thing about it!
Do the backstroke, suckers:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-texas-good-luck-everybody
He’s kidnapping a little girl and no one is doing a thing about it!
It must be Monday already:
https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017/08/25/alex-jones-suggests-michelle-obama-has-penis-and-may-have-murdered-joan-rivers/217771
Then Michelle Obama murdered the wrong person.
It must be Monday already:
https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017/08/25/alex-jones-suggests-michelle-obama-has-penis-and-may-have-murdered-joan-rivers/217771
Then Michelle Obama murdered the wrong person.
ROGER STONE: What we’re hearing from the Democrats both in the House and Senate is red-baiting —
ALEX JONES (HOST): That’s on Drudge.
STONE: — fearmongering. It is well beyond the point of recklessness, whether it is [Rep.] Adam Schiff [(D-CA)], who has maligned me, or whether it is Sen. Mark Warner [(D-VA)] or whether it is Sen. John McCain [(R-AZ)]. But let me tell you something, Alex, these guys are pussies. They talk a tough game. “We’re going to get Roger Stone in front of the committee.” Gentlemen, ladies, I am ready, I am more than ready —
JONES: In fact, let me say this right now. Let me tell — I’m not against gay people. OK? I love them, they’re great folks. But Schiff looks like the archetypal cocksucker with those little deer-in-the-headlight eyes and all his stuff. And there’s something about this fairy, hopping around, bossing everybody around, trying to intimidate people like me and you. I want to tell Congressman Schiff and all the rest of them, “Hey listen, asshole, quit saying Roger and I” — and I’ve never used cussing in 22 years but the gloves are off — “listen you son of a bitch, what the fuck’s your problem? You want to sit here and say that I’m a goddamn fucking Russian? You get in my face with that I’ll beat your goddamn ass, you son of a bitch. You piece of shit. You fucking goddamn fucker. Listen, fuckhead, you have fucking crossed a line. Get that through your goddamn fucking head. Stop pushing your shit. You’re the people that have fucked this country over and gang raped the shit out of it and lost an election. So stop shooting your mouth off claiming I’m the enemy. You got that, you goddamn son of a bitch? Fill your hand.” I’m sorry, but I’m done. You start calling me a foreign agent, those are fucking fighting words. Excuse me.
STONE: Yeah, I don’t think I have ever been in a campaign in which we disparage the patriotism of our opponents. Now, I’m not going to go there. But I think Adam Schiff has acted irresponsibly and I think he needs to be confronted with his exact words.
JONES: He’s sucking globalist dick. [YouTube, 3/30/17]
I sure hope North Korea launches those nukes.
ROGER STONE: What we’re hearing from the Democrats both in the House and Senate is red-baiting —
ALEX JONES (HOST): That’s on Drudge.
STONE: — fearmongering. It is well beyond the point of recklessness, whether it is [Rep.] Adam Schiff [(D-CA)], who has maligned me, or whether it is Sen. Mark Warner [(D-VA)] or whether it is Sen. John McCain [(R-AZ)]. But let me tell you something, Alex, these guys are pussies. They talk a tough game. “We’re going to get Roger Stone in front of the committee.” Gentlemen, ladies, I am ready, I am more than ready —
JONES: In fact, let me say this right now. Let me tell — I’m not against gay people. OK? I love them, they’re great folks. But Schiff looks like the archetypal cocksucker with those little deer-in-the-headlight eyes and all his stuff. And there’s something about this fairy, hopping around, bossing everybody around, trying to intimidate people like me and you. I want to tell Congressman Schiff and all the rest of them, “Hey listen, asshole, quit saying Roger and I” — and I’ve never used cussing in 22 years but the gloves are off — “listen you son of a bitch, what the fuck’s your problem? You want to sit here and say that I’m a goddamn fucking Russian? You get in my face with that I’ll beat your goddamn ass, you son of a bitch. You piece of shit. You fucking goddamn fucker. Listen, fuckhead, you have fucking crossed a line. Get that through your goddamn fucking head. Stop pushing your shit. You’re the people that have fucked this country over and gang raped the shit out of it and lost an election. So stop shooting your mouth off claiming I’m the enemy. You got that, you goddamn son of a bitch? Fill your hand.” I’m sorry, but I’m done. You start calling me a foreign agent, those are fucking fighting words. Excuse me.
STONE: Yeah, I don’t think I have ever been in a campaign in which we disparage the patriotism of our opponents. Now, I’m not going to go there. But I think Adam Schiff has acted irresponsibly and I think he needs to be confronted with his exact words.
JONES: He’s sucking globalist dick. [YouTube, 3/30/17]
I sure hope North Korea launches those nukes.
Arpaio pardoned.
Arpaio pardoned.
Harvey reaches cat 4, eye is moving onshore.
Harvey reaches cat 4, eye is moving onshore.
Next move: Arpaio replaces Pence!
What fncking sh1tstains Trump and his GOP fellow travelers are.
Next move: Arpaio replaces Pence!
What fncking sh1tstains Trump and his GOP fellow travelers are.
What fncking sh1tstains Trump and his GOP fellow travelers are.
But we were told they were nice.
What fncking sh1tstains Trump and his GOP fellow travelers are.
But we were told they were nice.
I think Alex Jones us just pranking us
I think Alex Jones us just pranking us
In better news, it appears Gorka is gone
http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/25/breaking-sebastian-gorka-resigns-from-trump-administration/#.WaC-HBIZs9M.twitter
Good riddance.
In better news, it appears Gorka is gone
http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/25/breaking-sebastian-gorka-resigns-from-trump-administration/#.WaC-HBIZs9M.twitter
Good riddance.
*huddles in corner, sweat pouring down, rocking back and forth, repeating*
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
…
*huddles in corner, sweat pouring down, rocking back and forth, repeating*
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
The Aristocrats!
…
Yever wonder about this guy:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/blacks-for-trump-maurice-symonette-interview-trump-emancipator-2020-campaign
I haven’t read the Book of Revelations in a long time but I believe it prophesizes the end of the cracked Jerry Lewis “Klaven” underwater burst fart bubble of the American experiment into a syncretic gathering and joining of the whackadoodle into our savage, violent ends.
I get what he means about the Cherokee and the need to defeat that tribal Nation again. I drove through the Cherokee country on my road trip and there is trouble a brewing down there.
Chiefs McConnell and company got big wampum ready to scalp us.
America is a prank the human race will be happy to see the end of.
We’re ridiculous, as a class of human being. Exceptionally ridiculous if it makes conservatives feel better.
It will end in savage bloodshed.
The Arizona Judge needs to order the re-arrest of Arpaio and his imprisonment and when rump’s federal marshals show up to intervene, kill the fuckers, and Hispanics need to burn 30 or 40 cities down, starting at dawn tomorrow.
The rule of law is no more.
I’m sending away for the Antifa brochure and membership forms.
Yever wonder about this guy:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/blacks-for-trump-maurice-symonette-interview-trump-emancipator-2020-campaign
I haven’t read the Book of Revelations in a long time but I believe it prophesizes the end of the cracked Jerry Lewis “Klaven” underwater burst fart bubble of the American experiment into a syncretic gathering and joining of the whackadoodle into our savage, violent ends.
I get what he means about the Cherokee and the need to defeat that tribal Nation again. I drove through the Cherokee country on my road trip and there is trouble a brewing down there.
Chiefs McConnell and company got big wampum ready to scalp us.
America is a prank the human race will be happy to see the end of.
We’re ridiculous, as a class of human being. Exceptionally ridiculous if it makes conservatives feel better.
It will end in savage bloodshed.
The Arizona Judge needs to order the re-arrest of Arpaio and his imprisonment and when rump’s federal marshals show up to intervene, kill the fuckers, and Hispanics need to burn 30 or 40 cities down, starting at dawn tomorrow.
The rule of law is no more.
I’m sending away for the Antifa brochure and membership forms.
When Gorka is dead, he will be gone.
When Gorka is dead, he will be gone.
Kill all murderers:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/8/24/1692907/-Trump-administration-refusing-to-work-with-states-ahead-of-Obamacare-open-enrollment
Kill all murderers:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/8/24/1692907/-Trump-administration-refusing-to-work-with-states-ahead-of-Obamacare-open-enrollment
yup
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/make-america-white
yup
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/make-america-white
Did any post of mine of yesterday end up in the spam trap? I clearly remember doing another post on the previous comments page (the count was at 365 when I started reading) and I got the ‘your comment has been posted’ response. But I can find only my older post on antifa there.
Did any post of mine of yesterday end up in the spam trap? I clearly remember doing another post on the previous comments page (the count was at 365 when I started reading) and I got the ‘your comment has been posted’ response. But I can find only my older post on antifa there.
unless someone else released it, I don’t see anything in there Hartmut. This was the last one from you
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2017/08/lost-in-the-noise-weekend-open-thread.html?cid=6a00d834515c2369e201bb09bc1fd6970d#comment-6a00d834515c2369e201bb09bc1fd6970d
unless someone else released it, I don’t see anything in there Hartmut. This was the last one from you
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2017/08/lost-in-the-noise-weekend-open-thread.html?cid=6a00d834515c2369e201bb09bc1fd6970d#comment-6a00d834515c2369e201bb09bc1fd6970d
I also look forward to the Nous header, a lot.
Meanwhile, at the risk of derailing the discussion, does this guy have a point, or not ?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2017/08/mark_lilla_thinks_identity_politics_are_destroying_the_democratic_party.html
I have to say I am in two minds about this one. My sympathies are with the Slate interviewer, but in terms of local and state politics, is there a germ of truth in his thesis ?
I also got the impression of two people talking almost at cross purposes…
(I don’t have the local knowledge to come to any conclusion one way or the other.)
I also look forward to the Nous header, a lot.
Meanwhile, at the risk of derailing the discussion, does this guy have a point, or not ?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2017/08/mark_lilla_thinks_identity_politics_are_destroying_the_democratic_party.html
I have to say I am in two minds about this one. My sympathies are with the Slate interviewer, but in terms of local and state politics, is there a germ of truth in his thesis ?
I also got the impression of two people talking almost at cross purposes…
(I don’t have the local knowledge to come to any conclusion one way or the other.)
Nigel, Scott Lemieux does a nice job with critiquing Lilla.
I think that there are certain conversations around race that sometimes reach the silliness levels in blog comment sections. “Cultural appropriation” does come up a lot, and sometimes it gets silly, IMO. Obviously, when certain marginalized cultures don’t get credit for having contributed anything, the record needs to be corrected. But I’ve read discussions about collards and Whole Foods Market, and whether a white proprietor can open up a Nashville hot chicken restaurant (even when acknowledging the history of the dish). But I’ve actually enjoyed thinking about that issue, which is what discussions on the Internet are for.
If Lilla thinks he has a point that Democrats need to quit considering how racism affects policy, he’s wrong. It’s kind of hard to know what his point is when “big tent”, “stronger together”, “rainbow coalition”, and other terms have always been used to describe who Democrats are trying to represent.
Nigel, Scott Lemieux does a nice job with critiquing Lilla.
I think that there are certain conversations around race that sometimes reach the silliness levels in blog comment sections. “Cultural appropriation” does come up a lot, and sometimes it gets silly, IMO. Obviously, when certain marginalized cultures don’t get credit for having contributed anything, the record needs to be corrected. But I’ve read discussions about collards and Whole Foods Market, and whether a white proprietor can open up a Nashville hot chicken restaurant (even when acknowledging the history of the dish). But I’ve actually enjoyed thinking about that issue, which is what discussions on the Internet are for.
If Lilla thinks he has a point that Democrats need to quit considering how racism affects policy, he’s wrong. It’s kind of hard to know what his point is when “big tent”, “stronger together”, “rainbow coalition”, and other terms have always been used to describe who Democrats are trying to represent.
“If Lilla thinks he has a point that Democrats need to quit considering how racism affects policy, he’s wrong.”
I don’t argue with that at all. At in some respects he comes across as quite silly.
I was merely curious if he might be right in any respect that Democrats are failing to articulate a universal message which appeals not only to those in their coalition, but also to undecideds in the centre ?
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not suggesting that they compromise on their principles to articulate any such message.)
“If Lilla thinks he has a point that Democrats need to quit considering how racism affects policy, he’s wrong.”
I don’t argue with that at all. At in some respects he comes across as quite silly.
I was merely curious if he might be right in any respect that Democrats are failing to articulate a universal message which appeals not only to those in their coalition, but also to undecideds in the centre ?
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not suggesting that they compromise on their principles to articulate any such message.)
I was merely curious if he might be right in any respect that Democrats are failing to articulate a universal message which appeals not only to those in their coalition, but also to undecideds in the centre ?
Who are these undecideds you speak of?
I was merely curious if he might be right in any respect that Democrats are failing to articulate a universal message which appeals not only to those in their coalition, but also to undecideds in the centre ?
Who are these undecideds you speak of?
Nigel, I posted a link to a Lilla piece a few weeks back, with some sympathy but overall similar caveats to yours. I was similarly “put right”, by sapient and probably a few others. But the truth is, Steve Bannon is a sinister bastard with a lot of rotten ideas, but he may be right about this one: that if the Dems continue focussing on so-called identity politics, they do half the Republicans’ work for them (because of tapping into a huge reservoir of e.g. white working class prejudice, alienation etc etc). Which is not to say that they should stop working for all the good things (anti-racism, anti-sexism etc etc) which are partly their raison d’etre.
This is a very tough one: what should they focus on, and most importantly how should they best get their message across in what is a very polarised and poisonous zeitgeist? As sapient has often pointed out, it’s not as if HRC didn’t have, and articulate, and publish, multiple well-researched, sensible and practicable policies for improving the lots of many different constituencies, but it clearly did not come across. How to remedy this seems to me to be the biggest conundrum in contemporary American politics.
