It’s difficult to look beyond Trump, as he demands so much of our attention, and rightfully so, but the issue we’re facing right now is far bigger than him. We live in a time of great uncertainty and fear, and people, not just in America, but across the globe, are beginning to gravitate toward authoritarianism. And it’s completely understandable. A great many people, in times of uncertainty and chaos, want leaders they perceive to be strong — leaders who they feel would, for example, be able to let immigrants starve in concentration camps if circumstances demanded it, rather than share what they believe is rightfully ours. These people, facing economic uncertainty and a rapidly collapsing ecosystem, don’t want thoughtful speeches by professors of constitutional law. They want leaders who say things like “America first”, and don’t appear to show the least bit of emotion when asked about policies that result in the deaths of children at the border. They want this because they think that it will help them and their loved ones survive what’s coming. I couldn’t disagree more with the approach, but I can see the logic in it. I can also see why some leaders, given all of this, may have a vested interest in ensuring that we continue to slide down the slippery slope toward armageddon. It’s easier to lead the fearful. And, more importantly, there’s money to be made.
And, with the acceleration of global warming, as societies along the equator begin to implode, there’s an enormous opportunity for would-be authoritarians. We’re collectively looking for supremely confident conmen to step up, offering simple answers to complex questions, and telling us that, if we just give them what they want, we’ll be fine. And, if it wasn’t Donald Trump talking about erecting a “big, beautiful wall” (without thinking about how desperate people fleeing drought, famine and increasingly unstable and violent countries might go over, under, or through such a structure), it would have been someone else. Put simply, we had a need for someone like Donald Trump. There was a large and growing niche that needed to be filled.
I’m thinking a lot about this tonight, as I’m reading through coverage of yesterday’s G20 summit in Osaka, looking at photos of our President standing not with the democratically elected leaders of nations that we’ve long considered to be our allies, but with the likes of Vladimir Putin, who we know for a certainty directed the hacking of our 2016 election, and Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, who ordered the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, an American resident.
The day before the summit was to begin, Putin gave an interview to the Financial Times in which he said that “Western-style liberalism” had “become obsolete”, and that the ideals espoused by the leaders of western democracies were now opposed by “the overwhelming majority of the population.” And, by liberalism, he of course didn’t mean American progressivism. He meant western liberalism — or the democratic principles that our nation was founded upon. Essentially he was saying that the global tide is turning against democracy and human rights, as people being focusing more on survival.
When given an opportunity to respond, Donald Trump did not defend our system of government. He did not, like Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, say, “What I find really obsolete is authoritarianism, personality cults, and the rule of oligarchs.” Instead, Donald Trump joined Putin in condemning “liberalism,” and talking about how it had already destroyed great American cities like San Francisco. [It’s likely that Trump, not exactly what you’d call ‘a student of history,’ didn’t understand what Putin meant by “Western-style liberalism.”] Our President then went on to share a laugh with Putin about their mutual hatred of journalists, and refer to the Russian dictator as both a “great guy” and a “terrific person.” [Just a reminder, 26 journalists have been murdered in Russia under Putin’s reign, and the Mueller report is full of evidence as to what this “great guy” has done to destabilize our nation and sow discord within our borders.]
And, of course, I’m sure that, by now, most of you have seen the following footage, in which Donald Trump, when asked by a reporter whether or not he intended to confront Putin about his role in the hacking of our 2016 election, turned to the Russian dictator, and jokingly said, “Don’t meddle in the election, please.” [Just a reminder, our national security agencies have warned that Russia is already planning to interfere in our 2020 election.]
I'm trying to imagine an alternate history in which, shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt leaned over with a chuckle, and asked Emperor Hirohito not to attack again.pic.twitter.com/XsUHdkxgGk
— Mark Maynard (@MarkAMaynard) June 29, 2019
Oh, and Trump also apparently once again stood up for Putin, saying that he believed the Russian dictator when he said that he didn’t interfere in our election.
White House transcript: @RealDonaldTrump defends Putin on election interference: "We've talked about it before. You know he denies it totally.. I mean, how many times can you get somebody to deny something? But he has, in the past, denied it. He's denied it also publicly. "
— Carla Marinucci (@cmarinucci) June 29, 2019
In a more sane world, this would be reason enough to impeach a president, but instead we just acknowledge it, and brace ourselves for the next atrocity, which well all know is right around the corner.
I could go on — I have a lot more to say on why Trump feels a natural affinity for despots — but I think I’m going to break out The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt, and see how far I can make it before I just curl up into the fetal position and begin weeping. I will say, however, that we’re fast coming to the point where each of us will have to make a choice as to whether we’ll embrace authoritarianism or fight it. Like it or not, we’re coming to that point.
Personally, I don’t think that western liberalism is dead. I think, however, that authoritarians are stacking the deck in their favor by refusing to act on global warming, cutting funding to at-risk countries, and fomenting fear. And, when we allow them to do this, we’re ceding ground to them, making it more likely that they can remain in office and further consolidate power. We need leaders that can articulate this, making it clear to the men and women of America that Donald Trump wants chaos and violence because it serves his purposes and allows him to further enrich himself. And, more importantly, we need leaders that can articulate a better way forward… a way that creates jobs, addresses climate change, strengthens international relationships, and forces fewer people to leave their countries seeking better lives in the United States. Instead of talking about decriminalizing border crossings, and offering health care to those who come to the country illegally, we need to look beyond the immediate problems we’re facing today, because of Donald Trump, and talk about global leadership, and reversing the forces that are driving people here. We need to talk about international collaboration, and how, together, we can make a better world. We need to talk about the opportunity we have in front of us right now to expand human rights while working together to solve the great challenges facing humanity. In my opinion, that’s how we win.
212 Comments
It should be noted that, yesterday, when Trumped joked with Putin — a known killer of journalists — about getting “rid of” journalists, it was the one year anniversary of the mass shooting at Maryland’s Capital Gazette which left five dead.
There was a lot more I wanted to say about our authoritarianism-curious president, but I just ran out of steam. Please forgive me.
Oh, before I go, I should also note that Donald Trump referred to Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, the man who called for the murder of American resident Jamal Khashoggi, “a friend of mine” before praising him as a leader who has done a “really a spectacular job.”
Well, you can see many people have already made their decision, Mark. There is no limit to the excuses they’ll make or the offenses they’ll dismiss to “support” their guy.
You can also see the lunacy on the left. The authoritarianism is growing there as well. These factions see each other as an enemy that must be dominated absolutely. We have all seen where that notion takes things.
Of course, each side blames ideology, the “other side’s” idiology. That way they can continue to ignore their own contribution to the problem and culpability in the disaster.
It’s culture actually. This culture that we are all responsible for creating and maintaining. We take very lightly the unhealthy developments in our culture, and even encouraged and took part in many. But you won’t here any talk about that. We have to stick to it stories and continue down this same old path anyone with an education in history recognizes, though likely doesn’t really understand.
iRobert– Among your definition of ‘unhealthy developments’ in the past has been derision of social justice movements as ‘identity politics’ (a term originated on the right). Do you still stand by the belief that movements for equity and representation are threatening to cohesiveness and mutuality on the left?
To me, they seem to be a force for greater liberalization and a stronger democracy that functions better for all.
There are many forms of authoritarianism but one of them is an acute sensitivity to criticism and being held accountable by those with power, any kind of power.
Donald Trump then went directly to South Korea to complete his summer Dictator Tour.
“Leaving South Korea after a wonderful meeting with Chairman Kim Jong Un. Stood on the soil of North Korea, an important statement for all, and a great honor!”
A “great honor” to be with a man who murdered his own brother.
Did you see this video of Ivanka Trump released by French Presidential palace? They know what’s up.
https://twitter.com/parhamghobadi/status/1145074623035449357?s=21
I wonder what Otto Warmbier’s loved ones are thinking right now.
Pootin is the single greatest force promoting authoritarianism. Big surprise that he offers this self promoting and highly biased analysis.
Similarly, my “analysis” would be that liberals are all getting gunned up, physically fit, and coordinated into a civilian force that no authoritarian would dare cross by rigging elections.
I know 2+2 does not equal 4 on barkbaynard.com but try to get it right for once.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/north-korean-leaders-slain-half-brother-was-said-to-have-been-a-cia-informant-11560203662
I don’t think western liberalism is dead. I think, however, that authoritarians are stacking the deck in their favor by refusing to act on global warming, cutting funding to at-risk countries, and fomenting fear. And, when we allow them to do this, we’re ceding ground to them, making it more likely that they can remain in office and consolidate power. We need leaders that can articulate this, making it clear to the men and women of America that Donald Trump wants chaos and violence because it serves his purposes and allows him to further enrich himself. And, more importantly, we need leaders that can articulate a better way forward… a way that creates jobs, addresses climate change, strengthens International relationships, and forces fewer people to leave their countries seeking better lives in the United States.
Yeah, we are really devolving into total destruction what with WWIII breaking out and everything right now. If your choice had succeeded and we went to war as she promised you would say I am afraid of strong, principled women.
JH: “iRobert– Among your definition of ‘unhealthy developments’ in the past has been derision of social justice movements as ‘identity politics’ (a term originated on the right).”
I am, and have been for a long time an activist for social justice. My criticisms are of the deteriorated nature of some movements on the so-called left, which actually worsen conditions. You, of course want to characterize any criticism of your particular strategies as criticism of social justice movements in general. Identity politics as a term is an accurate label regardless of its origins. I believe identity politics is undermining genuine progress on social justice issues, and it may in fact be designed for that purpose. There are many on both ‘sides’ who benefit from sabotage of genuine progress.
HW: “Do you still stand by the belief that movements for equity and representation are threatening to cohesiveness and mutuality on the left?”
Do you still beat your children?