Nigel, I posted a link to a Lilla piece a few weeks back, with some sympathy but overall similar caveats to yours. I was similarly “put right”, by sapient and probably a few others. But the truth is, Steve Bannon is a sinister bastard with a lot of rotten ideas, but he may be right about this one: that if the Dems continue focussing on so-called identity politics, they do half the Republicans’ work for them (because of tapping into a huge reservoir of e.g. white working class prejudice, alienation etc etc). Which is not to say that they should stop working for all the good things (anti-racism, anti-sexism etc etc) which are partly their raison d’etre.
This is a very tough one: what should they focus on, and most importantly how should they best get their message across in what is a very polarised and poisonous zeitgeist? As sapient has often pointed out, it’s not as if HRC didn’t have, and articulate, and publish, multiple well-researched, sensible and practicable policies for improving the lots of many different constituencies, but it clearly did not come across. How to remedy this seems to me to be the biggest conundrum in contemporary American politics.
that if the Dems continue focussing on so-called identity politics,
careful now. don’t make the mistake of assuming ‘conservatives’ don’t practice ‘identity politics’, too. they do. thoroughly. their whole shtick of Traditional American Values™ is based on their political identity. and when they look at the diverse Democratic coalition and sneer that it’s anti-white, they’re telling us loud and clear that the GOP is the party of people who identify as white. the white-supremacist faction is a particularly ultra- politics of white identity.
“we’re a Christian nation” is an assertion of identity.
all group politics is identity politics.
when the GOP complains about the Dems practicing identity politics, what they’re really doing is pointing out that Dems pay attention to the concerns of minorities who won’t vote GOP. and they’re pretending this is a problem for the Dems. but it’s not. it’s a problem for the GOP.
HRC’s message didn’t come across because Trump was a type of candidate that the country had never seen before. and he captured the attention of everyone, left and right. and despite that, and despite the fact that a Dem had held the Presidency for the previous 8 years (a situation which is always tough on the incumbent party), and despite being the target of a ridiculous media narrative, and despite being the target of Russian interference, and despite interference by the FBI, and despite not being a great speaker, and despite not being a TV celebrity game show host billionaire, she got millions more votes than Trump did.
that if the Dems continue focussing on so-called identity politics,
careful now. don’t make the mistake of assuming ‘conservatives’ don’t practice ‘identity politics’, too. they do. thoroughly. their whole shtick of Traditional American Values™ is based on their political identity. and when they look at the diverse Democratic coalition and sneer that it’s anti-white, they’re telling us loud and clear that the GOP is the party of people who identify as white. the white-supremacist faction is a particularly ultra- politics of white identity.
“we’re a Christian nation” is an assertion of identity.
all group politics is identity politics.
when the GOP complains about the Dems practicing identity politics, what they’re really doing is pointing out that Dems pay attention to the concerns of minorities who won’t vote GOP. and they’re pretending this is a problem for the Dems. but it’s not. it’s a problem for the GOP.
HRC’s message didn’t come across because Trump was a type of candidate that the country had never seen before. and he captured the attention of everyone, left and right. and despite that, and despite the fact that a Dem had held the Presidency for the previous 8 years (a situation which is always tough on the incumbent party), and despite being the target of a ridiculous media narrative, and despite being the target of Russian interference, and despite interference by the FBI, and despite not being a great speaker, and despite not being a TV celebrity game show host billionaire, she got millions more votes than Trump did.
Who are these undecideds you speak of?
oh, you know, everyone who isn’t a minority of some type. a normal person, a person without any kind of obvious identity.
Who are these undecideds you speak of?
oh, you know, everyone who isn’t a minority of some type. a normal person, a person without any kind of obvious identity.
I would suggest that both Nigel and GFNC read the Lemieux link provided by Sapient….it is a very cogent rejoinder to the Lilla nonsense.
And what cleek said.
I would suggest that both Nigel and GFNC read the Lemieux link provided by Sapient….it is a very cogent rejoinder to the Lilla nonsense.
And what cleek said.
A link provided by Lemieux:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/books/review/mark-lilla-the-once-and-future-liberal.html
A link provided by Lemieux:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/books/review/mark-lilla-the-once-and-future-liberal.html
I can’t disagree with a word of what cleek said. And I’m about to start catching up, including with the Lemieux link. But despite everything, I think the Dems have a problem, which they shouldn’t by any sensible measure have, and it needs to be addressed. The electoral college aint goin’ nowhere (sorry, still Bob Dylan obsessed from the other night), and according to FiveThirtyEight’s (I think it was) analysis from after the election of states and the urban versus the rural vote, this problem urgently needs addressing.
I can’t disagree with a word of what cleek said. And I’m about to start catching up, including with the Lemieux link. But despite everything, I think the Dems have a problem, which they shouldn’t by any sensible measure have, and it needs to be addressed. The electoral college aint goin’ nowhere (sorry, still Bob Dylan obsessed from the other night), and according to FiveThirtyEight’s (I think it was) analysis from after the election of states and the urban versus the rural vote, this problem urgently needs addressing.
let me be pithier:
“overly concerned with identity politics” is today’s way of saying “ni—r lover”.
let me be pithier:
“overly concerned with identity politics” is today’s way of saying “ni—r lover”.
let me be pithier:
“overly concerned with identity politics” is today’s way of saying “ni—r lover”.
Undoubtedly often true, but you have to distinguish who is saying it, and whether they mean “overly concerned” or “appearing to be overly concerned, as against concerned with that as well as other kinds of discrimination and need”.
let me be pithier:
“overly concerned with identity politics” is today’s way of saying “ni—r lover”.
Undoubtedly often true, but you have to distinguish who is saying it, and whether they mean “overly concerned” or “appearing to be overly concerned, as against concerned with that as well as other kinds of discrimination and need”.
true. i didn’t mean you, certainly.
true. i didn’t mean you, certainly.
Understood, thanks.
Understood, thanks.
Nigel, the responses here have been generally correct. That said, there is certainly room for the Democrats to talk more about income inequality as it impacts poor (and middle class) whites as well. Indeed, that’s the big point Bernie Sanders was making in his campaign IMHO.
The important thing is to add to, rather than replace, the rest of their platform. They can get back those Obama-Trump voters, if they apply themselves.**
** Obama, after all, didn’t harp on race (because he didn’t have to). But he did talk about poverty and addressing it far more than Clinton did in last year’s campaign.
Nigel, the responses here have been generally correct. That said, there is certainly room for the Democrats to talk more about income inequality as it impacts poor (and middle class) whites as well. Indeed, that’s the big point Bernie Sanders was making in his campaign IMHO.
The important thing is to add to, rather than replace, the rest of their platform. They can get back those Obama-Trump voters, if they apply themselves.**
** Obama, after all, didn’t harp on race (because he didn’t have to). But he did talk about poverty and addressing it far more than Clinton did in last year’s campaign.
You can put anything you want in
Alice’s Restauranta party platform, but if only a few people pay attention, it doesn’t matter. THAT was Hillary’s “issue” problem.Another example: 2016 GOP platform selling out Ukraine to Putin.
All swept up in the “BUT HER EMAILS” maelstrom.
You can put anything you want in
Alice’s Restauranta party platform, but if only a few people pay attention, it doesn’t matter. THAT was Hillary’s “issue” problem.Another example: 2016 GOP platform selling out Ukraine to Putin.
All swept up in the “BUT HER EMAILS” maelstrom.
I thought this was interesting, in today’s Guardian. It’s a longish piece about the attractions of apocalyptic, rapture-related thinking, and how that explains a lot about today’s politics, by an ex-believer. As she says:
As an entertaining aside, it reveals that top candidate for Antichrist at the moment among rapture-believers is Jared Kushner.
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-guardian/20170826/282007557521122
I thought this was interesting, in today’s Guardian. It’s a longish piece about the attractions of apocalyptic, rapture-related thinking, and how that explains a lot about today’s politics, by an ex-believer. As she says:
As an entertaining aside, it reveals that top candidate for Antichrist at the moment among rapture-believers is Jared Kushner.
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-guardian/20170826/282007557521122
Today’s Astronomy Picture of the Day from NASA features a video from space of Hurricane Harvey approaching Texas. It’s so slow that it’s even more ominous.
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap170826.html
Today’s Astronomy Picture of the Day from NASA features a video from space of Hurricane Harvey approaching Texas. It’s so slow that it’s even more ominous.
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap170826.html
Snarki, to put it another way, it isn’t enough to put something in the party platform (or, for candidates for Congress or a state legislature, put a position paper on your website.) You have to get out and talk about it.
Snarki, to put it another way, it isn’t enough to put something in the party platform (or, for candidates for Congress or a state legislature, put a position paper on your website.) You have to get out and talk about it.
GftNC, this puts me in mind, for some reason, or a massively insensitive (by today’s standards) vignette:
Junior Englishman: “The natives are revolting!!”
Senior Englishman: “Yes, yes. But what’s this I hear about an uprising?”
Somehow my back brain is seeing a parallel with “deplorables” and those who want revolutionary change (albeit mostly a reactionary revolution).
GftNC, this puts me in mind, for some reason, or a massively insensitive (by today’s standards) vignette:
Junior Englishman: “The natives are revolting!!”
Senior Englishman: “Yes, yes. But what’s this I hear about an uprising?”
Somehow my back brain is seeing a parallel with “deplorables” and those who want revolutionary change (albeit mostly a reactionary revolution).
🙂
🙂
The difference in Obama and Clinton was, whatever policy positions he talked about, people in general believed him.
Even Democrats questioned her honesty. History sucks but, even without a vast right wing conspiracy, she had history that supported some of her positions but belied her move to the left to compete with Bernie.
So it really hurt her ability to control the message and leverage her policy advantage,
IMO of course
The difference in Obama and Clinton was, whatever policy positions he talked about, people in general believed him.
Even Democrats questioned her honesty. History sucks but, even without a vast right wing conspiracy, she had history that supported some of her positions but belied her move to the left to compete with Bernie.
So it really hurt her ability to control the message and leverage her policy advantage,
IMO of course
the GOP’s 30 year campaign to convince people she couldn’t be trusted worked. a whole generation of people grew up hearing the steady, context-free, background hum of “Clinton is corrupt”.
and so, people voted for a serial adulterer who ran a fake school and is famous for not paying his bills.
the GOP’s 30 year campaign to convince people she couldn’t be trusted worked. a whole generation of people grew up hearing the steady, context-free, background hum of “Clinton is corrupt”.
and so, people voted for a serial adulterer who ran a fake school and is famous for not paying his bills.
Oh my God.
Also from today’s Guardian, on the issue of whether by focussing on the removal or otherwise of Confederate monuments Trump has got away with his comments after Charlotteville, and has moreover broken the taboo on Nazi sympathising:
A poll taken after Charlottesville found that 9% of Americans believe holding neo-Nazi or white supremacist views is acceptable. That’s 30 million people.
I haven’t checked sources, but if this is true then russell’s comment on this subject about numbers of white supremacists versus college snowflakes a few days ago, that I and others challenged, looks correct. Apologies, russell. I wish you were wrong.
Oh my God.
Also from today’s Guardian, on the issue of whether by focussing on the removal or otherwise of Confederate monuments Trump has got away with his comments after Charlotteville, and has moreover broken the taboo on Nazi sympathising:
A poll taken after Charlottesville found that 9% of Americans believe holding neo-Nazi or white supremacist views is acceptable. That’s 30 million people.
I haven’t checked sources, but if this is true then russell’s comment on this subject about numbers of white supremacists versus college snowflakes a few days ago, that I and others challenged, looks correct. Apologies, russell. I wish you were wrong.
I would love to see that poll question.
I would love to see that poll question.
Haven’t read it yet, but here it is:
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-abc-news-poll-aug-16-20-2017/2235/
Haven’t read it yet, but here it is:
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-abc-news-poll-aug-16-20-2017/2235/
GftNC for some reason this puts me in mind of Roderick Spode (a “black short”).
GftNC for some reason this puts me in mind of Roderick Spode (a “black short”).
My thoughts about cultural appropriate, FWIW. I have two.
1. Imitation is the highest form of flattery
2. If anybody is making money off of your work, you should be one of them
My thoughts about cultural appropriate, FWIW. I have two.
1. Imitation is the highest form of flattery
2. If anybody is making money off of your work, you should be one of them
Apologies, russell. I wish you were wrong.
No worries.
Who knows, maybe I am wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time, it’s a daily occurrence.
What I think about all of it is that there are a crapload of people in this country who don’t like folks who aren’t like them, especially if they are darker than they are or have an odd name or speak a different language at home.
And those folks don’t mind at all if the folks they don’t like are harrassed, tossed out of the country, shot by cops during traffic stops, held on suspicion of being illegal, followed around stores when they go shopping, given a beating just because, or otherwise treated like crap.
They won’t actually go beat anybody over the head with a pipe, but they don’t lose any sleep if somebody else does.
As long as it’s not falling on their own heads, it’s all good. Those Other Folks must surely have done something to deserve it. They don’t belong here anyway.
In round numbers, I’d say I’ve just described 15-20% of the American public. Order of magnitude, say half of Trump’s people. I’m open to correction, that’s just my take on it.
You don’t need double-8’s tattooed on your shaved head to condone racial violence.
Apologies, russell. I wish you were wrong.
No worries.
Who knows, maybe I am wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time, it’s a daily occurrence.
What I think about all of it is that there are a crapload of people in this country who don’t like folks who aren’t like them, especially if they are darker than they are or have an odd name or speak a different language at home.
And those folks don’t mind at all if the folks they don’t like are harrassed, tossed out of the country, shot by cops during traffic stops, held on suspicion of being illegal, followed around stores when they go shopping, given a beating just because, or otherwise treated like crap.
They won’t actually go beat anybody over the head with a pipe, but they don’t lose any sleep if somebody else does.
As long as it’s not falling on their own heads, it’s all good. Those Other Folks must surely have done something to deserve it. They don’t belong here anyway.
In round numbers, I’d say I’ve just described 15-20% of the American public. Order of magnitude, say half of Trump’s people. I’m open to correction, that’s just my take on it.
You don’t need double-8’s tattooed on your shaved head to condone racial violence.
ral:
“The trouble with you, Spode, is that just because you have succeeded in inducing a handful of half-wits to disfigure the London scene by going about in black shorts, you think you’re someone. You hear them shouting “Heil, Spode!” and you imagine it is the Voice of the People. That is where you make your bloomer. What the Voice of the People is saying is: “Look at that frightful ass Spode swanking about in footer bags! Did you ever in your puff see such a perfect perisher?”
ral:
“The trouble with you, Spode, is that just because you have succeeded in inducing a handful of half-wits to disfigure the London scene by going about in black shorts, you think you’re someone. You hear them shouting “Heil, Spode!” and you imagine it is the Voice of the People. That is where you make your bloomer. What the Voice of the People is saying is: “Look at that frightful ass Spode swanking about in footer bags! Did you ever in your puff see such a perfect perisher?”
Crikey, I realise I read that quotation somewhere in the last few days. If it was here, I apologise again. I had a difficult ten days in London for various reasons, and was stressed and sleepless, so anything is possible. Anyway, in my opinion, you can never have too much P G Wodehouse, so hopefully nobody will mind too much if this is a repeat.
Crikey, I realise I read that quotation somewhere in the last few days. If it was here, I apologise again. I had a difficult ten days in London for various reasons, and was stressed and sleepless, so anything is possible. Anyway, in my opinion, you can never have too much P G Wodehouse, so hopefully nobody will mind too much if this is a repeat.
🙂
🙂
Arpaio pardoned.
the first person Trump pardons is a guy who is famous for being an asshole (to put it mildly) to minorities and who defied the courts when called on it.
the GOP will do nothing about it. on the whole, they probably will say nothing negative about it.
this fact will not be lost on all those the GOP derides as practicing “identity politics”.
Arpaio pardoned.
the first person Trump pardons is a guy who is famous for being an asshole (to put it mildly) to minorities and who defied the courts when called on it.
the GOP will do nothing about it. on the whole, they probably will say nothing negative about it.
this fact will not be lost on all those the GOP derides as practicing “identity politics”.
Trump won 28% of the Latino vote. Hopefully in 2018 and 2020 you won’t see them for dust.
Trump won 28% of the Latino vote. Hopefully in 2018 and 2020 you won’t see them for dust.
Who are these undecideds you speak of?
That is perhaps what I was getting at, as it seems to imply that no one who voted Republican last time might be persuaded otherwise.
I think that is wrong.
(I am not a fan of the Lille piece, but my question was whether there might be a germ of truth amongst the mulch.)
Who are these undecideds you speak of?
That is perhaps what I was getting at, as it seems to imply that no one who voted Republican last time might be persuaded otherwise.
I think that is wrong.
(I am not a fan of the Lille piece, but my question was whether there might be a germ of truth amongst the mulch.)
The Arpaio pardon is utterly unconscionable (though, regrettably, entirely constitutional).
Trump shows all the instincts of an incipient fascist.
The Arpaio pardon is utterly unconscionable (though, regrettably, entirely constitutional).
Trump shows all the instincts of an incipient fascist.
That is perhaps what I was getting at, as it seems to imply that no one who voted Republican last time might be persuaded otherwise.
I think that is wrong.
I hope so.
The Arpaio pardon is utterly unconscionable
Republicans who don’t understand that are unpersuadable. Republicans who make immigrants their pinata, oppose voting rights, oppose women’s health care (including but not limited to reproductive services – remember, femaleness was a preexisting condition prior to Obamacare), support firing transgender Americans from the military, support prohibiting people from going to the bathroom, etc., those people are also unpersuadable.
If Democrats stand up for these Americans, we’re accused of “identity politics”. That’s what this is about.
That is perhaps what I was getting at, as it seems to imply that no one who voted Republican last time might be persuaded otherwise.
I think that is wrong.
I hope so.
The Arpaio pardon is utterly unconscionable
Republicans who don’t understand that are unpersuadable. Republicans who make immigrants their pinata, oppose voting rights, oppose women’s health care (including but not limited to reproductive services – remember, femaleness was a preexisting condition prior to Obamacare), support firing transgender Americans from the military, support prohibiting people from going to the bathroom, etc., those people are also unpersuadable.
If Democrats stand up for these Americans, we’re accused of “identity politics”. That’s what this is about.
Arpaio pardoned.
he’s just shoring up that base.
If Democrats stand up for these Americans, we’re accused of “identity politics”.
it’s pretty much all identity politics at this point.
i’m not that interested in picking sides, but sometimes folks don’t give you the choice.
Arpaio pardoned.
he’s just shoring up that base.
If Democrats stand up for these Americans, we’re accused of “identity politics”.
it’s pretty much all identity politics at this point.
i’m not that interested in picking sides, but sometimes folks don’t give you the choice.
Yes. Apparently Chris Wallace the other night, talking about the false equivalence Trump created in Charlotteville, quoted Churchill:
I decline utterly to be impartial between the fire brigade and the fire.
Yes. Apparently Chris Wallace the other night, talking about the false equivalence Trump created in Charlotteville, quoted Churchill:
I decline utterly to be impartial between the fire brigade and the fire.
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-spiritual-adviser-affront-god-d615c512bffc/
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-spiritual-adviser-affront-god-d615c512bffc/
Back to Lilla and his ilk: I have no idea what the Democrats should or shouldn’t do; I’m learning disabled about politics at the best of times.
But the Dems are one of the two major parties in a country of 330MM people…I think anyone (e.g. Lilla) who opines condescendingly about what they should do is all wet on the face of it. Especially if the opining is about identity politics. (See cleek and others above.)
But I’m going to offer a proposition for debate: the Dems should do more to bring their younger upcomers into the limelight.
For example, several younger people of my acquaintance (younger meaning in this case the 25-35yo age range) were rooting strongly for Pete Buttigieg to get the DNC chairmanship. He’s well-spoken, smart, a veteran, an openly gay mayor in South Bend, Indiana, for crying out loud, and from what I’ve seen of him I would join my younger friends in hoping hope he goes far.
In the Maine gubernatorial race coming up over the next year or so, there are some youngsters (relatively speaking) and some people of my generation (I’m 67) or older who I think should just quit trying, and let the younger folks go at it. I’m not saying this as a general rule, nor am I thinking in terms of any specific cut-off. I just wonder if maybe there’s a lot of energy roiling around right now that would come into focus more effectively with some new faces.
Have I now pulled my own Lilla? I go back to saying I have no idea what the Democrats should do, but I’m curious what people here think about the age thing. I assume that if I knew more about political history I would find that this is an eternal pendulum/dynamic. Similarly with the comments I see here and there about realignment……but that’s another topic.
Back to Lilla and his ilk: I have no idea what the Democrats should or shouldn’t do; I’m learning disabled about politics at the best of times.
But the Dems are one of the two major parties in a country of 330MM people…I think anyone (e.g. Lilla) who opines condescendingly about what they should do is all wet on the face of it. Especially if the opining is about identity politics. (See cleek and others above.)
But I’m going to offer a proposition for debate: the Dems should do more to bring their younger upcomers into the limelight.
For example, several younger people of my acquaintance (younger meaning in this case the 25-35yo age range) were rooting strongly for Pete Buttigieg to get the DNC chairmanship. He’s well-spoken, smart, a veteran, an openly gay mayor in South Bend, Indiana, for crying out loud, and from what I’ve seen of him I would join my younger friends in hoping hope he goes far.
In the Maine gubernatorial race coming up over the next year or so, there are some youngsters (relatively speaking) and some people of my generation (I’m 67) or older who I think should just quit trying, and let the younger folks go at it. I’m not saying this as a general rule, nor am I thinking in terms of any specific cut-off. I just wonder if maybe there’s a lot of energy roiling around right now that would come into focus more effectively with some new faces.
Have I now pulled my own Lilla? I go back to saying I have no idea what the Democrats should do, but I’m curious what people here think about the age thing. I assume that if I knew more about political history I would find that this is an eternal pendulum/dynamic. Similarly with the comments I see here and there about realignment……but that’s another topic.
the next pundit that brings the “no more identity politics” line gets a kick in the ass. from me.
maybe someone like wj is above identity politics. 99.99% of politics is identity politics.
people identify themselves in certain ways. their interests align with that self-identity.
thus, identity politics.
the Lilla (and folks like him) thing seems to be: quitting making an issue out of the blacks / immigrants / gays / whoever. because it’s alienating regular americans.
here’s the deal: blacks, gays, immigrants, and whoever else are regular americans.
intersectional bi women of color who are candidates for a PhD in queer studies at UCBerkeley and who sometimes identify as dudes. regular americans. field and stream subscribers from south bend who like to whittle are regular americans. anarchist off-the-grid ex-hippies from oregon whose side hustle is foraging for mushrooms are rgular americans.
old dudes with mortgages and ranch houses in the burbs who play drums on the weekend are regular americans.
we contain multitudes. i paraphrase a gay humanist skinny-dipping poet and sometime male nurse. get my drift?
we’re all regular americans. we all have our particular interests and concerns. nobody’s are more authentically “american” than anybody else’s.
i’m not throwing anybody under the bus to suit Lilla.
the next pundit that brings the “no more identity politics” line gets a kick in the ass. from me.
maybe someone like wj is above identity politics. 99.99% of politics is identity politics.
people identify themselves in certain ways. their interests align with that self-identity.
thus, identity politics.
the Lilla (and folks like him) thing seems to be: quitting making an issue out of the blacks / immigrants / gays / whoever. because it’s alienating regular americans.
here’s the deal: blacks, gays, immigrants, and whoever else are regular americans.
intersectional bi women of color who are candidates for a PhD in queer studies at UCBerkeley and who sometimes identify as dudes. regular americans. field and stream subscribers from south bend who like to whittle are regular americans. anarchist off-the-grid ex-hippies from oregon whose side hustle is foraging for mushrooms are rgular americans.
old dudes with mortgages and ranch houses in the burbs who play drums on the weekend are regular americans.
we contain multitudes. i paraphrase a gay humanist skinny-dipping poet and sometime male nurse. get my drift?
we’re all regular americans. we all have our particular interests and concerns. nobody’s are more authentically “american” than anybody else’s.
i’m not throwing anybody under the bus to suit Lilla.
maybe someone like wj is above identity politics
this,in case it’s not clear, was intended as a compliment.
if wj could ever be persuaded to run for POTUS he’d have a solid shot at my vote.
maybe someone like wj is above identity politics
this,in case it’s not clear, was intended as a compliment.
if wj could ever be persuaded to run for POTUS he’d have a solid shot at my vote.
I’m not sure if I’m above identity politics, or just have a hard time grasping (emotionally) the concept. I understand the theory, but I just don’t feel it. I suspect it’s much harder to execute if you have to stop and do it consciously every time.
Appreciate the complement, Russell. I think there’s a lot of folks, across the political spectrum, who could do a decent job of it. The problem is that you need someone like that who is also good at (and preferably enjoys) campaigning. AND has a big enough ego to go after the position.
Finding 2 and 3 together doesn’t seem to be difficult. Getting one of those who also has 1, or at least the wit and ability to hire good help? Not so much.
I’m not sure if I’m above identity politics, or just have a hard time grasping (emotionally) the concept. I understand the theory, but I just don’t feel it. I suspect it’s much harder to execute if you have to stop and do it consciously every time.
Appreciate the complement, Russell. I think there’s a lot of folks, across the political spectrum, who could do a decent job of it. The problem is that you need someone like that who is also good at (and preferably enjoys) campaigning. AND has a big enough ego to go after the position.
Finding 2 and 3 together doesn’t seem to be difficult. Getting one of those who also has 1, or at least the wit and ability to hire good help? Not so much.
I agree, russell – which is probably to say that the Democrats need leaders as well able to express that as you do.
And as able to talk to rural Illinoisians as was Obama…
Meantime, Slate week expresses what I fear about the Arpaio pardon:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/08/trump_s_arpaio_pardon_is_a_bad_sign_for_mueller_s_investigation.html
The potential for a GOP Congress to enable the trampling of the rule of law under the cover of what is a constitutional presidential power is there. And a significant minority of the US public won’t care; some will even applaud it.
And the electoral maths (gerrymandering) means the Democrats need to win by quite a margin to have a prospect of retaking the House; the Senate looks equally hard in the short term.
I agree, russell – which is probably to say that the Democrats need leaders as well able to express that as you do.
And as able to talk to rural Illinoisians as was Obama…
Meantime, Slate week expresses what I fear about the Arpaio pardon:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/08/trump_s_arpaio_pardon_is_a_bad_sign_for_mueller_s_investigation.html
The potential for a GOP Congress to enable the trampling of the rule of law under the cover of what is a constitutional presidential power is there. And a significant minority of the US public won’t care; some will even applaud it.
And the electoral maths (gerrymandering) means the Democrats need to win by quite a margin to have a prospect of retaking the House; the Senate looks equally hard in the short term.
That should be ‘well’, not ‘week’.
That should be ‘well’, not ‘week’.
Fascism is in our faces:
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/uncle-joes-legacy.html
Fuck elections.
Kill.
Fascism is in our faces:
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/uncle-joes-legacy.html
Fuck elections.
Kill.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/video-shows-police-standing-back-after-man-shoots-into-charlottesville-crowd
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/video-shows-police-standing-back-after-man-shoots-into-charlottesville-crowd
“He’s sad. He’s angry. He’s staying at the hotel.”
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/theres-gold-headboards
People who destroy my country die horrible deaths.
“He’s sad. He’s angry. He’s staying at the hotel.”
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/theres-gold-headboards
People who destroy my country die horrible deaths.
Some believed the ascension of John Kelly to Chief of Staff would ameliorate rump’s fascist tendencies.
He has merely provided order to the subhuman fascist murderous darkness descending over America.
Bannon, Gorka and company will be much more effective consolidators of murderous fascism outside the White House feeding the murderous republican base, tens of millions of our neighbors and coworkers, the red meat to get them primed and ready to kill us.
Firing Mueller will be much easier under John Kelly.
John Kelly is subhuman vermin.