Are you trying to quote me there? I didn’t say that. And your little insinuation about me and my kids can suck it.
I don’t know about “obsolete,” but there’s no denying that people in many countries (in many parts of the world) are increasingly turning away from traditional, established parties in favor of movements that – if not explicitly authoritarian – at least lean in the direction.
In many cases, I think this tendency is largely a result of growing frustration/cynicism with political elites who have consistently said (promised) one thing, and done another.
For example – here in the U.S., over the past 40 years or so, while Republicans and Democrats have maintained some modest policy disagreements, and have mounted a series of spirited (and expensive) election battles – they have remained largely unified around what really “matters” – an elite consensus that favors low taxes, less regulation, “free trade,” unfettered power for the wealthy and corporations, and unchecked military adventurism. For 40+ years Americans have been told by leaders in both parties that following this path would improve their lives, their communities, and our nation … but I think that many are now finally starting to realize it was all a big lie.
Trump, of course, is the “most amazing, most fantastic, most beautiful, bigly-est” liar of them all – but when he tells cynical, disaffected voters he’s against the “elites,” who have stolen their future, they begin to listen. When he says he’s going to “drain the (D.C.) swamp,” many begin to cheer. And when he talks about punishing nations like China for their unfair trade practices, he begins to gain the support (and votes) of many people who feel there’s nobody in Washington who is willing to fight for them.
If/when the Democratic Party (or some other group) decides to genuinely stand up on behalf of ordinary poor, working-, and middle-class people, rather than the rich and powerful, things may begin to change. At this early stage of the Democratic Party presidential primary, there are some hopeful signs that this may be beginning to happen. If however, they decide to make the same mistake they made in 2016 (choosing the safe, mainstream, establishment candidate) – I think Trump may easily win a second term.
https://me.me/i/no-matter-who-you-vote-for-the-rich-stay-rich-21429196
I’m sorry, HW, I didn’t mean to type your initials. I meant to type Jean Henry’s. I sincerely apologize. I’m just not focusing properly while typing.
Let me repost with the initials corrected…
JH: “Do you still stand by the belief that movements for equity and representation are threatening to cohesiveness and mutuality on the left?”
Sure Jean, do you still beat your children?
No worries
https://youtu.be/nbY_aP-alkw
Aloha JB, Time to do my Putin puppet duties (who is surely a typical right wing strongman kinda guy, but no threat to us), “Pootin is the single greatest force promoting authoritarianism.” Name one country in which the Russians (under Putin) have initiated regime change in favor of an authoritarian regime.
The US under Trump, either assisted or imitated right wing authoritarian regime changes in Venezuela,Brazil, Nicaragua, and Cuba. Under Obama/Hillary Honduras and Ukraine. We sell the evilest regime (the Saudi family) on the planet billions of dollars in weapons so they can engage in genocide. American Exceptionalism, the “bi-partisan” notion that we can go into any country and if they don’t do what we want, we’ll smack you around, is the root of the problem with Putin.
My parents did not meet at Harvard and they were not lawyers but somehow I know exactly what a “complex question” is and I also know why asking those types of questions ought to be avoided.
Fix it.
Dolt, they are running a fucking empire maintaining strongman rulers in as many Soviet satellite countries as possible. Ten straight days in Georgia protesting ruskie interference ffs. Puleeze.
https://www.rferl.org/a/georgian-protests-continue-for-10th-day/30028555.html
Ukraine? Ever heard of it? Or are you cool with Crimea ceded to invading authoritarian?
“I believe identity politics is undermining genuine progress on social justice issues, and it may in fact be designed for that purpose. ” iRobert
’nuff said. He’s all for social justice and activism so long as white straight men get to define the terms and the agenda. Got it. I’m sure you’re all for representation too, so long as no one gets uppity.
I’m wondering how much social justice activism you are engaged in now or in the past 10-15 years.
Never mind, I think you just answered my question. Let me guess: you felt excluded as the targeted population assumed control of their movements and so you dropped out rather than be asked to adjust your perspective. You then conflated your personal experience with feeling left out with the undermining of the movement itself. If not you personally, it;s not an unfamiliar narrative.
There is no progressivism without creating considerable discomfort for those with power and privilege in this society. There never has been and there never will be change without struggle.
It’s surprising to be fighting against the man and then wake up one day and find you are the man, but that’s how unearned privilege works in this culture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYOjWnS4cMY
I wanted to get at a few things with this post. I wanted to talk about how authoritarianism is growing, and about how Trump is aligning himself with these strongmen around the globe… like Putin, Un and bin Salman. But I also wanted to talk about my concern that, given the palpable fear in the face of uncertainty about future, the Democrats may be playing into the hands of Trump when talking about making border crossings a civil infraction rather than a criminal offense, and extending health care to those who come into the country illegally. For one thing, I don’t think such measures would ever pass in a country that can’t even push through protections for Dreamers, when a vast majority of Americans approve. But I just don’t like the idea of fighting on Trump’s terms. Instead of talking about how we care for those being driven to our borders, I’d much rather we were talking about why they’re coming, etc.
“privilege, what privilege. I can’t see it.” every straight liberal white dude.
“yes, exactly.” everyone else.
Bonus points for straight liberal white dude listing off either progressive bonafides– “I’m a feminist”– or talking about your individual struggles, social class, etc.
People like iRobert represent as big a barrier to social progress and making the economic and social case for progressivism as people like HW and FF.
Thank you, Anonymous…. I’m going to see if I can embed the video of Ivanka here. People need to see this.
Some girls are more indoctrinated than others
Some girls are more indoctrinated than others
Some girls mothers are more indoctrinated than
Other girls mothers
Demetrius– a quick review of history will show you that populists and totalitarians and populist totalitarians also ‘promise one thing and deliver another.’ That’s the nature of power. The weakness of democracy as known when they were conceived is that they can be undermined by the will of the people alone. Plato saw that tyranny would appeal to those frustrated with the pace of change and the mediation required under democracy and that it was a threat to democratic stability, None of this is new.
Many of us are legitimately angry at the current system, but we all should be wary of the reactionary impulse to throw out the baby democracy with the bad water. Some institutions are necessary and non-partisan. We are undermining them with our divisive partisanship.
I won’t be doing this often, but here’s the context for FF’s remark.
https://www.nme.com/news/music/no-human-rights-morrissey-denies-racist-apologises-robert-smith-interview-nephew-2513623
M, our starting point is one of post cold war national level PTSD we bestowed on the Central and South Americas. With the added pressure of climate change there will be induced migration for the foreseeable future. I was stunned that the Dems, with the possible exception of Bennet, were giving an impression of casual acceptance of an open-ish border. They better be clarifying their immigration stance to include acknowledging existing law and the Executives duty to administer the law. They kinda opened themselves up to Faux News headlines “Dems Welcome Run on the Border!!!”.
I want to hear a message that says “we will administer, compassionately as possible, according to the laws on the books while we work on immigration reform reflecting reality”. Reality being that we caused the mess they flee, the climate change disruption, and demographics in the US leaving us needing more young workers.
Aloha, JB, glad to see you are with the Democrats who can’t wait to escalate our differences with Russia into a existential crises over our democracy. Was listening to the Jimmy Carter interview on Russia. Worth listening to. He was asked what to do about Russia. Other then repeating that Russia is bad, he had nothing to say. If what you believe is true, then we are already at war with Russia, and you should be promoting national unity in the face of the foreign threat. Instead you talk about the coming civil war, which you see as inevitable. Your position about Russia is just political posturing devoid of any conception of its consequences. All this tells me is that you are like JH, nothing but a tool for the military/industrial/security apparatus. That you have no problems with America’s endless interventions and the neo-liberal/conservative regime that runs our foreign policy/economy.
Authoritarianism===endless wars folks. The wars are the elephant in the room.
MM authoritarianism is combated by fighting and struggling for the “good candidate” not the “lesser evil”. In this election there is only one candidate who has the courage to take on the complex of evil that is drowning our culture in war, jingoism, migrant and minority bashing. You know who I am talking about. Tulsi will bend the arch of history towards democracy and justice and away from the evils that our endless wars have brought us.
Aloha, More Puttin puppet work. For anyone who is interested in more than sound bites, here is a link to the entire interview.
https://www.ft.com/content/878d2344-98f0-11e9-9573-ee5cbb98ed36
Not sure that adds much context. I got the reference. Morrissey appears to be at minimum a hard Brexit supporter. FF is implying I’m ideological. I assume he is referring to me as I’m the only woman commenting on this post.
Feminism is not an ideology. It’s a critical perspective. Marxism is both a critical perspective and a political ideology as a context. There’s no indoctrination. There’s no one or right why to be a feminist. There’s no ideological test. It’s a liberal construct, not a fascist one.
Sorry no glasses. “Marxism is both a critical perspective and a political ideology– as a contrast There’s no indoctrination; There’s no right way to be a feminist. There’s no ideological test. It’s a liberal construct, not a fascist one.”
You know her as Tulsi. I know her as the anti-gay cultist who does PR for war criminals.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/10/tulsi-gabbard-assad-syria-1214882
Jean Henry is right fucking on about white straight privilege. As a white straight man I can legally carry ridiculous amounts of firepower practically anywhere with no worry of violence from the state. From the Sportsman club where I’m rubbing shoulders with the cops, to the State Capitol as a political stunt if I choose. With complete impunity.
My women and poc friends at work have personal stories that reflect much greater challenges to get to the same place as me. When someone else tells you “hey it looks like privilege from my point of view” you have to trust them. Unless you’re a narcissistic dick of course. Then you can deny it and double down.