He is rump’s Sepp Dietrich.
Some believed the ascension of John Kelly to Chief of Staff would ameliorate rump’s fascist tendencies.
He has merely provided order to the subhuman fascist murderous darkness descending over America.
Bannon, Gorka and company will be much more effective consolidators of murderous fascism outside the White House feeding the murderous republican base, tens of millions of our neighbors and coworkers, the red meat to get them primed and ready to kill us.
Firing Mueller will be much easier under John Kelly.
John Kelly is subhuman vermin.
He is rump’s Sepp Dietrich.
A chaotic fascism is easier for its victims to negotiate.
An orderly, efficient fascism is soothing to the doubters, the second-guessers, those who are turned off by the ick factor of mass murder.
Fascism’s victims struggle against armed chaos outside their door coming to get them and might fight it out of sheer alarm.
But a crisp knock on the door and a gentlemanly request for papers and perhaps a trip down to the police station or even to the train depot for points east and the victim will calmly gather a few things and disappear.
Come with us, little mother.
John Kelly is subhuman vermin until he proves us wrong.
A chaotic fascism is easier for its victims to negotiate.
An orderly, efficient fascism is soothing to the doubters, the second-guessers, those who are turned off by the ick factor of mass murder.
Fascism’s victims struggle against armed chaos outside their door coming to get them and might fight it out of sheer alarm.
But a crisp knock on the door and a gentlemanly request for papers and perhaps a trip down to the police station or even to the train depot for points east and the victim will calmly gather a few things and disappear.
Come with us, little mother.
John Kelly is subhuman vermin until he proves us wrong.
“It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see…”
“You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?”
“No,” said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, “nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.”
“Odd,” said Arthur, “I thought you said it was a democracy.”
“I did,” said Ford. “It is.”
“So,” said Arthur, hoping he wasn’t sounding ridiculously obtuse, “why don’t people get rid of the lizards?”
“It honestly doesn’t occur to them,” said Ford. “They’ve all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they’ve voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.”
“You mean they actually vote for the lizards?”
“Oh yes,” said Ford with a shrug, “of course.”
“But,” said Arthur, going for the big one again, “why?”
“Because if they didn’t vote for a lizard,” said Ford, “the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?”
“What?”
“I said,” said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, “have you got any gin?” —Douglas Adams, So Long, And Thanks for All the Fish.
“It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see…”
“You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?”
“No,” said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, “nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.”
“Odd,” said Arthur, “I thought you said it was a democracy.”
“I did,” said Ford. “It is.”
“So,” said Arthur, hoping he wasn’t sounding ridiculously obtuse, “why don’t people get rid of the lizards?”
“It honestly doesn’t occur to them,” said Ford. “They’ve all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they’ve voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.”
“You mean they actually vote for the lizards?”
“Oh yes,” said Ford with a shrug, “of course.”
“But,” said Arthur, going for the big one again, “why?”
“Because if they didn’t vote for a lizard,” said Ford, “the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?”
“What?”
“I said,” said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, “have you got any gin?” —Douglas Adams, So Long, And Thanks for All the Fish.
Reptiles elect lizards.
Filched from Michael Robbins’ “Equipment For Living — On Poetry and Pop Music”
“Our machine was devastating” Michael Herr wrote of America’s profane destruction of Indochina. “And versatile. It could do everything but stop.”
Applies to Yemen as well, and Obama had a hand in that.
But it certainly applies to the rumplican party.
It can’t stop.
The 2018 and 2020 elections are already stolen.
There is only one thing that will stop it:
“Picture the east Aegean sea by night
And on a beach slant its shimmering
Upwards of 50,000 men
Asleep like spoons beside their lethal fleet.”
……
“Think of a raked sky-wide Venetian blind.
Add the receding traction of its slats
Of its slats of its slats as a hand draws it up.
Hear the Greek army getting to its feet.”
Christopher Logue, in his neo-translations of Homer’s Iliad.
It is time for Achilles’ slashing and savage rage to be unleashed on rumplican America.
Reptiles elect lizards.
Filched from Michael Robbins’ “Equipment For Living — On Poetry and Pop Music”
“Our machine was devastating” Michael Herr wrote of America’s profane destruction of Indochina. “And versatile. It could do everything but stop.”
Applies to Yemen as well, and Obama had a hand in that.
But it certainly applies to the rumplican party.
It can’t stop.
The 2018 and 2020 elections are already stolen.
There is only one thing that will stop it:
“Picture the east Aegean sea by night
And on a beach slant its shimmering
Upwards of 50,000 men
Asleep like spoons beside their lethal fleet.”
……
“Think of a raked sky-wide Venetian blind.
Add the receding traction of its slats
Of its slats of its slats as a hand draws it up.
Hear the Greek army getting to its feet.”
Christopher Logue, in his neo-translations of Homer’s Iliad.
It is time for Achilles’ slashing and savage rage to be unleashed on rumplican America.
Fuck elections.
Kill.
i’m currently reading a history of the war of the roses.
no thanks, i’ll take my chances with voting.
Fuck elections.
Kill.
i’m currently reading a history of the war of the roses.
no thanks, i’ll take my chances with voting.
John Kelly is subhuman vermin until he proves us wrong.
So what you are asking for is details on what one White House staffer was talking about when he said “You wouldn’t believe the crazy shit we have stopped.”
Let’s say you get what you are asking for. What happens then? It’s virtually certain that Trump reacts to revelations that he has been stopped (over anything) by doing lots of stuff that’s crazier, and that you hate more, than what he has already been doing. How is that a good thing?
Sometimes you have to live with imperfect information, because it is manifestly obvious that making public perfect information would be bad. And not just in the context of formal military operations or intelligence covert ops. (If that sounds like we are running operations against a hostile power in the White House, wel….)
John Kelly is subhuman vermin until he proves us wrong.
So what you are asking for is details on what one White House staffer was talking about when he said “You wouldn’t believe the crazy shit we have stopped.”
Let’s say you get what you are asking for. What happens then? It’s virtually certain that Trump reacts to revelations that he has been stopped (over anything) by doing lots of stuff that’s crazier, and that you hate more, than what he has already been doing. How is that a good thing?
Sometimes you have to live with imperfect information, because it is manifestly obvious that making public perfect information would be bad. And not just in the context of formal military operations or intelligence covert ops. (If that sounds like we are running operations against a hostile power in the White House, wel….)
Hope Tillerson’s comments don’t somehow prove your point, wj. I haven’t been a fan of Tillerson, but this statement is quite an eye-opener.
Hope Tillerson’s comments don’t somehow prove your point, wj. I haven’t been a fan of Tillerson, but this statement is quite an eye-opener.
It seems to me that Tillerson’s comment could be read in (at least) two ways.
1. I have just spoken for the American people’s values, but the president speaks for his own values [which cannot be assumed to be the same as the American people’s values].
2. I am not going to speak for the president, (i.e., he can speak for himself).
I thought Wallace took it to be #1, and the tweeter took it to be #1, and I took it to be #1 at first. But on second thought, #2 seems much more likely.
If only English was math.
It seems to me that Tillerson’s comment could be read in (at least) two ways.
1. I have just spoken for the American people’s values, but the president speaks for his own values [which cannot be assumed to be the same as the American people’s values].
2. I am not going to speak for the president, (i.e., he can speak for himself).
I thought Wallace took it to be #1, and the tweeter took it to be #1, and I took it to be #1 at first. But on second thought, #2 seems much more likely.
If only English was math.
I think Tillerson’s response to Wallace made #1 clear. That is my take, obviously. Maybe I’m just grasping for hope.
I think Tillerson’s response to Wallace made #1 clear. That is my take, obviously. Maybe I’m just grasping for hope.
I think Pence,Tillerson and a few others have started to build a fence around him. Enough space he can do his Tues Thurs chaos but slowly shrinking it.
Step outside those lines, try to fire any of those people and Ryan/McConnell take him out.
We will know soon enough.
I think Pence,Tillerson and a few others have started to build a fence around him. Enough space he can do his Tues Thurs chaos but slowly shrinking it.
Step outside those lines, try to fire any of those people and Ryan/McConnell take him out.
We will know soon enough.
For (slightly) light relief, here is a piece on Trump by Frankie Boyle (one of our bitterest comedians) from today’s Observer:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/27/frankie-boyle-donald-trump-embodies-twitter
Sample:
Trump delivered one of his random rightwing word collages in front of a crowd who if they were any whiter would have had carrots for noses.
Imagine standing up in Arizona and talking about preserving white culture: a state so recently colonised that the dry cleaners still offer a smallpox cleansing service. White guys have only been in Arizona for 150 years – that’s not even enough time to fill a Costa loyalty card. He’s literally standing in Apache land, 150 years after their genocide, talking about protecting American culture; standing amid a culture people like him destroyed, talking about building a wall
For (slightly) light relief, here is a piece on Trump by Frankie Boyle (one of our bitterest comedians) from today’s Observer:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/27/frankie-boyle-donald-trump-embodies-twitter
Sample:
Trump delivered one of his random rightwing word collages in front of a crowd who if they were any whiter would have had carrots for noses.
Imagine standing up in Arizona and talking about preserving white culture: a state so recently colonised that the dry cleaners still offer a smallpox cleansing service. White guys have only been in Arizona for 150 years – that’s not even enough time to fill a Costa loyalty card. He’s literally standing in Apache land, 150 years after their genocide, talking about protecting American culture; standing amid a culture people like him destroyed, talking about building a wall
I liked this line: Under investigation by the FBI, he is now at war with intelligence in two ways.
I liked this line: Under investigation by the FBI, he is now at war with intelligence in two ways.
I agree, JanieM. I also liked this excellent insult, immediately following:
It’s hard to pick out a single low point of the Trump presidency, but it seems like the KKK now feel relaxed enough to march without their hoods. “Jews will not replace us!”? Looks like if your sister keeps saying no, nobody will mate.
I agree, JanieM. I also liked this excellent insult, immediately following:
It’s hard to pick out a single low point of the Trump presidency, but it seems like the KKK now feel relaxed enough to march without their hoods. “Jews will not replace us!”? Looks like if your sister keeps saying no, nobody will mate.
Since we’re doing black humor, a passage from an Alexandra Petri piece about Gary Cohn in the WP (hat tip Anne Laurie at BJ):
Since we’re doing black humor, a passage from an Alexandra Petri piece about Gary Cohn in the WP (hat tip Anne Laurie at BJ):
Kelly and Tillerson can resign and join Antifa. It’s too late for their souls. They signed on with eyes open. If we knew during the campaign what rump is, they did too. I’m not interested in listening to them brag later that they were merely saving us from rump’s worst depredations. They can fuck off.
As to elections versus civil war violence: I prefer the former. No kidding. I’m not requesting anyone enlist for the latter one. But, American history is precedent.
In September of 1862, the bloodiest battle to date of the Civil War, Antietam, was fought. Twenty-three thousand dead (this was before the enemy waged war expressly on civilians; they will this time, and are). Simultaneously, the midterm elections proceeded, the Republicans of the time …. me …. lost two dozen seats in the House, while the confederate democrats, including those in the Northern, so-called Union States … the rumpublican/rumplican party … gained big time.
http://www.history.com/news/7-ways-the-battle-of-antietam-changed-america
Americans voted — for the future statues of the worst traitors in American history — and slaughtered each other, simultaneously. Just saying, not wishing.
Do I need to recite the bloody savage battles fought during the Presidential election year of 1864. That’s what the internet is for.
As to Lilla, I see some of his point, not the identity politics part, Newt Gingrich’s predecessors, John Birch, the Founders of the country, Jim Crow era buttfuckers, Barry Goldwater, Strom Thurmond, William F For Fucker Buckley, John Caldwell Calhoun, Woodrow Wilson, Clarence Thomas thought up identity politics long before some silly, shallow professor of look-at-me studies did. Without the former, there wouldn’t be the latter.
And, yeah, judging personalities of the past according to our contemporary standards seems a little rum, until you consider the originalist bullshit jurists, who want us to live by the standards of the past, the rumplican party is shoving down out throats to judge US at the point of a musket from somewhere circa 1760.
But the Democratic Party does need an overall message and a vision. It’s elements are there, sure, but chopped up into little policy bits indigestible to the majority of the polity, who as a class of simple people like a simple line of bullshit to get them to the polls.
Like Make America Great Again.
Instead, and I didn’t watch the Democratic Convention, we got this (and this is a shout-out to Donald Johnson):
“July 28, 2016: retired marine general John Allen addresses the Democratic convention at the (fucking) Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. His bellicose speech is a paean to the American military “the shining example of America at its very best” — and it’s “weapons and equipment.” When he finishes speaking, the auditorium fills with music. You think: They can’t really be playing THIS after THAT. But they are. On a popular social media platform, writer Elliot Sharp summed up the venality of the moment, of these people, “They played a Curtis Mayfield song after that fascist DNC war speech because nothing matters to them.”
From Michael Robbins, cited in a previous comment.
Thing is, Lilla seems to forget that Abraham Lincoln, the liberal Democrat, forged the most eloquent, poetic, moving, historic expressions of what it is to be American and a unified Nation and a guy, a rightwing conservative rumpublican wearing a red hat blaring “Make America Great Again”, shot Lincoln in the back of the head, followed by the betrayal of Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and general fucking misery for too many Americans.
If it didn’t work that time, I’d ask Lilla, what makes anyone think it will work this time, considering the vermin among us?
I’m not waiting 120 years again to clear this crap up, only to have it raise it’s reptilian, fork-tongue head again every time we let down our guards.
It’s something in the American bloodstream only a permanent transfusion will eradicate.
I like Curtis Mayfield and I like having a Marine General on my side, but the two together clang into nonsense.
Nevertheless, get it on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z66wVo7uNw
I may stop linking to Youtube because Mayfield and company aren’t getting a royalty, thanks to Google and company who will end up being rumpublicans by any other name.
They run their businesses just like rump runs his. Do Evil and call it business. Fuck them too.
GFNTC: Great stuff. John Jay would giggle.
I coulda been such a contender in demagogy. I missed my calling.
But ya’ll have rump instead.
Kelly and Tillerson can resign and join Antifa. It’s too late for their souls. They signed on with eyes open. If we knew during the campaign what rump is, they did too. I’m not interested in listening to them brag later that they were merely saving us from rump’s worst depredations. They can fuck off.
As to elections versus civil war violence: I prefer the former. No kidding. I’m not requesting anyone enlist for the latter one. But, American history is precedent.
In September of 1862, the bloodiest battle to date of the Civil War, Antietam, was fought. Twenty-three thousand dead (this was before the enemy waged war expressly on civilians; they will this time, and are). Simultaneously, the midterm elections proceeded, the Republicans of the time …. me …. lost two dozen seats in the House, while the confederate democrats, including those in the Northern, so-called Union States … the rumpublican/rumplican party … gained big time.
http://www.history.com/news/7-ways-the-battle-of-antietam-changed-america
Americans voted — for the future statues of the worst traitors in American history — and slaughtered each other, simultaneously. Just saying, not wishing.
Do I need to recite the bloody savage battles fought during the Presidential election year of 1864. That’s what the internet is for.
As to Lilla, I see some of his point, not the identity politics part, Newt Gingrich’s predecessors, John Birch, the Founders of the country, Jim Crow era buttfuckers, Barry Goldwater, Strom Thurmond, William F For Fucker Buckley, John Caldwell Calhoun, Woodrow Wilson, Clarence Thomas thought up identity politics long before some silly, shallow professor of look-at-me studies did. Without the former, there wouldn’t be the latter.
And, yeah, judging personalities of the past according to our contemporary standards seems a little rum, until you consider the originalist bullshit jurists, who want us to live by the standards of the past, the rumplican party is shoving down out throats to judge US at the point of a musket from somewhere circa 1760.
But the Democratic Party does need an overall message and a vision. It’s elements are there, sure, but chopped up into little policy bits indigestible to the majority of the polity, who as a class of simple people like a simple line of bullshit to get them to the polls.
Like Make America Great Again.
Instead, and I didn’t watch the Democratic Convention, we got this (and this is a shout-out to Donald Johnson):
“July 28, 2016: retired marine general John Allen addresses the Democratic convention at the (fucking) Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. His bellicose speech is a paean to the American military “the shining example of America at its very best” — and it’s “weapons and equipment.” When he finishes speaking, the auditorium fills with music. You think: They can’t really be playing THIS after THAT. But they are. On a popular social media platform, writer Elliot Sharp summed up the venality of the moment, of these people, “They played a Curtis Mayfield song after that fascist DNC war speech because nothing matters to them.”
From Michael Robbins, cited in a previous comment.
Thing is, Lilla seems to forget that Abraham Lincoln, the liberal Democrat, forged the most eloquent, poetic, moving, historic expressions of what it is to be American and a unified Nation and a guy, a rightwing conservative rumpublican wearing a red hat blaring “Make America Great Again”, shot Lincoln in the back of the head, followed by the betrayal of Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and general fucking misery for too many Americans.
If it didn’t work that time, I’d ask Lilla, what makes anyone think it will work this time, considering the vermin among us?
I’m not waiting 120 years again to clear this crap up, only to have it raise it’s reptilian, fork-tongue head again every time we let down our guards.
It’s something in the American bloodstream only a permanent transfusion will eradicate.
I like Curtis Mayfield and I like having a Marine General on my side, but the two together clang into nonsense.
Nevertheless, get it on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z66wVo7uNw
I may stop linking to Youtube because Mayfield and company aren’t getting a royalty, thanks to Google and company who will end up being rumpublicans by any other name.
They run their businesses just like rump runs his. Do Evil and call it business. Fuck them too.
GFNTC: Great stuff. John Jay would giggle.
I coulda been such a contender in demagogy. I missed my calling.
But ya’ll have rump instead.
Marty had better be right at 12:45 pm. I hope he is.
Of course Pence will then wreak havoc and vengeance policy-wise on tens of millions of Americans at the behest of Bannon, Coulter, and the NRA.
While the massive riots by the right wing burn shit down.
The only difference will be that Pence, knowing his own predilections (he’s righteously smug that way) will have his wife alongside at all times, to stop him from finger fucking HIS God whisperers, as rump does his .. during the benedictions.
Marty had better be right at 12:45 pm. I hope he is.
Of course Pence will then wreak havoc and vengeance policy-wise on tens of millions of Americans at the behest of Bannon, Coulter, and the NRA.
While the massive riots by the right wing burn shit down.
The only difference will be that Pence, knowing his own predilections (he’s righteously smug that way) will have his wife alongside at all times, to stop him from finger fucking HIS God whisperers, as rump does his .. during the benedictions.
Thing is, Lilla seems to forget that Abraham Lincoln, the liberal Democrat, forged the most eloquent, poetic, moving, historic expressions of what it is to be American and a unified Nation and a guy, a rightwing conservative rumpublican wearing a red hat blaring “Make America Great Again”, shot Lincoln in the back of the head, followed by the betrayal of Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and general fucking misery for too many Americans.
Except for the shooting in the head part, you could substitute a couple of names, swap Reconstruction for most regulatory and civil rights law of the last 80 years, and call it 2016.
In my opinion.
I’m not waiting 120 years again to clear this crap up, only to have it raise it’s reptilian, fork-tongue head again every time we let down our guards.
The “it” that raises its reptilian, fork-tongue head is IMO an inextricable part of America. Baked into our history, from long before we even existed as a nation. Baked into our Constitution, and it took a truly horrible war and two or three amendments to pry it out of that document. Even after that, it took another hundred years of organized national political terror before the Constitutional change filtered its way into black letter law.
Some would say that process is ongoing.
It’s a big part of who we are. Not all of what we are, but a big part. My personal opinion is that it will never, ever, ever go away.
We move the goalposts marking out who gets to be a “real” American every generation or two. But the same kinds of people tend to get to be the “real” ones, and the same kinds of people tend to get to be “those other people”. For hundreds of years now.
Keep your guard up.
Thing is, Lilla seems to forget that Abraham Lincoln, the liberal Democrat, forged the most eloquent, poetic, moving, historic expressions of what it is to be American and a unified Nation and a guy, a rightwing conservative rumpublican wearing a red hat blaring “Make America Great Again”, shot Lincoln in the back of the head, followed by the betrayal of Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and general fucking misery for too many Americans.
Except for the shooting in the head part, you could substitute a couple of names, swap Reconstruction for most regulatory and civil rights law of the last 80 years, and call it 2016.
In my opinion.
I’m not waiting 120 years again to clear this crap up, only to have it raise it’s reptilian, fork-tongue head again every time we let down our guards.
The “it” that raises its reptilian, fork-tongue head is IMO an inextricable part of America. Baked into our history, from long before we even existed as a nation. Baked into our Constitution, and it took a truly horrible war and two or three amendments to pry it out of that document. Even after that, it took another hundred years of organized national political terror before the Constitutional change filtered its way into black letter law.
Some would say that process is ongoing.
It’s a big part of who we are. Not all of what we are, but a big part. My personal opinion is that it will never, ever, ever go away.
We move the goalposts marking out who gets to be a “real” American every generation or two. But the same kinds of people tend to get to be the “real” ones, and the same kinds of people tend to get to be “those other people”. For hundreds of years now.
Keep your guard up.
We move the goalposts marking out who gets to be a “real” American every generation or two. But the same kinds of people tend to get to be the “real” ones, and the same kinds of people tend to get to be “those other people”. For hundreds of years now.
Yes and no. We do manage to move the goalposts — which is a good thing in this instance.
And it’s true that the same people who objected to the last change(s) get to remain “real Americans”. And they do keep coming back to object to the next broadening of the definition. (Joined, depressingly enough, by some new recruits from the newly included.)
But the definition of “real American” does, for most of us, keep broadening. And the number (not to mention percentage) of those rejecting all past changes keeps shrinking. They can maintain their numbers only by constantly finding new groups to demonize and reject. They have to keep moving those goalposts too, or else disappear.
We move the goalposts marking out who gets to be a “real” American every generation or two. But the same kinds of people tend to get to be the “real” ones, and the same kinds of people tend to get to be “those other people”. For hundreds of years now.
Yes and no. We do manage to move the goalposts — which is a good thing in this instance.
And it’s true that the same people who objected to the last change(s) get to remain “real Americans”. And they do keep coming back to object to the next broadening of the definition. (Joined, depressingly enough, by some new recruits from the newly included.)
But the definition of “real American” does, for most of us, keep broadening. And the number (not to mention percentage) of those rejecting all past changes keeps shrinking. They can maintain their numbers only by constantly finding new groups to demonize and reject. They have to keep moving those goalposts too, or else disappear.
As to elections versus civil war violence: I prefer the former.
So long as Alabama believes it has a chance to fix New York, and California believes it has a chance to fix Mississippi, I am not overly concerned. When the political classes there start thinking that fixing the other side is hopeless, and the best defense is to go their own way, I get worried.
As to elections versus civil war violence: I prefer the former.
So long as Alabama believes it has a chance to fix New York, and California believes it has a chance to fix Mississippi, I am not overly concerned. When the political classes there start thinking that fixing the other side is hopeless, and the best defense is to go their own way, I get worried.
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/im-going-to-light-him-up.html
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/epic-storm.html
Scroll down to the Mattis video.
We are supposed to understand each other?
Doesn’t he know I am defying God by defying rump?
He sat in a Cabinet meeting and worshiped Sun-God’s ass, with the rest of them.
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/im-going-to-light-him-up.html
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/epic-storm.html
Scroll down to the Mattis video.
We are supposed to understand each other?
Doesn’t he know I am defying God by defying rump?
He sat in a Cabinet meeting and worshiped Sun-God’s ass, with the rest of them.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/harvey-drowning-houston
‘Federal immigration authorities left about 50 immigrant women and children, most of them asylum-seekers from Central America, stranded at a downtown San Antonio bus station after service was canceled Friday due to Hurricane Harvey.
Barbie Hurtado, a community organizer with RAICES, a nonprofit that provides legal aid to immigrant families, said Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett, who represents San Antonio, had called immigration enforcement officials the day before to tell them not to drop families off.
“Knowing that, they just dropped them off,” Hurtado said. “These are women and children who have been released from family detention with no money, cell phones, and don’t speak English.”
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) did not immediately return a request for comment.’
I guess my fellow federal government employees ARE subhuman, shitfuck, republican, murderous, child-drowning vermin dog shit.
Conservatives would merely complain they are overpaid and shouldn’t have health insurance.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/08/harvey-drowning-houston
‘Federal immigration authorities left about 50 immigrant women and children, most of them asylum-seekers from Central America, stranded at a downtown San Antonio bus station after service was canceled Friday due to Hurricane Harvey.
Barbie Hurtado, a community organizer with RAICES, a nonprofit that provides legal aid to immigrant families, said Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett, who represents San Antonio, had called immigration enforcement officials the day before to tell them not to drop families off.
“Knowing that, they just dropped them off,” Hurtado said. “These are women and children who have been released from family detention with no money, cell phones, and don’t speak English.”
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) did not immediately return a request for comment.’
I guess my fellow federal government employees ARE subhuman, shitfuck, republican, murderous, child-drowning vermin dog shit.
Conservatives would merely complain they are overpaid and shouldn’t have health insurance.
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/iconic-picture-of-82717.html
Kick their fucking asses off Medicaid and they’ll quickly learn to do the backstroke without bleeding the gummint dry.
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/iconic-picture-of-82717.html
Kick their fucking asses off Medicaid and they’ll quickly learn to do the backstroke without bleeding the gummint dry.
He sat in a Cabinet meeting and worshiped Sun-God’s ass, with the rest of them.
If you have never in your career had to sit in a meeting with an egotistical boss, and tell him his utterly asinine idea was brilliant, you have been luckier than most of us. Be assured that, when we found ourselves there, we were utterly insincere. Just trying to get thru it and back to real work before nausea won.
He sat in a Cabinet meeting and worshiped Sun-God’s ass, with the rest of them.
If you have never in your career had to sit in a meeting with an egotistical boss, and tell him his utterly asinine idea was brilliant, you have been luckier than most of us. Be assured that, when we found ourselves there, we were utterly insincere. Just trying to get thru it and back to real work before nausea won.
Somehow I avoided that. Tried not to have too many bosses, period.
Nor was I a boss of anyone.
But I get it.
Did any of your bosses have a guy in the room carrying the nuclear codes?
wj, I appreciate your even-tempered nature, your native optimism about the future, your reasonableness, and your realism.
But, you’re fired.
No, you are NOT!
Somehow I avoided that. Tried not to have too many bosses, period.
Nor was I a boss of anyone.
But I get it.
Did any of your bosses have a guy in the room carrying the nuclear codes?
wj, I appreciate your even-tempered nature, your native optimism about the future, your reasonableness, and your realism.
But, you’re fired.
No, you are NOT!
Not that I wasn’t a general practitioner of insincerity as well.
Coming clean doesn’t work much in America below the one percent, unless it’s the regular at the end of the bar holding forth.
I work them with my insincerity too.
Not that I wasn’t a general practitioner of insincerity as well.
Coming clean doesn’t work much in America below the one percent, unless it’s the regular at the end of the bar holding forth.
I work them with my insincerity too.
When will Mattis, Tillerson, and Kelly stop being obedient to the charismatic lout rump?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nYVFO5zZiM
Human nature says its hard for them to finally say no.
Carl Icahn said no to rump.
But who says no to Icahn? He’s just like rump, but competently evil.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/carl-icahns-failed-raid-on-washington
I want to fuck with the one percent and hurt them.
When will Mattis, Tillerson, and Kelly stop being obedient to the charismatic lout rump?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nYVFO5zZiM
Human nature says its hard for them to finally say no.
Carl Icahn said no to rump.
But who says no to Icahn? He’s just like rump, but competently evil.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/carl-icahns-failed-raid-on-washington
I want to fuck with the one percent and hurt them.