Liberal democracy ain’t obsolete Vlad. What’s obsolete is the hanging on of Imperialism and colonialism. (and racists and Nazis and Tsarist)
Dolt, national unity on the cyberwar with Russia is impossible if one side are active traitors. I don’t have time to find links, but refresh your memory on the ideological similarities of the Evangelical right and the Russian Orthodox Church, and it’s role running Russia under pootin. That’s what a bunch of them nuts laying hands on agent orange are working on for us.
I highly suggest iRobert read Robin D’Aneglo’s book on White Fragility. She really lays into liberals and progressives for being as toxic as open racists. Racism is a structure/system, not an event or an act. And racism is most profoundly enabled by those who defend or preserve the structure while condemning the acts. He’ll probably just read from selective MLK quotes for white people instead.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/08/white-liberal-racism-why-progressives-are-unable-to-see-their-own-bigotry.html
Aloha, 19 years of constant war. Citizen soldiers are now our Warriors. No Democracy can survive endless wars. Authoritarianism is the natural result of our endless regime changes, so let’s all vote for more of the same. As Tulsi says, “This insanity must stop”.
Truth, you might want to spend some more time getting to know Tulsi rather than reading political hit pieces by tools of the establishment.
Nobody is advocating throwing “baby democracy” out with the bathwater.
What I’m saying is that if the Democratic Party (or someone else) doesn’t cut the bullshit and start addressing, and delivering on a “back to basics” agenda that delivers real results for poor, working-, and middle=class Americans (instead of the MIC and multi-national corporations) – many will continue to be wooed by charlatans like Trump who talk tough and pretend to champion ordinary folks.
agreed.
JH: “you felt excluded as the targeted population assumed control of their movements and so you dropped out ”
Jean clearly believes the civil rights movement was not legitimate until very recently.
JH: “He’ll probably just read from selective MLK quotes for white people instead.”
MLK quotes for white people? You are truely insane, Jean. I know you don’t have the guts to say that crazy-ass shit to folks who have been busting their asses for many decades for every inch of progress, holding the inspiration of MLK close to their hearts. I can’t think of anything that reflects on me better than to serve as the target of your deranged hostilities. You don’t speak for anyone, and nobody with any sense would want you speaking for them. You do nothing but harm to any cause you claim to champion. You’re really that nuts. So please, continue to express what a terrible person I am in your judgement, because everyone can clearly see the value of your judgement.
The initial impulse is to defend oneself when misrepresented and maligned. But in a circumstance like this one, where these things are coming from what everyone can see is a deranged lunatic, it’s actually not something to be too concerned about. It may even be something to welcome.
Everyone who comments here has had the experience of being misrepresented and malogned by Jean Henry. In that twisted mind it seems just about everyone is a “privileged straight white man” regardless of whether they are privilaged, straight, white or male. It’s really odd. It’s especially strange coming from a person who so fits the description of this evil vision.
Mayor Pete isn’t straight.
Looks like he’s being out-privilaged at the moment too.
I don’t think it is a good idea for Mark to provide context. It creates too much work for him. Mark is going to have to now get out his chisel. The inscribed golden tablets he reluctantly brought down to us from atop the hill do not give THE context at all. I knew absolutely nothing of Morrissey’s politics. After reading the article I still have no idea about his politics. I only know what other people said.
I was just trying to accuse Jean, in a rhyming sort of way, of being deeply indoctrinated into a slander-for-power-cult. It was kind of a joke… I would not provide that NME article for context at all though. This stuff is better for context imo:
https://youtu.be/Uid7RrXBY2A
https://youtu.be/BLSLx5wt9Fg
https://youtu.be/APPpFrIGFQ8
I also wonder what “story is being told” by the look on Lagarde’s face. I don’t get it at all. This is supposed to mean something? Lagarde’s face means something to AOC? Lagarde’s face confirms some held meaning about Ivanka ?
What is their conversation about. I must have missed THE context.
#unwantedivanka is now a thing.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/01/ivanka-trump-g-20-prompts-unwantedivanka-edited-photos/1615522001/
Funny though it is … I also suspect Trump is grooming her to be his successor.
iRobert:
RE: “MLK quotes for white people? You are truely insane, Jean. I know you don’t have the guts to say that crazy-ass shit to folks who have been busting their asses for many decades for every inch of progress”
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/martin-luther-king-jr-s-true-radical-legacy-being-whitewashed-ncna960756
Speaking of which;
Tucker Carlson: “You’ve got to be honest about what it means to lead a country, it means killing people”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-leading-a-country-means-killing-people
“Jean clearly believes the civil rights movement was not legitimate until very recently.”
Totally inaccurate. I believe the movement has evolved and become deeper and more effective over time. That’s why they call it a movement. Understanding how movements have evolved in no way belittles their past. Social movements require growing social awareness to make them viable. iRobert appears to have stopped his in 1968 and edited out anything difficult or challenging even then. None of these ideas about white privilege are contemporary. The idea of double consciousness which is the source for white privilege concepts comes from Dubois.
Remember when the idea of white supremacy, like patriarchy, being something foundational and current in American culture was so offensive to many commenters here. That’s standard. This crew is really lost. I’m glad to introduce them to these foreign concepts.and take their insults as being bat shit crazy. Because that means when they here it the next time it may ringa bell and maybe they will start to listen. If not that time, the next or the next.
Awareness is the first step to progress. I do what I do here with great intention and cause. They are not my own ideas, nor are they fringe ideas. They certainly aren’t new. except to some people here.
“”We’re taught to think of racism as individual acts of intentional meanness across race. That it’s always an individual, it has to be conscious, and it must be intentional. That definition exempts virtually all white people from the system that we’re all in and that we’ve all been shaped by. It is the bedrock of our country. That changes the question from “If I’m racist,” [to] which most white people would answer “No,” to “How is this manifesting in my life?” Because it is. It’s on me to figure out how.”
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/08/white-liberal-racism-why-progressives-are-unable-to-see-their-own-bigotry.html
iRobert– in case I was too long winded before, when I use a phrase like “selected MLK quotes for White people” to POC of any age, they know EXACTLY what I mean without explanation or validating link. And no, they are not offended. At least not by me.
Washington Post: “Trump asks for military tanks on the Mall as part of grandiose July Fourth event”
Read more:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/trump-asks-for-military-tanks-on-the-mall-as-part-of-grandiose-july-fourth-event/2019/07/01/e9d274ee-9adc-11e9-8d0a-5edd7e2025b1_story.html
Mark, Julian Castro just made your point at a town hall in Frisco, Texas. He said that we should be talking about increasing safety and creating opportunities in Latin American countries so that illegal immigration isn’t an issue.
Good god Jean. Who are these supposed people you are educating and bringing into a higher degree of social awareness? The main reason I bother to engage with you is because I think you embody obvious forms of toxic masculinity and I think if you became aware of it the world would be a better place.
You are the functional equivalent of a mansplaining machine. I see no difference.
Similarly, some girls are bigger than others.
Women with opinions really scare you don’t they, FF?
PS I believe reverse sexism exists. Your charges give a lot of credibility to those who claim it doesn’t and can’t.
PS I feel really ok about condescending to you lot about structural racism and sexism.
PS It’s too bad your parents didn’t go to Harvard, because they can’t write letters as Alumni to the Kennedy School demanding they not hire Gov Snyder. Mine can.
PS They aren’t both lawyers. My dad is, as was his father and grandfather in the small town where I grew up. My mom is an adult literacy advocate and educator. They were both lifelong Republicans until 2008. You’d probably like them.
No Jean.
It does not bother me that the goddesses of Truth, Justice and Wisdom are without pricks either.
(Some girls mothers are bigger than other girls mothers.)
What the UN Special Rappatuer on Torture has to say on this very topic . Tulsi is the only candidate who free Assange Manning and pardon Snowden. And you wonder about our slide into authoritarianism. https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian-assange-b252ffdcb768
Assange, by all accounts, has his own authoritarian streak to match his martyrdom one, like our President of whom Assange is a fan.
Fuck Assange. Hang him for treason next to Agent Orange on the Citgo canopy. I thought WikiLeaks was a good idea at first too Dolt, but once he went to work with pootin he became an enemy of the USA.
Mayor Pete is doing OK bringing in the Benjamins.
Not like those privileged straight white males Biden and Bernie.
Still not bad for a kid from the Midwest.
Pete went to a Harvard.
I bet he isn’t happy about Snyder.
This is what you said Jean: “you felt excluded as the targeted population assumed control of their movements and so you dropped out ”
When called on this absurd suggestion that the “targeted population” was not in control of their own movement initially, you responded “I believe the movement has evolved and become deeper and more effective over time.”
That doesn’t jive with what you suggested. The “targeted population” never had to assume control of their own movement…their own creation. It’s offensive and insane to suggest the civil rights movement was not originally their own creation, their own movement. But you are prone to the offensive and insane. This is just one very clear example.
JH: “That’s why they call it a movement.”
That’s just dumb. It of course is not why it is called a movement. Pure ridiculousness.
But, by all means, keep on spewing the insanity. It’s never going to fly and you’ll continue to be a pariah.
You are right iRobert. POC were always in control of the civil rights movement. I should have said that POC are now challenging liberal Americans with the movement. The narrative has deepened and broadened and the criticism of white supremacy become more detailed and acute. (A parallel to the women’s movements evolution over the same time span) In order to get critical civil rights legislation passed many in the movement mediated their message and narriwly focused their demands. The passage of that legislation also relied heavily on change of heart among white politicians and citizens– and so the message was often one of conciliation. (Though even MLK at the end was targeting white liberalism more specifically as well as focusing on persistent poverty and structural racism.)
The undertaking now is the dismantling of structural racism that is less acknowledged but has clearly had a similar impact. Mass incarceration, new forms of voter suppression and subconscious bias and discrimination by employers, schools, health care providers, banks, etc etc The New Jim Crow. This work is newly challenging to the status quo which is white privilege. It is, in particular, challenging to white liberal progressives who have run many of our major cities and states with high POC populations where many of this systemic bias is perpetuated.