Footage from Candid Camera used in “Experimenter”, the great movie referenced above:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgRoiTWkBHU
Footage from Candid Camera used in “Experimenter”, the great movie referenced above:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgRoiTWkBHU
I guess I just don’t have the stamina for constant outrage. It’s not that I can’t see the reasons to be outraged. (Although I’d probably phrase it as “horrified, shocked, and appalled.”) But I just can’t manage to keep up the emotional level.
When will Mattis, Tillerson, and Kelly stop being obedient to the charismatic lout rump?
I think the legal phrase is “assumes facts not in evidence.” How obedient are they really being? And how much do they say “Yes, sir. We’ll get right on that.” And do nothing — or, at most, put a committee together to “study” how to implement it . . . for months or years, if necessary.
Maybe they are all being entirely obedient. But I sure wouldn’t bet the ranch on it.
I guess I just don’t have the stamina for constant outrage. It’s not that I can’t see the reasons to be outraged. (Although I’d probably phrase it as “horrified, shocked, and appalled.”) But I just can’t manage to keep up the emotional level.
When will Mattis, Tillerson, and Kelly stop being obedient to the charismatic lout rump?
I think the legal phrase is “assumes facts not in evidence.” How obedient are they really being? And how much do they say “Yes, sir. We’ll get right on that.” And do nothing — or, at most, put a committee together to “study” how to implement it . . . for months or years, if necessary.
Maybe they are all being entirely obedient. But I sure wouldn’t bet the ranch on it.
I objected long ago to He, Trump’s government being a BAGA ([B]illionaires [A]nd [G]enerals [A]dminstration) strictly based on my proletarian inclinations.
I now object to the BAGASHIT ([B]illionaires [A]nd [G]enerals [A]dminstration [S]ucking up to [H]is [I]mperial [T]rumpiness) out of a sense of impending doom.
–TP .
I objected long ago to He, Trump’s government being a BAGA ([B]illionaires [A]nd [G]enerals [A]dminstration) strictly based on my proletarian inclinations.
I now object to the BAGASHIT ([B]illionaires [A]nd [G]enerals [A]dminstration [S]ucking up to [H]is [I]mperial [T]rumpiness) out of a sense of impending doom.
–TP .
I think Pence,Tillerson and a few others have started to build a fence around him. Enough space he can do his Tues Thurs chaos but slowly shrinking it.
Step outside those lines, try to fire any of those people and Ryan/McConnell take him out.
If there is any truth in that, then it’s Kelly doing the wall building – the firing of Bannon etc, and the limiting of unscheduled access to Trump – I can’t see any evidence for those two.
And that started only very recently; we will see how long Kelly lasts.
In the meantime, the Arpaio pardon happens, which to me is so far beyond any other single thing Trump has done, in being outside of amy constitutional of democratic norm that I can’t see how it can be defended by even the most partisan if they actually have a brain.
I’d be very interested in McKinney’s take on this – whether he is as deeply alarmed as I am, or whether he think it unfortunate but not particualrly consequential..
I think Pence,Tillerson and a few others have started to build a fence around him. Enough space he can do his Tues Thurs chaos but slowly shrinking it.
Step outside those lines, try to fire any of those people and Ryan/McConnell take him out.
If there is any truth in that, then it’s Kelly doing the wall building – the firing of Bannon etc, and the limiting of unscheduled access to Trump – I can’t see any evidence for those two.
And that started only very recently; we will see how long Kelly lasts.
In the meantime, the Arpaio pardon happens, which to me is so far beyond any other single thing Trump has done, in being outside of amy constitutional of democratic norm that I can’t see how it can be defended by even the most partisan if they actually have a brain.
I’d be very interested in McKinney’s take on this – whether he is as deeply alarmed as I am, or whether he think it unfortunate but not particualrly consequential..
It’s a big part of who we are. Not all of what we are, but a big part. My personal opinion is that it will never, ever, ever go away.
Tribalism is, I think, along with violence, a part of the human psyche. It’s how we evolved, and I don’t think it’s something that can ever ‘go away’.
It doesn’t really matter what the tribe is – race; religion; nationality – the instinct is the same against someone defined as the other.
There are two many examples of people readily being persuaded that friends and neighbours are less than human, even to the point of exterminating them, for this not to be a part of human instinct.
It is a foundation of civilisation that we recognise this instinct in ourselves, and crush it.
It’s a big part of who we are. Not all of what we are, but a big part. My personal opinion is that it will never, ever, ever go away.
Tribalism is, I think, along with violence, a part of the human psyche. It’s how we evolved, and I don’t think it’s something that can ever ‘go away’.
It doesn’t really matter what the tribe is – race; religion; nationality – the instinct is the same against someone defined as the other.
There are two many examples of people readily being persuaded that friends and neighbours are less than human, even to the point of exterminating them, for this not to be a part of human instinct.
It is a foundation of civilisation that we recognise this instinct in ourselves, and crush it.
Biden gets it:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/joe-biden-after-charlottesville/538128/
Biden gets it:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/joe-biden-after-charlottesville/538128/
If you have never in your career had to sit in a meeting with an egotistical boss, and tell him his utterly asinine idea was brilliant, you have been luckier than most of us.
Never. What does “had to” mean? I suppose I might do it if it were the only way to feed my children, but I have some useful talents, so it isn’t.
As a boss, I never particularly wanted my staff to tell me I was right. I could do that myself.
If you have never in your career had to sit in a meeting with an egotistical boss, and tell him his utterly asinine idea was brilliant, you have been luckier than most of us.
Never. What does “had to” mean? I suppose I might do it if it were the only way to feed my children, but I have some useful talents, so it isn’t.
As a boss, I never particularly wanted my staff to tell me I was right. I could do that myself.
I suppose I might do it if it were the only way to feed my children…
How many senior White House staffers have that excuse ?
I suppose I might do it if it were the only way to feed my children…
How many senior White House staffers have that excuse ?
I’d be very interested in McKinney’s take on this
Hope McKinney and his family are all okay.
I’d be very interested in McKinney’s take on this
Hope McKinney and his family are all okay.
I hope so too.
The scenes from Houston – and the likelihood that the weather will continue for some time – are scary.
I hope so too.
The scenes from Houston – and the likelihood that the weather will continue for some time – are scary.
I want to fuck with the one percent and hurt them.
I just want them to spend their money on yachts and their ninth fabulous home and Basquiat paintings and stop spending it on Congresspeople.
Send your kids to Ivies and pay for it all out of pocket money. Buy your kids an Ivy and send them there.
Even better, be a tax expatriate. Go live in Ireland, or Switzerland, or the Caymans. They’d LOVE to have you. You can hang out with other folks just like you and swap stories about what a raw deal you got in the good old USA.
Go Galt!! You’ll show us! We’ll be so sorry you left.
Don’t go away mad, just go away.
Seriously, go enjoy your money and leave the rest of us alone.
I want to fuck with the one percent and hurt them.
I just want them to spend their money on yachts and their ninth fabulous home and Basquiat paintings and stop spending it on Congresspeople.
Send your kids to Ivies and pay for it all out of pocket money. Buy your kids an Ivy and send them there.
Even better, be a tax expatriate. Go live in Ireland, or Switzerland, or the Caymans. They’d LOVE to have you. You can hang out with other folks just like you and swap stories about what a raw deal you got in the good old USA.
Go Galt!! You’ll show us! We’ll be so sorry you left.
Don’t go away mad, just go away.
Seriously, go enjoy your money and leave the rest of us alone.
WRS.
All that military spending, to “safeguard the nation”? You could give the upper crust $1B each to GTFO, and the country would come out ahead overall.
Or 1000 drones zeroed in on their each of their asses, their choice, but decide PDQ.
WRS.
All that military spending, to “safeguard the nation”? You could give the upper crust $1B each to GTFO, and the country would come out ahead overall.
Or 1000 drones zeroed in on their each of their asses, their choice, but decide PDQ.
“How obedient are they really being?”
Obedient is perhaps the wrong word. I’m sure there is a constant urge to eye roll in the presence of rump, and especially after they leave meetings with him, avoiding each other’s eye contact, and rush to grab the flasks from their desk drawers as they mutter “Jesus Christ on a Segway, just fuck me!”
I’m also sure the three of them are in this to pursue their own interests, which I don’t particularly trust.
To some extent, I think they marvel at the sheer lead-with-your-balls sociopathy of the shithead, but also think they could have used a little more of that when dealing with the other high-placed fuckers they’ve dealt with in their illustrious careers. None of these guys are easy marks.
rump learned long ago that the way to set people off balance from the outset is to let out a blood-curdling, take no prisoners attack yell like a Comanche warrior in a B western.
But, rump has done this his entire life. Treated people like shit, while of course, massaging their egos until he has no further use for them. And when they turn on them, it’s no contest. He will jackhammer you. And he has help from the hyenas who never leave his side.
What do we expect from someone whose role models were his father Fred and Roy Cohn? When attacked, butcher your opponent while maintaining that mask on your face of a two-bit dictator who has access to destructive resources the naive can only imagine in their worst nightmares.
And rump’s testicles tingle when that happens, He loves it. He calls it negotiating. Hitler called it Anschluss.
This is routine for him and look where it got him.
Meanwhile, these very same traits are what his base love. These tiny, powerless humans so want to tell the world and everyone around them to go fuck themselves and then go into a Mussolini stance, with the arrogant nod and say “What are you going to do about it?”
I read a tweet (I don’t twat, but sometimes I look up the feeds on the interscrews) by a college roommate of rump jr recently who related the story about the time senior rump showed up at their college room and immediately gave rump jr. the back of his hand across the face, knocking him sprawling to the floor because he wasn’t dressed properly for whatever occasion they were scheduled to attend, probably either something to do with beauty queens turned escorts or maybe senior has a business associate hung by his ankles in a dungeon at the hotel and needed help applying the car battery clamps to the guys nether regions.
See, that’s a guy who takes control of a room and fills it.
I maintain my outrage by trying to express it in the most entertaining, cracked way I can.
If I’d expressed outrage all these years like Brett Bellmore did, like it was the most reasonable opinion on the face of the Earth, I’d have expired from boredom long ago.
I also mimic the subject of my outrage and I think rump’s bloviations are calculated to sound uncalculated and crazy as the call of the loon, so voila.
“How obedient are they really being?”
Obedient is perhaps the wrong word. I’m sure there is a constant urge to eye roll in the presence of rump, and especially after they leave meetings with him, avoiding each other’s eye contact, and rush to grab the flasks from their desk drawers as they mutter “Jesus Christ on a Segway, just fuck me!”
I’m also sure the three of them are in this to pursue their own interests, which I don’t particularly trust.
To some extent, I think they marvel at the sheer lead-with-your-balls sociopathy of the shithead, but also think they could have used a little more of that when dealing with the other high-placed fuckers they’ve dealt with in their illustrious careers. None of these guys are easy marks.
rump learned long ago that the way to set people off balance from the outset is to let out a blood-curdling, take no prisoners attack yell like a Comanche warrior in a B western.
But, rump has done this his entire life. Treated people like shit, while of course, massaging their egos until he has no further use for them. And when they turn on them, it’s no contest. He will jackhammer you. And he has help from the hyenas who never leave his side.
What do we expect from someone whose role models were his father Fred and Roy Cohn? When attacked, butcher your opponent while maintaining that mask on your face of a two-bit dictator who has access to destructive resources the naive can only imagine in their worst nightmares.
And rump’s testicles tingle when that happens, He loves it. He calls it negotiating. Hitler called it Anschluss.
This is routine for him and look where it got him.
Meanwhile, these very same traits are what his base love. These tiny, powerless humans so want to tell the world and everyone around them to go fuck themselves and then go into a Mussolini stance, with the arrogant nod and say “What are you going to do about it?”
I read a tweet (I don’t twat, but sometimes I look up the feeds on the interscrews) by a college roommate of rump jr recently who related the story about the time senior rump showed up at their college room and immediately gave rump jr. the back of his hand across the face, knocking him sprawling to the floor because he wasn’t dressed properly for whatever occasion they were scheduled to attend, probably either something to do with beauty queens turned escorts or maybe senior has a business associate hung by his ankles in a dungeon at the hotel and needed help applying the car battery clamps to the guys nether regions.
See, that’s a guy who takes control of a room and fills it.
I maintain my outrage by trying to express it in the most entertaining, cracked way I can.
If I’d expressed outrage all these years like Brett Bellmore did, like it was the most reasonable opinion on the face of the Earth, I’d have expired from boredom long ago.
I also mimic the subject of my outrage and I think rump’s bloviations are calculated to sound uncalculated and crazy as the call of the loon, so voila.
It’s when I tell the real truth that my blogging manner reduces my impact.
Here’s some real truth.
Joe Biden is absolutely right. We are in grave danger from this man and his Party. They must not only be defeated but utterly destroyed.
I am not saying that in Daffy Duck’s voice.
It’s when I tell the real truth that my blogging manner reduces my impact.
Here’s some real truth.
Joe Biden is absolutely right. We are in grave danger from this man and his Party. They must not only be defeated but utterly destroyed.
I am not saying that in Daffy Duck’s voice.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/top-state-department-officials-leave
Tillerson is loser McGregor versus rump’s Mayweather. He’s got nothing in this fight.
The former can go back to the small pond of Exxon and resume his big fish fucking of the world from there.
rump will help him control us and fuck the world with measures such as this:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-roll-back-limits-military-gear-local-police
What, you think they are being armed with weapons of war, in line with rightwing militias and NRA pigfuckers, to go after the niggers and the wetbacks. I use those words because those words are now used in briefings in the White House, and if the royal you don’t think they are, royal you are royal princesses.
Sure, maybe when that airhead vacuity Ben Carson, the tool, is in the room, sniveling around rump’s pantlegs, they may use other terms.
Do we notice how the flagrantly armed right wing in this country who hates our democratic government when it’s us in power, ostensibly, not that we ever lawfully get our way, Merrick Garland, hasn’t shown up once with their weapons to protest this current zealously intrusive regulatory security state rump is building?
That’s because they like it. They like authority over the lesser mortals .. us. They kiss its big cock.
I’m assuming they are coming for me too. As you should too.
I get that the original misguided reason for so-arming the now obviously right wing paramilitary local forces in this country was terrorism in the Homeland, Jurgen. But rump’s move is nothing less terrifying that Putin’s infiltration of the Crimea’s paramiliatry forces with plainclothes Russian Army regulars and the subsequent liquidation of all opposition.
rumo loves this shit.
http://www.motherjones.com/media/2016/05/putin-russia-baltic-states-master-plan/
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/top-state-department-officials-leave
Tillerson is loser McGregor versus rump’s Mayweather. He’s got nothing in this fight.
The former can go back to the small pond of Exxon and resume his big fish fucking of the world from there.
rump will help him control us and fuck the world with measures such as this:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-roll-back-limits-military-gear-local-police
What, you think they are being armed with weapons of war, in line with rightwing militias and NRA pigfuckers, to go after the niggers and the wetbacks. I use those words because those words are now used in briefings in the White House, and if the royal you don’t think they are, royal you are royal princesses.
Sure, maybe when that airhead vacuity Ben Carson, the tool, is in the room, sniveling around rump’s pantlegs, they may use other terms.
Do we notice how the flagrantly armed right wing in this country who hates our democratic government when it’s us in power, ostensibly, not that we ever lawfully get our way, Merrick Garland, hasn’t shown up once with their weapons to protest this current zealously intrusive regulatory security state rump is building?
That’s because they like it. They like authority over the lesser mortals .. us. They kiss its big cock.
I’m assuming they are coming for me too. As you should too.
I get that the original misguided reason for so-arming the now obviously right wing paramilitary local forces in this country was terrorism in the Homeland, Jurgen. But rump’s move is nothing less terrifying that Putin’s infiltration of the Crimea’s paramiliatry forces with plainclothes Russian Army regulars and the subsequent liquidation of all opposition.
rumo loves this shit.
http://www.motherjones.com/media/2016/05/putin-russia-baltic-states-master-plan/
Can we at least confiscate their Basquiats and return them to the streets before the door hits them in their fat, walleted asses?
Can we at least confiscate their Basquiats and return them to the streets before the door hits them in their fat, walleted asses?
Also thinking about McKinney, and hoping all’s OK with him.
Count, your method of choice adds greatly to the gaiety of nations, and when there’s no gaiety to be had, it expresses our darkest leanings. We’re currently snowed under by Diana documentaries, articles etc, because it is the 20th anniversary of her death. Trying to explain why the nation went nuts when she died, many people (including her children) have been puzzled that people exploded with grief, when they didn’t personally know her. As a possible explanation, the writer Hilary Mantel quoted this recently:
This struck me as profoundly true. And Count, by expressing yourself as you do, you broadcast on a frequency quite different to the everyday, “rational” one that most of us use. But it’s an important one. Don’t stop.
Also thinking about McKinney, and hoping all’s OK with him.
Count, your method of choice adds greatly to the gaiety of nations, and when there’s no gaiety to be had, it expresses our darkest leanings. We’re currently snowed under by Diana documentaries, articles etc, because it is the 20th anniversary of her death. Trying to explain why the nation went nuts when she died, many people (including her children) have been puzzled that people exploded with grief, when they didn’t personally know her. As a possible explanation, the writer Hilary Mantel quoted this recently:
This struck me as profoundly true. And Count, by expressing yourself as you do, you broadcast on a frequency quite different to the everyday, “rational” one that most of us use. But it’s an important one. Don’t stop.
On Harvey:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-the-us-wasnt-prepared-for-hurricane-harvey/article36098669/
Excerpts:
Good government is like effective vaccines. Some people don’t know how important they are once they’ve mostly eliminated the problems that made them necessary. Only after they fail do those same people sometimes get it.
On Harvey:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-the-us-wasnt-prepared-for-hurricane-harvey/article36098669/
Excerpts:
Good government is like effective vaccines. Some people don’t know how important they are once they’ve mostly eliminated the problems that made them necessary. Only after they fail do those same people sometimes get it.
“Diana broadcast on an archetypal frequency.”
This struck me as profoundly true.
Totally agree. I wrote a piece about this a few years after she died, weaving it into the fact that Mother Teresa died a few days after Diana.
My daughter spent her early childhood drawing and making art of various kinds, while she watched movies on video (stories! she loved stories! she is now a writer of stories). For a long time, a huge proportion of her art consisted of drawings of princesses. (Not Diana, just generic princesses). My daughter wasn’t the only little girl (or boy?) to be obsessed with princesses.
Think of the fairy tales with princesses in them!
Etc.
And somehow Diana managed to carry that archetype — which was, after all, thrust on her from the outside world, you don’t actually go to school to become the princess archetype when you grow up — she managed to carry it in front of all the world with some grace and fascination, and be very very obviously a real flesh and blood human woman at the same time. It was a staggering “accomplishment” — although that’s not really the right word, I don’t know if there is a right word.
I’m not saying she was wonderful, I’m not saying she was horrible. But I don’t know if I could name anyone else who has ever done quite that thing. Think of the queen: archetypal to the hilt, not hardly the least bit human, at least as far as she lets the world get any glimpses.
The grief when Diana died — well, people are obsessed with celebrities, of course, but I think with her it was much more than that. It also had something to do with the fact that she carried that archetype for all of us. I don’t mean “for us” in the sense that she might buy a gift “for us,” or that she was “giving it” to us — but in the sense that that’s what archetypes are, they are “for” all of us, that’s the point. And a person whom the universe or dog or the FSM designates as the carrier — not actually something one would wish on oneself, I think.
GftNC — you said you’re already inundated with Diana, and here I am pontificating from afar! But you struck a chord. Time for breakfast and caffeine.
(P.S. I don’t know Warren Colman and won’t google before breakfast, but I am certainly using “archetype” in a mostly Jungian sense.)
“Diana broadcast on an archetypal frequency.”
This struck me as profoundly true.
Totally agree. I wrote a piece about this a few years after she died, weaving it into the fact that Mother Teresa died a few days after Diana.
My daughter spent her early childhood drawing and making art of various kinds, while she watched movies on video (stories! she loved stories! she is now a writer of stories). For a long time, a huge proportion of her art consisted of drawings of princesses. (Not Diana, just generic princesses). My daughter wasn’t the only little girl (or boy?) to be obsessed with princesses.
Think of the fairy tales with princesses in them!
Etc.
And somehow Diana managed to carry that archetype — which was, after all, thrust on her from the outside world, you don’t actually go to school to become the princess archetype when you grow up — she managed to carry it in front of all the world with some grace and fascination, and be very very obviously a real flesh and blood human woman at the same time. It was a staggering “accomplishment” — although that’s not really the right word, I don’t know if there is a right word.
I’m not saying she was wonderful, I’m not saying she was horrible. But I don’t know if I could name anyone else who has ever done quite that thing. Think of the queen: archetypal to the hilt, not hardly the least bit human, at least as far as she lets the world get any glimpses.
The grief when Diana died — well, people are obsessed with celebrities, of course, but I think with her it was much more than that. It also had something to do with the fact that she carried that archetype for all of us. I don’t mean “for us” in the sense that she might buy a gift “for us,” or that she was “giving it” to us — but in the sense that that’s what archetypes are, they are “for” all of us, that’s the point. And a person whom the universe or dog or the FSM designates as the carrier — not actually something one would wish on oneself, I think.
GftNC — you said you’re already inundated with Diana, and here I am pontificating from afar! But you struck a chord. Time for breakfast and caffeine.
(P.S. I don’t know Warren Colman and won’t google before breakfast, but I am certainly using “archetype” in a mostly Jungian sense.)
JanieM, no problem on the innundation front. You sound as if you might be interested in this, the article from which I took the quote. It’s one of the better and more interesing pieces of recent days:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/aug/26/the-princess-myth-hilary-mantel-on-diana
JanieM, no problem on the innundation front. You sound as if you might be interested in this, the article from which I took the quote. It’s one of the better and more interesing pieces of recent days:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/aug/26/the-princess-myth-hilary-mantel-on-diana
Thanks, I will read it later today.
Thanks, I will read it later today.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/taibbi-blame-media-for-creating-world-dumb-enough-for-trump-w499649
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/taibbi-blame-media-for-creating-world-dumb-enough-for-trump-w499649
Watch local Texas municipalities try to implement more rational land use and building code policies and then see how vermin libertarian republican right wing crypto christian fascists in the Governor’s Manse and in the State House deprive their local rights and thwart all improvement.
And the local officials aren’t invited any longer to statewide policy forums.
Republican policies are murderers, and worse, they destroy property, and what could be worse than that? Certainly not murdering human beings.
Watch local Texas municipalities try to implement more rational land use and building code policies and then see how vermin libertarian republican right wing crypto christian fascists in the Governor’s Manse and in the State House deprive their local rights and thwart all improvement.
And the local officials aren’t invited any longer to statewide policy forums.
Republican policies are murderers, and worse, they destroy property, and what could be worse than that? Certainly not murdering human beings.
strangely, i remember where i was when i heard the news that Diana had died: Cullman, AL, my mother-in-law’s house, sitting on the low white couch while my MiL and wife chatted in the kitchen.
and i remember this despite the fact that i never paid any attention to her and do not care a whit about the modern UK royal family. i asked my wife, a few weeks back why people are still fascinated with her and she was shocked that i had to ask. even after she explained it… nope. maybe it’s less of a guy thing?
strangely, i remember where i was when i heard the news that Diana had died: Cullman, AL, my mother-in-law’s house, sitting on the low white couch while my MiL and wife chatted in the kitchen.
and i remember this despite the fact that i never paid any attention to her and do not care a whit about the modern UK royal family. i asked my wife, a few weeks back why people are still fascinated with her and she was shocked that i had to ask. even after she explained it… nope. maybe it’s less of a guy thing?
Nigel: being outside of amy constitutional of democratic norm that I can’t see how it can be defended by even the most partisan if they actually have a brain.
The way our system is set up in the Constitution, the President can pardon absolutely anyone (for Federal crimes), for any reason or for no reason. So, while outside the norms of what has been done in the past, it was not outside what is allowed.
On the other hand, it definitely displays an unprecedented level of contempt for the courts. (Not “contempt of court”. That’s got an actual legal definition.) Not mention making it seem suddenly quite possible, likely even, that those involved in the Russia probe might get preemptively pardoned. That would remove their incentive to cooperate. On the other hand, it would make it harder to refuse to testify on grounds of possible self-incrimination.
Nigel: being outside of amy constitutional of democratic norm that I can’t see how it can be defended by even the most partisan if they actually have a brain.
The way our system is set up in the Constitution, the President can pardon absolutely anyone (for Federal crimes), for any reason or for no reason. So, while outside the norms of what has been done in the past, it was not outside what is allowed.
On the other hand, it definitely displays an unprecedented level of contempt for the courts. (Not “contempt of court”. That’s got an actual legal definition.) Not mention making it seem suddenly quite possible, likely even, that those involved in the Russia probe might get preemptively pardoned. That would remove their incentive to cooperate. On the other hand, it would make it harder to refuse to testify on grounds of possible self-incrimination.
From the Count’s RS-Taibbi link:
From the Count’s RS-Taibbi link:
What clerk said.
Though in my case I was enjoying coffee and jam donuts in bed on Sunday morning… a habit I’ve since had to grow out of.
And my wife is equally puzzled, rather than shocked.
What clerk said.
Though in my case I was enjoying coffee and jam donuts in bed on Sunday morning… a habit I’ve since had to grow out of.
And my wife is equally puzzled, rather than shocked.
Pro bono: What does “had to” mean? I suppose I might do it if it were the only way to feed my children, but I have some useful talents, so it isn’t.
“Had to” in the sense of otherwise I couldn’t feed my family? No. On the other hand, there’s a trade-off between a little brown-nosing (not necessarily attached to any actual work effort) vs the effort required to go job hunting. I know some people who change jobs every could of years. Me, until the last time, when I got laid off, I only changed jobs when someone came looking for me — job hunting: just not my idea of a good time!
Actually doing something, especially something that I thought was unethical (let alone illegal) would be a very different story. But just telling the boss he’s great? Not that big a deal.
Pro bono: What does “had to” mean? I suppose I might do it if it were the only way to feed my children, but I have some useful talents, so it isn’t.
“Had to” in the sense of otherwise I couldn’t feed my family? No. On the other hand, there’s a trade-off between a little brown-nosing (not necessarily attached to any actual work effort) vs the effort required to go job hunting. I know some people who change jobs every could of years. Me, until the last time, when I got laid off, I only changed jobs when someone came looking for me — job hunting: just not my idea of a good time!
Actually doing something, especially something that I thought was unethical (let alone illegal) would be a very different story. But just telling the boss he’s great? Not that big a deal.
strangely, i remember where i was when i heard the news that Diana had died: Cullman, AL, my mother-in-law’s house, sitting on the low white couch while my MiL and wife chatted in the kitchen.
I was on the phone with a friend who had called to let me know she was having an impromptu party. I told her about it while we were talking, as the breaking news flashed across my TV. Our mutual reaction was something along the lines of “Huh. That’s weird. Let’s party!”
So I guess it’s not exclusively a not-a-guy-thing (if that multi-negative formulation makes any sense).
strangely, i remember where i was when i heard the news that Diana had died: Cullman, AL, my mother-in-law’s house, sitting on the low white couch while my MiL and wife chatted in the kitchen.
I was on the phone with a friend who had called to let me know she was having an impromptu party. I told her about it while we were talking, as the breaking news flashed across my TV. Our mutual reaction was something along the lines of “Huh. That’s weird. Let’s party!”
So I guess it’s not exclusively a not-a-guy-thing (if that multi-negative formulation makes any sense).
the President can pardon absolutely anyone (for Federal crimes), for any reason or for no reason…
I know, wj (hence the reference to norms).