I’m done talking to you about this. HAve you read The New Jim Crow or White Fragility? I suggest you do. Then maybe you wouldn’t find my points so shocking.
There should probably be a little less discussion of Jean Henry and a lot more about Mayor Pete.
Looks like he might have beat Bernie in the fund raising.
Thanks to the silent majority of MM reader for donating to Pete. He couldn’t have done it without you.
Labeling everything as white privilege isn’t a strategy that’s going to go anywhere.
Winning hearts and minds is how progress has been made primarily. As older generations have been handing off power to the younger ones, much has improved. Young people don’t have the hang-ups the geezers so. Attacking people for things they’re not guilty off will only serve to create new tensions, new resentment, and new hostilities. It’s a dumb strategy and will fail miserably.
Martin Luther King’s wisdom was timeless and serves as an example for strategy regarding all struggles for social change. Disarming the opponent is a key part of the strategy. It has proven very effective.
The things you say and do only cause defensiveness, resistance, and promote new hostilities, on all sides. Circumstances can not improve with increased hostilities. The approach that you personally perceive as soft is actually the stronger approach. That’s the brilliance of Gandhi, MLK and others.
Racists welcome your strategy, because it’s feeding their numbers. It’s raising hostilities and providing very easy arguments for opposition.
The strategy you promote doesn’t even work for you personally. You are a pariah. No one wants you speaking for them. No one wants you on their side. No one is interested in your racism and hatred. Except those that want division and increased tension. That’s where you’re finding your allies.
iR, I think you need a break man. You seem to be forgetting the critical context that we’re all obviously fucked in the head for coming to MM to be abused by each other, and to abuse in return.
Aloha Reading JH and JB’s response to the UN Special Rapatour explains our slide into authoritarianism. Politics is more important than principles. Personalities are more important than policies.
Thanks for the welfare check, JB. I’m doing fine really. I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about the Maytard community. I’m actually vacationing more than ever nowadays.
I realize my peace and love talk runs you the wrong way, but rest assured that I’m locked and loaded for the big civil war. Until then I’m going to keep talking peace and love, and bringing people together in non-violence.
Mayor Pete is definitely the peace and love candidate this go round.
Russia’s state TV host Evgeny Popov says that at the #G20, “Putin completely captivated Trump, we can now say with complete certainty that Trump is ours.” Co-host Olga Skabeeva adds: “He wants the U.S. to be just like Russia… and himself to be just like Putin.”
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1146044140033126406
Dolt, while John Brown uses his fair share of hyperbole, your assertion that my reaction to Assange and Snowdens treason explains a slide into authoritarianism is not based in reality. You fail to acknowledge the actual Americans doing civil service jobs on our behalf whose lives were put at risk by these indescrimant leakers. Face it, these guys started with a noble idea, but were quickly exploited by authoritarians in support of their mission to further undermine Democracy.
You may not agree with the current goals and mission of the CIA, but I hope we can agree that changing political leadership and policy is the way to address this. Not exposing well intentioned fellow Americans to assassination. At least thats what my deep state buddies think happened. See iR, I’m all for national unity.
Aloha JB, sounds like rationalizations. Freedom of the Press will soon be dead. No evidence that any one other than Chelsea Manning and Assange were physically harmed by anything Assange has done. Keep spinning the lies and misinformation that your deep state buddies feed you. Thanks for proving my point.
Glad I could help you feel good about yourself! But if authoritarianism is your concern, many of us think wikileaks is one of the reasons we have an actual authoritarian wannabe in the White House. How does that fit your narrative again? All deep state lies? You and HW should share some common ground on this.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wikileaks-hillary-clinton/
Aloha JB, You will have to explain how locking up publishers and curtailing freedom of the press is some how going to further democracy and stop authoritarianism. May be your “deep state” buddies will give you some additional misinformation to argue with. Any luck on finding others who have been physically harmed by Assanges and Wikileaks publishing? Remember the most important thing is to kill the messenger–best way to control the flow of information
Wikileaks is not a publisher DD. And yes, there are limits to the right to a free press. You can’t commit a crime to get your information, for instance.
“The things you say and do only cause defensiveness, resistance, and promote new hostilities, on all sides.” — no just among unevolved white dudes.
Dolts for Putin, When they were co-opted by pootin Assange and Snowden stopped being the messenger. Imagine if Woodward and Bernstein had gotten played by a foreign power wanting leverage instead of immediately publishing. One minute you’re a journalist, the next you’re complicit.
From the Journalistic code of ethics: – Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.
So “avoid political or other outside activities….” would probably cover Assange getting played by pootin and Agent Orange, nevermind Snowden taking refuge in ruskie-ville.
https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
As far as harm done to individuals; how many more beatings, killings (khashoggi?), imprisonments have there been because of Agent Oranges illegitimate presidency? Hard to say for sure, but I’d guess plenty.
Yes, he is right, liberals and their crazy ideas are obsolete. That’s why we need Trump more than every. Look at how much of a mess liberal states are. People don’t work, they just sit around and get money from the government.
And Snowden is a whole ‘nother freak altogether. Kinda reminds me of a higher functioning George Zimmerman. If he hadn’t washed outta the army he’d probably be agitating and doing IT for the Proud Boys at their big 4th of July riots coming up in DC.
Can we agree “journalists and publisher” don’t mean just any asshole with some information and an internet connection?
Anonymous, thats a good one> LOL . I’m sure everyone at MM can agree those fucking GOP are the real welfare queens, but with good propagandists at Faux News.
“In total, the blue states have a GDP of $11,1 trillion while the red states have a GDP of $5.6 trillion”
http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/size-red-blue-economy
Jean, you come across as a privileged white dude.
Jean, you equate your idea of social justice movements with ALL social justice movements. That’s so narcissistic and obviously innacurate.
When anyone criticizes you, you chose to deflect by claiming it’s becaise they have a problem with women. No, Jean, face it; people have a problem with you. Men who have a problem with women generally don’t have as much of a problem with women who act like a stereotypical man. Your behavior is much more like that of a streotypical man.
You are just trying to avoid facing the fact that it’s with you and how you conduct yourself that people so often have a problem. Your desperate need to lie to yourself about that is glaringly obvious. Don’t blame all women for your offensive conduct. Don’t try to hide your offensive conduct by attributing to women in general. The vast majority of women accomplish anything and everything you have, and more, without misrepresenting others, and without trying to feed hostilities (on all sides).
You are a scapegoater, Jean. You’re looking for others to blame for your personal conflicts. You’re looking to project your personal issues onto entire genders.
All of my rotten behavior is my doing. I certainly don’t attribute my faults to all men. That would be narcissistic and absurd. Whatever problems anyone here has with me, I know it’s with me. It’s with what I say and with how I say it. I have no need to make myself feel better about that by lying to myself and saying it’s because I’m male that everyone here is offended by me.
When people say they don’t agree with my ideas about social justice, I don’t pretend it’s because they are against social justice. That’s just so pathetic.
I hope you gave yourself a little more honestly and adress this obnoxious behavior. But we know how difficult that is to do at our advanced age.
There has been no evidence presented that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that Russia supplied the hacked emails to Assange, merely that Russian operatives hacked an unsecure server, as did others. And there is no evidence that Assange committed any crime to get possession of the emails. Assange has repeatedly denied getting the information from Russians. There is evidence that shows the downloading of the emails was too rapid to have been accomplished over the Internet. The speed of the download is consistent with an onsite transfer to a flash drive. Stealing information is a crime, but I think the Pentagon Papers determined that printing stolen information is not. JB, If your argument is that Assange is not a member of the “press” he still has the freedom of speech to which all individuals are entitled.
Assuming all whites have privilege and that all POC lack privilege is racism. All “isms” won’t be defeated by making generalized statements about a heterogeneous group of people, but by embracing each and every individual as contributing to the diversity of the group. Assuming anything about an individual as a result of categorizing them into an “identity group” is a logical fallacy. Everybody deserves to be treated with equal respect.
Do yourself a favor, Jean and listen to what these guys are trying to tell you. It might not feel like it but they are trying to help you grow into a higher understanding. You seem to imagine you have some kind of cutting edge understanding on the war for equality and justice. You assume we don’t know what you are talking about. We know exactly what you are talking about and we see theNECESSARY flaws in your strategies and their programmed to fail (il)logical grounding. The irony is you think we just haven’t been exposed enough to your ideas to see how great they are. It couldn’t be further from the truth. You and your ideas are going to be a museum piece “on times past” in about 15 years. Your ideas, and your logic are dying a slow death. Understanding will speed up the it death but you need to self reflect more.
Yeah Jean. Listen to the white dudes. They obviously know more about sexism than any woman could ever know!
Nobody is telling Jean anything about sexism, Lynn. Jean is suggesting anybody who has a problem with her personally, has a problem with all women. That’s just crazy, and an obvious indication that she can’t take responsibility for her own conduct. If Jean were responding with “you just feel threatened by old people” that wouldn’t mean we all thought we understood better than Jean what it’s like being old. Would you then step in to say “Yeah Jean. Listen to the little kids. They obviously know more about being old than any senior citizen could ever know!”?
Lynne should listen to what iRobert and EOS saying too. The world is leaving the bigot brains of all stripes behind. It will be a sad day for Lynne and Jean when their kind of thinking has all died out but it will be a good day for everyone else. Humanity is going to graduate from Kindergarten soon. It is going to be awesome.
Sure Lynn,
How can a man possibly have an opinion?