But it seems to me that Trump is using the Constitution against itself in the most destructive way possible.
Arpaio is someone who has quite possibly enabled multiple murders of those held in his detention. He has demonstrated the utmost contempt for individual constitutional rights, and been condemned by a federal judge.
To pardon him, as a political gesture, before he has even been sentenced does not just go beyond norms or precedent; it is a direct assault on the idea of constitutional rights or the rule of law.
This is precisely why Congress has the power of impeachment… though little good that will do for the foreseeable future.
the President can pardon absolutely anyone (for Federal crimes), for any reason or for no reason…
I know, wj (hence the reference to norms).
But it seems to me that Trump is using the Constitution against itself in the most destructive way possible.
Arpaio is someone who has quite possibly enabled multiple murders of those held in his detention. He has demonstrated the utmost contempt for individual constitutional rights, and been condemned by a federal judge.
To pardon him, as a political gesture, before he has even been sentenced does not just go beyond norms or precedent; it is a direct assault on the idea of constitutional rights or the rule of law.
This is precisely why Congress has the power of impeachment… though little good that will do for the foreseeable future.
she was shocked that i had to ask. even after she explained it… nope. maybe it’s less of a guy thing?
I myself was fairly untouched except to feel very sorry for her sons, until the funeral and its immediate aftermath which I found very moving despite myself. Interestingly, in the wall to wall coverage of people going to lay flowers, cards etc outside the various palaces in the week after she died, and throwing flowers at the hearse on every road and all the way up the motorway on her coffin’s way to its ancestral burial place, there were plenty of guys openly weeping, although maybe women were in the majority – I never saw an analysis. And I don’t think it was just gay guys either, a constituency that felt particularly strongly about her because of her AIDS work. What I do remember though was what seemed like a disproportionate number of people of colour, maybe because in so many of the pictures of her cuddling babies, they were babies of colour. And of course the landmine stuff in Angola….
she was shocked that i had to ask. even after she explained it… nope. maybe it’s less of a guy thing?
I myself was fairly untouched except to feel very sorry for her sons, until the funeral and its immediate aftermath which I found very moving despite myself. Interestingly, in the wall to wall coverage of people going to lay flowers, cards etc outside the various palaces in the week after she died, and throwing flowers at the hearse on every road and all the way up the motorway on her coffin’s way to its ancestral burial place, there were plenty of guys openly weeping, although maybe women were in the majority – I never saw an analysis. And I don’t think it was just gay guys either, a constituency that felt particularly strongly about her because of her AIDS work. What I do remember though was what seemed like a disproportionate number of people of colour, maybe because in so many of the pictures of her cuddling babies, they were babies of colour. And of course the landmine stuff in Angola….
I think everyone wants to be a princess swept away from the daily quotidian and ensconced in royal pomp and finery, despite being surrounded by frogs.
I want my pea placed in a museum one day if I ever get to sleep on it in a palace. As it is, I just rotate my princess-less tempur-pedic occasionally and in vain.
Diana also had a look and bearing of some ineffable quality, a vulnerability and the ability to radiate a feeling of empathy that mere mortals could relate to and was different from the way the royals bear themselves in public with those mouthfuls of lemons, though I’m pleased to hear the Queen downs a flute of champagne at bed time and probably puts her feet up on the royal furniture.
John Lennon knew that. He had their number and they liked that he did.
I think folks also thought at least Charles is finally having fun in the sack with the winsome Diana, although apparently not, given events recorded in the tabloids, which are completely true, according to our President, King of the Shitheads.
No doubt, however, the royal family had a tiger by the tail and she would have ordered their heads and others’ off had she been given the chance.
But mere mortals would have reveled in that too.
I think everyone wants to be a princess swept away from the daily quotidian and ensconced in royal pomp and finery, despite being surrounded by frogs.
I want my pea placed in a museum one day if I ever get to sleep on it in a palace. As it is, I just rotate my princess-less tempur-pedic occasionally and in vain.
Diana also had a look and bearing of some ineffable quality, a vulnerability and the ability to radiate a feeling of empathy that mere mortals could relate to and was different from the way the royals bear themselves in public with those mouthfuls of lemons, though I’m pleased to hear the Queen downs a flute of champagne at bed time and probably puts her feet up on the royal furniture.
John Lennon knew that. He had their number and they liked that he did.
I think folks also thought at least Charles is finally having fun in the sack with the winsome Diana, although apparently not, given events recorded in the tabloids, which are completely true, according to our President, King of the Shitheads.
No doubt, however, the royal family had a tiger by the tail and she would have ordered their heads and others’ off had she been given the chance.
But mere mortals would have reveled in that too.
Among the things that Congress must deal with in the 12 working days they have scheduled between the end of the August recess and the end of the fiscal year on Sep 30 is the National Flood Insurance Program. The program’s authorization to write new policies expires then. Also unless Congress acts, the program’s authority to borrow money will almost certainly reach its limit in the near term, greatly slowing the rate at which claims due to Harvey will be paid.
Among the things that Congress must deal with in the 12 working days they have scheduled between the end of the August recess and the end of the fiscal year on Sep 30 is the National Flood Insurance Program. The program’s authorization to write new policies expires then. Also unless Congress acts, the program’s authority to borrow money will almost certainly reach its limit in the near term, greatly slowing the rate at which claims due to Harvey will be paid.
Trump has managed to find and exploit the weak spots in our system of government. this shouldn’t be surprising, since it’s exactly how he ran his businesses – abuse the spirit of laws and regulations in order to enrich himself at the expense of everyone dumb enough to business with him.
he was a con-man and a criminal in the private sector.
anyone who thought he wouldn’t be the same in public sector probably shouldn’t be allowed outside without a helmet.
Trump has managed to find and exploit the weak spots in our system of government. this shouldn’t be surprising, since it’s exactly how he ran his businesses – abuse the spirit of laws and regulations in order to enrich himself at the expense of everyone dumb enough to business with him.
he was a con-man and a criminal in the private sector.
anyone who thought he wouldn’t be the same in public sector probably shouldn’t be allowed outside without a helmet.
Fifty percent of Houston’s underwater areas are not required to or do not have flood insurance.
This:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/you-cant-erase-urban-homeless-by-making-them-illegal/
You do realize we are under creeping martial law, do you not?
Enjoy it, regulation-haters.
Fifty percent of Houston’s underwater areas are not required to or do not have flood insurance.
This:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/you-cant-erase-urban-homeless-by-making-them-illegal/
You do realize we are under creeping martial law, do you not?
Enjoy it, regulation-haters.
I don’t why, but every time I hear about Princess Diana, I think about the fairy tale romance and misadventure Sir Paul McCartney experienced with his second wife (third, if you count Lennon), the princess whose name and leg shall not be mentioned.
Since GFNTC likes a pungent insult, this is one quoted from someone or other about Macca’s curse in a recent biography of him I read. This, after such flagrant lying in divorce Court that the Judge gave her a tongue-lashing:
“She’s such a liar that you just know we’re going to learn soon that she has two good legs after all.”
McCartney, when asked later why he was attracted to her, thought a moment, and summoning his inner cheeky Beatle, answered, “Well, mate, I have to admit it was the leg thing.”
I think Cyd Charisse’s husbands said the same thing, but for different reasons.
I don’t why, but every time I hear about Princess Diana, I think about the fairy tale romance and misadventure Sir Paul McCartney experienced with his second wife (third, if you count Lennon), the princess whose name and leg shall not be mentioned.
Since GFNTC likes a pungent insult, this is one quoted from someone or other about Macca’s curse in a recent biography of him I read. This, after such flagrant lying in divorce Court that the Judge gave her a tongue-lashing:
“She’s such a liar that you just know we’re going to learn soon that she has two good legs after all.”
McCartney, when asked later why he was attracted to her, thought a moment, and summoning his inner cheeky Beatle, answered, “Well, mate, I have to admit it was the leg thing.”
I think Cyd Charisse’s husbands said the same thing, but for different reasons.
Among the things that Congress must deal with…is the National Flood Insurance Program.
A program that should be phased out and done away with completely.
Among the things that Congress must deal with…is the National Flood Insurance Program.
A program that should be phased out and done away with completely.
Bring me tariffs!
https://seekingalpha.com/news/3291977-trump-demands-tariffs-china
America is such a drama queen. Incurable romantics. Lecture the world for decades regarding free trade and then change our minds just when the world gets use to doing what we demand.
What did we think was going to happen?
Probably this, which is posted for wj too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2GncOR7LZI
Who the fuck do we think we are?
I smell smoke:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrAKFakK3i8
I smell nuclear holocaust:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trump-seeks-cooked-intelligence-to-renege-on-the-nuclear-deal/
I smell rotting flesh set out in the sun by America the Beautiful as we wash our hands with Purell:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-saudi-led-coalitions-weaponization-of-disease/
Don’t leave the building. Everything will be fine.
Bring me tariffs!
https://seekingalpha.com/news/3291977-trump-demands-tariffs-china
America is such a drama queen. Incurable romantics. Lecture the world for decades regarding free trade and then change our minds just when the world gets use to doing what we demand.
What did we think was going to happen?
Probably this, which is posted for wj too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2GncOR7LZI
Who the fuck do we think we are?
I smell smoke:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrAKFakK3i8
I smell nuclear holocaust:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trump-seeks-cooked-intelligence-to-renege-on-the-nuclear-deal/
I smell rotting flesh set out in the sun by America the Beautiful as we wash our hands with Purell:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-saudi-led-coalitions-weaponization-of-disease/
Don’t leave the building. Everything will be fine.
McCartney, when asked later why he was attracted to her, thought a moment, and summoning his inner cheeky Beatle, answered, “Well, mate, I have to admit it was the leg thing.”
Maybe he was telling the truth, Count. I am reliably informed there is such a thing as “amputee porn”. What I like is wit, and if it simultaneously imputes extra appallingness to already appalling recipients, so much the better. The John Jay thing though, that’s in an all-time league of its own for vindictiveness, world-without-end, Amen.
McCartney, when asked later why he was attracted to her, thought a moment, and summoning his inner cheeky Beatle, answered, “Well, mate, I have to admit it was the leg thing.”
Maybe he was telling the truth, Count. I am reliably informed there is such a thing as “amputee porn”. What I like is wit, and if it simultaneously imputes extra appallingness to already appalling recipients, so much the better. The John Jay thing though, that’s in an all-time league of its own for vindictiveness, world-without-end, Amen.
I Want to Hold Your Wooden Leg.
I Saw Her Standing On One Leg There
And Your Bird Can Limp
Can’t Buy Me Leg
Day Tripper
Eight Legs A Week
You’re Lucky Just To Dance With Me
Fixing A Leg
I’m Looking Through Your Leg, Peg
I’ve Just Seen A Leg
Leg It Be
Harrrr Jude (OK, that’s a reach)
Norwegian Wooden Leg
Roll Over Beethoven, If You Can’t Get up
She Hobbled Through The Bathroom Door
She’s Leaving Home (In a Wheelchair)
The Long And Winding Road Made Impassable By Amputation
Limp and Shout
We Can Leg It Out
Why Don’t We Do It Someplace More Amputee-Friendly
You Can’t Do That, Obviously
You Never Give Me Your Prosthetic
You’ve Got To Hide Your Fake Leg Away
You Aren’t Going to Lose That Girl Because She Can’t Walk
Lucy In the Sky With No Legs
Ticket To Sit
You’ve Really Got A Hold Of My Stump
Slow Down (Like You Haven’t, Already)
Walk, Don’t Run For Your Life
And I Love Her Crutch
All You Need Is One Leg To Stand On
For No One With Legs
Limping Miss Lizzy
Got To Get Your Stump Into My Life (that’s pure early lennon humor)
I’ll Follow The Sun, You Try To Keep Up
Eleanor Legless
Carry That Leg
I think we’ve discovered a fresh angle on Beatle exegesis, GFNTC
I Want to Hold Your Wooden Leg.
I Saw Her Standing On One Leg There
And Your Bird Can Limp
Can’t Buy Me Leg
Day Tripper
Eight Legs A Week
You’re Lucky Just To Dance With Me
Fixing A Leg
I’m Looking Through Your Leg, Peg
I’ve Just Seen A Leg
Leg It Be
Harrrr Jude (OK, that’s a reach)
Norwegian Wooden Leg
Roll Over Beethoven, If You Can’t Get up
She Hobbled Through The Bathroom Door
She’s Leaving Home (In a Wheelchair)
The Long And Winding Road Made Impassable By Amputation
Limp and Shout
We Can Leg It Out
Why Don’t We Do It Someplace More Amputee-Friendly
You Can’t Do That, Obviously
You Never Give Me Your Prosthetic
You’ve Got To Hide Your Fake Leg Away
You Aren’t Going to Lose That Girl Because She Can’t Walk
Lucy In the Sky With No Legs
Ticket To Sit
You’ve Really Got A Hold Of My Stump
Slow Down (Like You Haven’t, Already)
Walk, Don’t Run For Your Life
And I Love Her Crutch
All You Need Is One Leg To Stand On
For No One With Legs
Limping Miss Lizzy
Got To Get Your Stump Into My Life (that’s pure early lennon humor)
I’ll Follow The Sun, You Try To Keep Up
Eleanor Legless
Carry That Leg
I think we’ve discovered a fresh angle on Beatle exegesis, GFNTC
Happiness is a Warm (fill in the blank)
I Will, But Can You
And we don’t want to mention Pete Townshend and The Who’s research into the matter in their album “Quadriplegia”
Happiness is a Warm (fill in the blank)
I Will, But Can You
And we don’t want to mention Pete Townshend and The Who’s research into the matter in their album “Quadriplegia”
More behavioral science in cartoon form, especially the upper left hand corner, when it comes to the stock market.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/4855512069681445/
More behavioral science in cartoon form, especially the upper left hand corner, when it comes to the stock market.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/4855512069681445/
Baby, You Can Drive My Car After We Install Handicap Controls
Baby, You Can Drive My Car After We Install Handicap Controls