Identity fallacy. It’s when the argument is dismissed based on the arguer’s social class, race, gender, etc:
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/234/Identity-Fallacy
That kind of logic can be taken to absurd conclusions. Should one be a dog to argue for animal rights? A cow to argue that killing animals for food is bad or acceptable? a moral philosopher or bioethicist with credentials and who is trained in their field has a far higher probability of underatanding gender-related and female-related ethical issues than a feminazi whose only credential is “knowing what it’s like to be a woman.”
This about drawing a line in the sand and saying you shall not…Also, Dude, feminazi is not the preferred nomenclature.
https://youtu.be/PNsNWimFgWc
Mayor Pete is gay.
He probably knows more about being gay than EOS.
Make your donations early so he can can continue to amass that war chest to defeat Trump. He raised half the money Trump raised. Not bad for a kid.
Bernie and Biden are already starting to ride into the sunset.
Mayor Pete might be able to help make western style liberalism popular again.
Don’t you agree EOS?
iRobeet— where have I ever suggested that people who have a problem with me personally have a problem with all women?
Please back up your statement.
That’s not how I feel nor is it what I said. Ever. Not sure how you got that idea.
I’m fine with ppl disliking me. I think I’ve made that clear here.
I’m especially fine with provoking this particular group to this degree with statements I made that I can easily stand by. I’m upsetting all the right people. I’m happy to take responsibility for that.
Jean, it may have been strong women or opinionated women which you most often suggested others are threatened or intimidated by, but you may have also suggested just women in general at times as well.
Still, the response is a dodge. If every time you tried to take issue with something someone said, they would respond by saying you just don’t like men, or that you hate white people, you’d recognize the pattern as unproductive. It would render thoughtful discussion and argument impossible.
As far as provoking and upsetting particular people goes, I don’t think anybody would doubt that you are fine with that and happy to take responsibility for it. What it seems you are not entirely fine with sometimes, is supporting your assertions with reason. In those moments it seems you don’t want to take responsibility for the assertions you’ve made, and so resort to dodging. diversion, and making dismissive accusations.
I have always thought there was something odd about this video but I have finally figured it out the exact oddity. The fraud-ity (so to speak) is revealed at 2:45- 3:48. I invite you all to take a look. This ought to serve as a prime example of why we ought not trust the straight white male perspective ever again. What are the odds that Tom , who refers to his “wife”, is also a white male? Ummm, the odds are like 100% folks! What are the odds ground control is made up of white straight males? White-straight-male-astronaught-song-about-white-straight-males, sung by the same and probably filmed by the same.
I am just glad that we finally, fifty years later, see strong women like Jean dismantling the patriarchy by asking iRobert, who represents the white straight male perspective, for the evidence of the truth claims he has made from his privileged white male perspective.
Don’t be surprised when iRobert never provides evidence. He is afterall floating around in a tin can far far away.
We have finally made the grade!
The planet earth is blue and there is nothing else to do.
https://youtu.be/iYYRH4apXDo
If FF, EOS and I responded to every criticism from you with things like “You just hate white people” or “You just don’t like men,” you would recognize those sorts of responses as dodges and attempts by us to feel all men or white people are on the same page with our opinions, or at least generally are.
I’m sure you don’t care what other commenters here think of you, and I would expect that’s probably true of most of us, if not all of us. I don’t think anyone here thinks that’s a bad thing, or anything but understandable.
You do want your opinions heard though, and that would happen more effectively if you would defend them properly. It might be that you let frustration get the best of you and so abandon a reasoned defense or argument of your assertions. I often abandon things I’m trying to say here, partly out of frustration, partly out of indifference, and largely out of laziness.
I will never abandoned my efforts on behalf of Mayor Pete ( unless he does something reprehensible) i’m willing to put in the time and erfort for a new generation of leadership. I think he is one of our only options.
He’s is the opposite of Trump.
IRobert— I’m the one who provides links and references to back up my statements on racism and sexism. You guys never do— oh except the occasional MLK pull quote, the use of which I and many others (linked above) have addressed when used to demand compliance and complacency in social justice movements.
Creating discomfort is absolutely part of the process of talking about issues of social v economic justice. It always has been. Many people can fool themselves that they are not wealthy (I’ve seen 1%ers do it) but it’s hard to deny one is white or male.
Privilege is simply the end result of structural racism and sexism. Just like marginalization is. I do not blame anyone for their privilege. I simply ask them to acknowledge it and live up to the responsibility to dismantle it by starting first with ourselves. I have great privilege myself. Most of us have some forms of privilege and experience some forms of bias. For most white straight cis men it’s clear to a great many people that they have a harder time seeing their privilege. It’s not much different than economic privilege in how it works. I know you all see how economic privilege functions. Many of you seem to think dismantling economic privilege matters at least to some extent. I don’t understand why you can’t simply apply that to issues of social justice as well.
You claim to not be defensive about this. You claim I simply am misconveying your points and perspectives, but for the most point I am simply reflecting your own points in your own words back to you. As for your perspectives, well it’s the nature of perspectives to have blind spots. We must rely on others to show us ours. I personally am going to rely on people who don’t reflect quite so much hostility towards me to show me mine. Thanks for the feedback though.
Your primary argument against me is that I hear you saying things that you don’t mean which upsets you and makes you dislike me. I hear that and I’m trying to tell you that’s my intent.
It just dawned on me that there might be other ways to interpret that David Bowie song.
I hope the GOP nazis dont kill anybody this 4th of July. That would be a weird way to celebrate independence from authoritarian rule.
“Far-right extremists are trying to use the unsubstantiated “cement milkshakes” rumor as a justification for shooting and killing #antifa. ” – Caroline Orr
https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/1146188483339464706
Me , I’ll be down in Frogeye
and you’ll know I lost control
When I build a fire on Main Street
And shoot it full of holes
Jean,
It is your assumptions about privilege that are factually incorrect.
https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/44-children-in-poverty-by-race-and-ethnicity#detailed/1/any/false/871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133,38,35/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/324,323
There are greater numbers of whites living under poverty conditions than any other race. It is wrong to assume that every white cis male is privileged. You shouldn’t make generalities about any group. Many persons of all races succeed as a result of their efforts.
I should have studied the chart better. While more whites than blacks are poor, Hispanics are in the lead. Still, there are comparable numbers of poor in all races.
Far right extremists are trying to use the unsubstantiated claim that Fake John Brown intentionally wears his pants too tight. They are wrong. In fact he is not referring to tight pants those although he does not mind the mix-up at all. He is actually referring to goggles. It keeps the quicklime, urine, and other chemical irritants that his buddies are throwing around out of his eyes. Frogeyes might even help with the occasional milkshake splatter.
Mostly though Frogeyes are worn by children when their parents take them to the swimming pool.
JH: “Your primary argument against me is that I hear you saying things that you don’t mean…”
No, you either deliberately or unintentionally misrepresent what others say.
JH: “…which upsets you and makes you dislike me.”
It is offensive behavior, but I’m not upset about it. Whether anybody likes or dislikes anybody else here is irrelevant. There’s no reason for anyone to concern themselves with that.
JH: “I hear that and I’m trying to tell you that’s my intent.”
What you’ve expressed suggests you once again have not “heard” anyone, and choose rather to shift to something that is not relevant and appears to be an emotional defense mechanism.
Generally, you did explain more and more clearly than usual though. So I’m seeing that as a good thing.
I’m sure we’ll have more opportunities to illustrate what we are saying. But you can not worry yourself about people here disliking each other. I’d assume you’d agree that stuff just don’t matter here.
Mayor Pete is starting to come out with policy. Just like you all wanted.
Today voluntary national service opportunities.
A young person thinking about young people.
Finally.
Aloha,
Our “leaders” want war so bad …
what do you want/
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/07/on-eve-of-4th-of-july-parade-us-attempts-to-lure-iran-into-shooting-down-another-us-plane.html#more
JH makes statement distinguishing economic privilege from racial privilege>
EOS counters by showing there are many poor white people too.
JH is accused of just not listening.
Jean, is Mark charging you by the word to post comments here now? I can’t say it’s a bad idea, but now your comments read like a Q-anon clue dump.
Your comment reads like an 1800s telegram. You should have put “- stop -“ at the end of each sentence.
Don’t get me wrong. I think we all appreciate the brevity.
I don’t want to speak for EOS, but I think what he might be wondering, Jean, is how all those white folks laking economic privilege haven’t been airomatically rescued by their white privilege.
By the way, could we get a full list of all the privileges from you, Jean? Let’s see there’s white privilege, and economic privilege, and male privilege of course…what are the rest of them?
Thorough attempts at accounting of intersectionality on the individual level collapses the identity politics project instantly. Their “project” is a very flimsy-schtick-for-power and almost everyone who has taken a second to think about it knows it has nothing to do with making the world a more Just place.
I don’t know about that, FF. I think you might be sanity privilaged, logic privilaged, and/or intelligence privilaged.
FF and iRboert think Trump is a self made man.
Mayor ?Pete openly acknowledges his privileges have helped him in his move towards the White House .
EOS doesn’t notice the percentages on his poverty list. Why is there a stark difference in each groups percentage in poverty? Do iRobert,FF, and EOS just think some races are inferior or do they struggle with systemic barriers to advancement.
Happy Independence Day!
Don’t forget to make a donation to ?Mayor Pete for a better future.
You’re an idiot, Sad. I think Trump is a freak puppet.
When am I going to see you in Iowa campaigning for your Mayor Pete. He’s going to need your help getting over that first hurdle.
I’m still partial to that Michiwauka dog catcher.
By the way, Sad, why does Mayor Pete want black people shot in South Bend? The Michiwauka dog catcher doesn’t even shoot rabid dogs.
Mayor Pete seems to be doing pretty well getting over hurdles without my assistance.
A small town Indiana mayor who is the number one fundraiser in the 2020 presidential race.
How many dogs does your man catch.
If longing for social change earns me the moniker of “idiot” i’ll take it.
Even a $3 donation to Mayor Pete would be appreciated.
I assume the Michawauka dogcatcher is catching dogs at a rate even higher than that of white South Bend cops shooting unarmed black men.
IRobert it’s those type of comments that have made you a social pariah in certain circles but allowed you to bond with FF. There is someone for everyone.
I really like Mayor Pete’s husband. Lucky guy.
Time to get ready for the party.
My parents didn’t meet at Harvard but….Trump is not a self-made man. There are no self made men. Swiss family Robinson was a movie. Racism and sexism exist in our systems and the legacy of past “isms” imbedded in our systems is still felt today, obviously. Nothing i have ever said should lead anybody to believe I think otherwise.
You need to get on the ball, Sad.
Buttigieg slips in polls despite fundraising
https://www.cbsnews.com/live/video/20190703171532-south-bend-mayor-pete-buttigieg-slips-in-polls-despite-strong-fundraising-numbers-with-24-m-raised-in-q2/
At this rate, Mayor Pete is going to be throwing one hell of a withdrawal party.
Sad,
My choices here have been you, Jean, and FF. What choice did I have really?
I understand why African Americans don’t like Mayor Pete. But why does he hate them so much?
Has FF made their gender public here, Sad. Are we assuming FF is male? Have we made any progress in our investigation of EOS’s gender?
I never said anything about the gender of FF did I?
I could care less.
The polls go up and down. It’s a long road to Iowa.
A person can hope. Our first queer kid president. That’s exciting!
Gonna meet you there….
https://youtu.be/gUcisIlT7sM
How much less could you care, Sad?
Maybe Lil Nas X could help Mayor Pete with his outreach efforts?
Happy 4th! Hope everyone takes a few minutes to reflect on how blessed we are to live in such a great country.
Maybe weird Al Yankovic could help too.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc
I think think Al is already helping Bernie.
I would wish you a happy 4th too, EOS, but I don’t want to upset Sad. He’ll think we’re bonding over our common white male privilege. So I’m going to wish Sad a Happy Independence Day, and accuse you, HW and FF of being white male privilaged nazis. It is apparently the only thing I can say or do that brings Sad comfort.
“By the way, Sad, why does Mayor Pete want black people shot in South Bend? The Michiwauka dog catcher doesn’t even shoot rabid dogs.”
iRobert wants Sad to explain why black people are not like rabid dogs.
That’s true stupid hick. Why can’t Mayor Pete at least give unarmed black men at least as much deference as rabid dogs get?
I mean, what does Mayor Pete have against black people?
I can certainly understand what they have against him. It’s a little like how black people avoid Mark. But Mark loves all people. Still, that doesn’t get any black people to feel any better about him.
Fortunately, Kamala Harris is eating Mayor Pete’s lunch. We can start making plans for Mayor Pete’s big withdrawal party.
Sad could care less. I’m still wondering how much less though.
Less than zero…..
i Robert— there are as many types of privilege as there are types of inequity. I’m not sure why you think privilege is such a ridiculous concept. Obviously inequity would indicate that some ppl have power and others don’t. That there is more than one kind of power seems surprising to you. Or is it just surprising that you have any?
The answer is pretty simple, Jean.
It’s obviously not that there is more than one kind of power that is difficult for anybody to understand. So it’s a little strange that you’d waste time saying that.
JH: “ there are as many types of privilege as there are types of inequity.”
I asked about other ones rhetorically, just to mock, really.
JH, “I’m not sure why you think privilege is such a ridiculous concept.”
And you don’t seem too interested in the answer either.
JH: “Obviously inequity would indicate that some ppl have power and others don’t.”
Yes, that is obvious.
JH: “That there is more than one kind of power seems surprising to you.”
How does it seem like a surprise to me? It is obvious that there are more than one kind of power. My asking you about other privilages was in mockery.
JH: “Or is it just surprising that you have any?”
That sounds like just mockery feom you now. Bit to answer the question, no, that’s another thing that’s obvious and naturally we can assume just about everyone understands.
Frosted Flakes seems to have put it most concisely.
http://markmaynard.com/2019/06/is-putin-right-when-he-says-that-western-style-liberalism-is-obsolete/#comment-947587
IRobert— I understood you were mocking. I wasn’t referring to your list. That list was based on an idea of a meritocracy where the most gifted rise to the top. We know we don’t have that. look at our president. (I’d be happy to have a meritocracy btw.)
When I said there are many kinds of privilege I was saying that your focus on economic privilege and oppression alone was ignoring other kinds of oppression. If one can talk about and dissect and attempt to dismantle economiv privilege, why can’t one talk about dissent and attempt to dismantle privilege accorded by race and gender privilege in the same way?
Anonymous: here’s FF’s statement you linked:
‘Thorough attempts at accounting of intersectionality on the individual level collapses the identity politics project instantly. Their “project” is a very flimsy-schtick-for-power and almost everyone who has taken a second to think about it knows it has nothing to do with making the world a more Just place’
I’m going to address his use of the term ‘accounting’ here. It’s ibterssting because it’s both the right word but it assumes the wrong intent. we are in fact in a time when we are taking an accounting of the different forms and expressions and dimensions of race and gender and sexual identity and other privileges. But we don’t do so to create a new hierarchy, which privileges the marginalized (this is the inherent assumption behind resistance to most efforts to dismantle inequity— that it’s a power grab) We make an accounting of the individual impacts of bias to do 2 things 1) build empathy (v sympathy) for the collective and individual experience of targeted populations 2) to attempt to dismantle each beam and post and nail structural inequity. We want to dismantle structural inequity to create an even playing field for competition, not to create entirely equal outcomes, just less paralyzingly unequal outcomes.
The Me Too movement have been amazingly effective at one piece of this. So far it has simply built awareness. In that flare up of awareness there was some initial scapegoating of individuals. Some deserved it, some did not. (The human desire to punish is unfortunate and difficult to control) But by and large we have come to understand and that systemic issues like sexual abuse are not the fault of one individual but a collective responsibility. Interestingly, because of me too, we now know that while the vast majority of perpetrators of sexual assault are men, 1 in 6 men are also victims. Sexual assault is a function of unequal power not anything inherent to gender (please don’t talk about testosterone) . Freeing society from grossly unequal power dynamics will allow all of us to live better and healthier lives.
The term intersectionality actually arose in a court case in which a black woman was facing employment discrimination. It went to the Supreme Court where it was dismissed not because she didn’t face discrimination but because the court couldn’t easily establish whether she faced gender or racial discrimination and we have differing protections for both. The entire point of intersectionality is to acknowledge the complexity of bias and the compounding impacts of experiencing multiple kinds of bias— which the data on outcomes bears out.
So yes the work of accounting forms of structural bias against specific groups is long and hard and confusing. It’s a highly imperfect process, one we seem to make even more fraught in the US with our neurotic guilt and punishment fetuses. But It’s also necessary. Critically necessary.
I would have loved it if we could as a nation, have pointed to outcomes and said— hey look at the disparity, how do we fix this via political reform. But we didn’t or not with enough conviction. We always revert to blaming the individual for outcomes even when those outcomes are broadly found by group. It’s this persistent denialism that leads us to the individual accounting en mass of the stories of women and people of color and lgbtq folks and the disabled etc efc. They are movements for voice and representation of interests. Movements create collective pressure for change. That pressure doesn’t feel great when it’s asking you personally to change and give something up . But that’s the whole point.
I think most of us want equity but we do t want to do the work. All these movements are asking if you is to listen to them and then figure out how to act in suppirtvto help us all heal. If I thought there was an easier way I’d be all for it. But I find the cure t status quo unacceptable.
** Autocorrect changed fetishes to fetuses which EIS would no doubt support as that’s her thing.
I don’t even know what to do with iRoberts assertion that movements don’t change and evolve over time. That’s just wrong in the face of it. The labor movement was racist and sexist a/f. It changed. It changed because the goals could not be achieved without truly collective effort. None of these movements for equity can sustain themselves on their own. They all need both their own voice and each other. As do we all.
JH: “I don’t even know what to do with iRoberts assertion that movements don’t change and evolve over time. That’s just wrong in the face of it.”
I never suggested that.
JH: “The labor movement was racist and sexist a/f. It changed. It changed because the goals could not be achieved without truly collective effort.”
Agreed.
JH: “None of these movements for equity can sustain themselves on their own. They all need both their own voice and each other. As do we all.”
Agreed.
”JH: “That’s why they call it a movement.”
That’s just dumb. It of course is not why it is called a movement. Pure ridiculousness.” — iRobert
”Mario Diani argues that nearly all definitions share three criteria: “a network of informal interactions between a plurality of individuals, groups and/or organizations, engaged in a political or cultural conflict, on the basis of a shared collective identity”
The actual paper is paywalled do the Wikipedia reference will have to do.
Social movements are so called because they attempt to move society. While their own evolution is not stated directly nothing can be moved without movement. And all sociological attempts to explore movements discuss their evolutionary patterns.
So I guess iRobert was calling my assertion ’ridiculous’ because it wasn’t literal enough. I thought he was doing so to deny that movements evolve over time and that they should not be cast in amber or risk dying(which by the way is one of the defined paths that lead to the dissolution of a movement).
Now we see he was just reaching for a pedantic argument to dismiss me and my points out of hand. It’s hard to know what iRobert believes except that he doesn’t like the world privilege or being told he is shy part of the problem.
My belief is that we are all part of the problem. I find that kind of freeing from guilt and shame. It also makes clear that the work begins with us, which means it’s actionable right now. Which is heartening and a responsibility to live up to.
Looking at systemic issues this way is actually stepping away from scapegoating and individual blame. People just don’t experience it that way at first.
I guess that’s civility.
JH: “So I guess iRobert was calling my assertion ’ridiculous’ because it wasn’t literal enough.”
No, I called it ridiculous because it was not true or accurate.
JH: “I thought he was doing so to deny that movements evolve over time…”
So, you see, it was because you made another assumption about my meaning beyond what I actually said. This is what I am saying that you do so often, and as a result cause so much unnecessary back and forth.
JH: “Now we see he was just reaching for a pedantic argument to dismiss me and my points out of hand.”
I don’t dismiss your points. I am challenging your terms, methods and strategy. I am trying to get you to communicate clearly and stop making unwarranted assumptions and misrepresenting what others are saying. But here you do it again.
JH: “It’s hard to know what iRobert believes except that he doesn’t like the world privilege or being told he is shy part of the problem.”
Though it may be hard to know what I believe here, I would actually be happy express what I believe it I thought I was communicating with someone who was actually interested in that. Also, of course I am part of the problem. Only a moron would not know they are part of the problem. I’m relieved to read that you know you are also.
JH: “I find that kind of freeing from guilt and shame. It also makes clear that the work begins with us, which means it’s actionable right now. Which is heartening and a responsibility to live up to”
Agreed.
Your jumping to conclusions without sufficient cause and your insistence on misrepresenting what others say and believe makes genuine and productive discussion impossible. You suggest sometimes that you are doing that intentionally to provoke or something, but I’m not sure I’ve ever seen any evidence that you can turn all that off.
iRobert– my job is not to state your perspective. My job on discourse is to state mine including my impression of your certainly subconscious bias as suggested by your own words.
You are doing the exact same thing to me.
We can each take our lessons or not.
Your discomfort with me doing exactly what you are doing appears to be a double standard.
Apparently autocorrected to certainly. *
Interesting…
JH: “iRobert– my job is not to state your perspective. “
Agreed. That’s why I keep having to trying to correct your attempts to state my perspective.
JH: “My job on discourse is to state mine including my impression of your certainly subconscious bias as suggested by your own words.”
Yes, you are continuously misrepresenting the perspective of others and not stating it as you impression but as established fact.
JH: “Why not
You are doing the exact same thing to me.”
The only time I pretend to state your perspective is when I am mimicking it in order to show how it appears from the outside. I make it pretty clear it’s mockery when I do. I certainly do not feel I could adequately state your case or perspective. But it often seems like you are certain you can accurately state other people’s opposing perspectives, and persepecrives which are not in agreement with your own. However, it seems you do it expressly for the purpose of constructing a straw-man argument.
JH: “We can each take our lessons or not.”
Misrepresenting other people’s perspectives is always either for the purpose of mockery or for the purpose of avoiding a genuine counter to the opponents actual perspective.”
JH: “Your discomfort with me doing exactly what you are doing appears to be a double standard.”
I’m not uncomfortable with it. But I’m curious to see if your misrepresentations are mockery or an impulse to set up a straw-man argument.
I’ve been at least as offensive towards others here as you have. I don’t want to give the impression that I am not aware of that. It’s conscious and intentional. You’ve stated something akin to that admission as well, no?
Sorry for not proofreading before posting. But I trust you understand the intended wording.
It seems to me that the most powerful form of privilage is to have good parents. That one factor seems to be what can make the most difference in a person’s existence. Sure money and various aspects of appearance are extremely powerful as well. But not having good parents can undermine just about all other advantages, and having good parents can provide what is needed to overcome almost any obstacles. This is most true in the freer nations such as the United States. Love and emotional security are so important in life. Every child deserves it, but far too few really get much of it these days.
Define “good” parent. I’m going to guess that it’s easier to be one when the family unit is in a relatively secure and stable social situation. Harder when the parents aren’t around a lot for whatever reason. Easier when there are other family members around willing to help. I would even make the leap to say that it’s easier to behave like a modest middle class family and have modest middle class values when one is modestly middle class. But what about those who aren’t?
See IRobert you could have bonded with EOS. They always bemoan the loss of the stable two parent family.
IRobert— Are you suggesting that having good parents overcomes racism and sexism and economic privilege?
What’s your evidence? Sounds like some Freudian bullshit that denies structural impediments.
The implications of what you are saying is that black Americans have worse parents and that explains their adverse outcomes. I
Gosh I wonder how mass incarceration of black men affects ‘good parenting’ In that population.
IRobert you are a regressive idiot.
I’m done discussing privilege and inequity with you.
Between this and your Kavanaugh rape denialism (or equivocation) , I see no funcriminal difference between you and FF or EOS on the issues of greatest concern to me.
IRobert— I believe what I say. Just not interested I. Winning arguments with you. I don’t believe the perception of winning or losing defines what is true in discourse. I write about these things to refine my thinking and subject it to scrutiny of opposition. You are not a worthy opponent.
Jean, your response seems a bit defensive. I think you know I’m a worthy opponent. I think you’re afraid.
I have many differences with FF and EOS. In terms of perspective, there are probably far more differences between myself and FF and EOS than there are between you and me. The similarities between myself and FF are mostly concentrated around our understanding and commitment to logic. My similarities to EOS are primarily in the areas of belief that morality matters above all else. We may have considerable differences on many of the details.
Sad: “See IRobert you could have bonded with EOS. They always bemoan the loss of the stable two parent family.”
I do think it helps a lot to have a two-parent arrangement. Single parenting is considerably more challenging. Of course having a partner helps. But I’m sure EOS and I have many disagreements on issues relating to parenting. I certainly wish you had better parenting, Sad.
Anonymous: “Define “good” parent. I’m going to guess that it’s easier to be one when the family unit is in a relatively secure and stable social situation.”
Absolutely.
Anonymous: “Harder when the parents aren’t around a lot for whatever reason. Easier when there are other family members around willing to help.
Certainly.
Anonymous: “I would even make the leap to say that it’s easier to behave like a modest middle class family and have modest middle class values when one is modestly middle class.”
Yes, of course.
Anonymous: “But what about those who aren’t?”
We all know the answer, I assume. It’s extremely challenging, but having loving supportive parents (or parent) dramatically improves the probability of overcoming many obstacles.
JH: “IRobert you are a regressive idiot.”
Jean, I think the same of you. So where does that leave us?
In my unbiased opinion, iRobert is more regressive an idiot than Jean Henry.
I guess disinterested observer is Jean, or some other coward who can’t support anything they post here. That’s about as regressive as a person can get.
I call ’em like I see ’em. I don’t have to support anything. It’s obvious you’re both idiots. You are the more regressive idiot. You are also the whinier of the two.
IRobert is struggling to Imagine a world in which he is not right.
I’m tempted to throw your ‘the greatest privilege is good parents’ line like chum to #blacktwitter, because I was too tired to drum up all the examples of how wrong that sentiment is.
That would be fun to watch.
You’re a coward, disinterested observer. You know it. You’re too stupid to make any intelligent arguments about anything, so this is the best you can do. So this is what you do to try to make yourself feel better.
Jean’s justva mental patient. Everyone can see that. She’s also just defensive about any mention of how important it is to be a good parent.
I’ve met plenty of disadvantaged people of all backgrounds, and those that had loving and supportive parents have overcome the most adversity.
I’ve also met more than a few people from what would be considered very privilaged backgrounds in most ways, bit have not had loving and supportive parents. These people often struggle with self destructive behavior and such.
I don’t mind if you share that opinion on any social media, Jean. It would be interesting to see the discussion.
It sounds like Mayor Pete had two really loving and supportive parents. His father studied philosophy and Marxism. It seems like they did a good job. He really wants to help us move forward and address issues of wealth inequality, racial strife and climate change. An old person isn’t going to be able to imagine the kind of change we need.
It’s nice that a Mayor Petes parents taught him to be aware of his privilege and use it to give back. How come all the “ good” parents don’t raise children dedicated to public service?
If someone is a disinterested observer they are a disinterested observer. I don’t think you can discount their opinion. It says it right there. Disinterested observer.
I wish my parents had been better too. I’m sure my grammar would have been more good.
They had a tough time though. I don’t think their parents were so good. Or the parents before them. Or the other parents in the neighborhood for that matter.
It’s funny how that works.
But thanks for wishing it had been better. Still. A lot of folks have it much worse.
The old guys, Joe and Bernie, are losing ground.
The ladies are gaining ground.
Mayor Pete is going to have to make up some ground to get back into this thing.
IRobert— I’m not questioning the value of good parenting. You said that good parenting was the greatest privilege which is just utter bullshit and also doesn’t account for all the ways ‘good parenting’ is made harder (along with everything else) by people who experience systemic disadvantage. So clearly it’s not the greatest privilege just one that doesn’t correspond to any demographic and so requires nothing of you. It’s politically neutral or seems so to you. It’s not a neutral concept to people who are blamed for the shitty outcomes for their kids (despite disparate access to education, justice, healthcare, capital, social mobility, etc etc) because it must be their poor parenting. As a bonus, no one has to worry about fixing those disparities because clearly it’s mostly indivisible failings to blame. You know what ever it takes to reassure IRobert he’s not part of the problem… so far as he has observed.
Jean, I suggested good parenting was the most powerful factor in helping a person overcome systemic disadvantages. That doesn’t translate to blaming parents for the negative impacts of systematic disadvantages.
I did however suggest poor parenting can undermine an otherwise privilaged existence. Isn’t that obvious?
You are basically saying that black people are marginalized because they are terrible at raising their kids. Which assumes that 1) black people are bad at raising kids (not true, though I am not sure that raising any kids to be like privileged white kids is good parenting,but I guess that’s what iRobert is after) and 2) that upbringing matters. Plenty of good kids come from bad families and plenty of really terrible kids come from good families. I personally, have never found that parents (who generally do the best they cant) matter, outside of extreme cases of violence.
Epstein arrested! First NXIVM, now this!!!
https://www.thedailybeast.com/jeffrey-epstein-arrested-for-sex-trafficking-of-minors-source?source=twitter&via=desktop
2,000 pages of documents to be released. I wonder who the “two unnamed individuals” trying to stop this are.
Arrested at the ‘airport’. Huh!
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html
Friends with Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Prince Andrews.
Defended by Kenneth Starr, who investigated Bill Clinton.
Let off easy by Alex Acosta, current Secretary of Labor.
Virginia Roberts, key prosecution witness, recruited at age 16 while locker room attendant at Mar-a-Lago.
Anonymous(Jean): “You are basically saying that black people are marginalized because they are terrible at raising their kids.”
Haha. It may be what a crazy person imagines my comments suggest. It’s a ridiculous extrapolation only a person incapable of basic reasoning would commit.
Anonymois(Jean): “I personally, have never found that parents matter, outside of extreme cases of violence.”
Haha! Yeah, parents don’t matter. That makes sense. You’re insane.
All parents matter!
Didn’t HW say his parents were intellectuals- filling the house with foreign students and intellectuals- stimulating conversation, music, and art. And he grew up to be a cheerleader for the fourth Reich!
Most parents do their best.
All Parents Matter!
Thank you, Sad. Somebody needed to say it.
HW, what’s your take on Alex Acosta?
IRobert wrong. what you said was having good parenting was the ultimate privilege, which implies not having it is the ultimate disadvantage more so that facing structural racism or sexism. The impact of your statement was to dismiss the importance of correcting racial and gender and even economic privilege (all group conditions and so our society responsibility to address) and skew to individual responsibility .
You are backtracking now defensively. If you were a person of integrity you would admit you misspoke at least.
IRobeet— I’m not anonymous or disinterested observer. I know it’s shocking that people other than me think you’re a fool.
‘Today’s a good day to find out from the Trump supporters in your life whether they’ll stop supporting him if it’s revealed in the Jeffrey Epstein case that Trump raped children. It’s important to get them to commit now so if and when that fact comes out you’ve got them on record.’
https://twitter.com/sethabramson/status/1147830073569026050?s=21
So HW— can we get you on record? I’d have no problem seeing Bill Clinton be held accountable if you are wondering.
IRobert read again your own words:
‘It seems to me that the most powerful form of privilage is to have good parents. That one factor seems to be what can make the most difference in a person’s existence. ‘
And please remember this was in context of a conversation in which you were asserting the absurdity and counter productive impact of ‘identity politics’ (which is a pejorative term made up by the right for social justice movements).
Jean, I don’t care what the morons on MM.com who post as anonymous or disinterested observer have to say. They never make any genuine contribution to any conversation anyway. They just try to make themselves feel better about their intellectual inadequacy by suggesting, without any proof, that they are in a position of superiority in some way intellectually. They’re useless in discussion and I’m sure that carries into their real world lives. It also doesn’t matter if you post under those names. I’m attempting to discuss this privilage matter with you, and not play childish games. To the degree that you are able to do that I’m appreciative.
I stand on my statement that good parenting can provide the most powerful advantage to an individual, which can help them to overcome many disadvantages. That assertion does not imply that it is always (or even usually) enough to overcome the many ways in which a person can be at a disadvantage. It just suggests that as a factor it can potentially be a most powerful one. My assertion also doesn’t imply that any failure (perceived or real) to overcome disadvantages is therefor the fault of poor parenting. Those are not logical extrapolations from what I’ve said. Any misunderstanding here may very likely be due to my poor communication, I admit. I am trying though.
I’m not backpedaling on my statements. What may seem like backpedaling to you, is my trying to correct what I see as your improper extrapolation from my statements. I actually do think you do that a lot, and may find that just about everyone is making an effort on some level to correct systems which unjustly disadvantage our fellow citizens.
I share your concerns about the ongoing systematic and institutionalized injustices in our society. However, I have some strong disagreements with you on strategies as to how effectively make positive change. I think that’s what’s at the core here.
“Friends with Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Prince Andrews.”
Not friends with Donald Trump. Trump’s comment on Jeffrey Epstein was obviously sarcastic.
Epstein told prosecutors in 2007 he helped found the Clinton Foundation.
Jean Henry is wrong 100% of the time. If she was a superhero her power would be getting it wrong: “Wrongwoman”
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/cultural-studies/origin-of-the-term-identity-politics-cultural-studies-essay.php
“A Contested Term. The origin of the term ‘identity politics’ is sometimes traced to the 1960s Civil Rights Movement but it was articulated by women of colour in their 1977 Combahee River Collective Statement.
The term refers to collective group identities like race, ethnicity, sex, religion, caste, sexual orientation, physical disability as the basis for political analysis and action.
Its main objective is to empower individuals to articulate their discrimination and invisibility through consciousness raising and action.”
HW and iRobert sure are good at explaining things.
They know a lot. And better.
I like that Mayor Pete was able to admit that he made a mistake. He failed. It’s hard to stop systemic racism in a large midwestern city.
Sad,
Have you ever actually done anything to help Mayor Pete’s campaign? Most of the time you come across as mocking him and his candidacy. But occasionally it seems like you might be sincere.
Sorry you find my earnestness misleading.
There really is no other choice to run against Trump. I know it makes a lot of people uncomfortable but he’s the only one who stands a chance. Even then I know it’s a long shot.
At this point I’ve mostly just been trying to talk about him with people. Most don’t know about him yet.
And of course, I keep sending him money.
And praying that a God will help him.
Who are their faves? Preparing you for devastating news about to rock the world? No, nothing like that. Why that’s crazy! It’s…it’s…something else…Alan Dershowitz maybe but it’s insane to think people such as the Clinton’s could ever be in trouble over a terrible thing like this!
Christine Pelosi:
https://twitter.com/sfpelosi/status/1147657745253855233
@sfpelosi
Follow Follow @sfpelosi
More
This Epstein case is horrific and the young women deserve justice. It is quite likely that some of our faves are implicated but we must follow the facts and let the chips fall where they may – whether on Republicans or Democrats. #WeSaidEnough #MeToo
HW, it will definite be interesting to see how this Epstein case goes now. I had lost hope that he was actually going to be held accountable for his atrocious crimes. I’d like to see him punished severely and to take down any and all individuals that ever had anything to do with him. Please do keep us up to date on the case.
HW— you didn’t answer my question.
Will you stop supporting Trump if it’s revealed by the Epstein case that he raped underaged girls?
Doesn’t seem like a hard one to answer. I get that you do t believe he did. (That will surprise no one.) So what’s the risk?
Define ‘revealed’. There was a lawsuit revealed against DJT before the election for supposedly abusing a young girl at Epstein’s apartment. Do you admit that was bogus? It came out that Epstein did not have a NY apartment at the time of the alleged crime as the plaintiff stated..
If Hillary Clinton goes down for something like this will you admit everything you said was wrong before you lick my boots and give me money as you promised?
What kinda sick fuck gets off on the sadistic idea of having his boots licked? Oh, right a groveling, POS actual bootlicker, that’s who.
John Brown– I offered to lick his boots and oat him $1000 if if HRC was ever arrested for any of the crimes QAnon says she committed. I asked him to do the same if Trump was ever arrested. He declined. It was an effort to expose HW’s lack of actual faith in how right he is despite his breast beating fatuous declarations that he is always right and I am always wrong.
It was a one off. I stand by it but haven’t thought of it since. It has proven a durable fantasy for HW however, so make of that what you will.
HW– if Trump is in Eosteims list if contacts as someone who was a client of his for underage girls, will you renounce him?
I would only ask you ally the same level of scrutiny to charged against the Clintons or other high powered Dems that you apply to any charges against Trump in determining their validity.
PS these new charges are by the Southern District of NY and so it appears Epstein did in fact run an operation there as well as Florida. (whether or not it’s the same apartment. And they all date to after 2002 so there are no statutes of limitations applicable.
I never said the deep state would never be successful in getting Trump. Why should I defend something I never said?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghAZS-Bnt7g
On the other hand you have said it’s fantasy to think the Clinton’s and Obama will pay for their crimes so you get to make a foolish wager on it if you want. Hubris….It’s the height of irony since you were crowing about winning beers off of old men who would engage in armwrestling but neglected to demand anything from you if they won. If somehow Trump is ever arrested I won’t have to do shit since I never said it couldn’t happen. You know what you have to do if your people are though.
Considering they had to make up a lie to frame DJT for abusing a girl at Epstein’s apartment in NYC which he did not have at the time I doubt DJT has a problem with anything like that. Why would they risk getting caught making something up, which they did if there was real evidence?
Luckily Mayor Pete is clean as a whistle!
I hear Naval Intelligence officer means Going To Be In The CIA.
Latest X22 Report is about Epstein
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6JD90yYEww
I couldn’t get past the Patriot Flashlight. It’s awesome!
I bet if Mayor Pete were president the US women soccer team would go to the White House.
Maybe football and basketball teams too.
Everything is a joke Paul Schreiber until you are all fucked up and reality sets in. This is not going to turn out well for people like the Clinton’s and their clingons. They are kind of like a Klingon but not bad ass at all hahahaha! My kind of humor
Did you see today’s Washington Post?
“Does Putin have a point?”
Read more:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/putin-declared-that-liberalism-is-obsolete-is-he-right/2019/07/08/a6f13070-a1a3-11e9-b732-41a79c2551bf_story.html
One Trackback
[…] gun reforms… It’s just so amazing what’s happened in one year’s time, and the degree to which things have continued to slide toward authoritarianism… One hesitates to think what July 4, 2020 might look like, and whether there may be flags […]