February 20, 2017

"Liberals may feel energized by a surge in political activism, and a unified stance against a president they see as irresponsible and even dangerous."

"But that momentum is provoking an equal and opposite reaction on the right. In recent interviews, conservative voters said they felt assaulted by what they said was a kind of moral Bolshevism — the belief that the liberal vision for the country was the only right one. Disagreeing meant being publicly shamed. Protests and righteous indignation on social media and in Hollywood may seem to liberals to be about policy and persuasion. But moderate conservatives say they are having the opposite effect, chipping away at their middle ground and pushing them closer to Mr. Trump."

From a NYT op-ed by Sabrina Tavernise titled "Are Liberals Helping Trump?"

I'll just answer from my personal perspective (about how it affects me): Yes.

302 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 302 of 302
J. Farmer said...

@Unknown:

Any rightist who thinks we are an island and not interconnected to this very small world is an ignoramus.

That's a banal fact that doesn't say half as much as you think it does. You're interconnected to your extended family, too. That doesn't mean you need to invite them to move into your home and start telling you what to do.

Known Unknown said...

""The left" (which now includes libertarians apparently),"

Uh ... no.

Anonymous said...

"Yes. This is perfect. Keep it up."

Oh yes, we most assuredly will and no amount of concern trolling or threats will stop it. We don't care how so called energized our anti Trump movement makes you people. You brought it upon yourselves.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Any rightist who thinks we are an island and not interconnected to this very small world is an ignoramus.

And this, be sure to bring this up at every opportunity.

Be sure to inform anyone who disagrees with you that they are ignoramuses. Because once someone realizes you think they are stupid, they will instantly change their opinion in order to gain your approval.

Every time.

CStanley said...

Never followed Milo related news other than cursorily. I figured that, as a social conservative I wouldn't like him but would still defend his right to speak.

I read his statements today and nothing there changed that opinion. I did, howerpver (again as a socially conservative person, and I'm speaking about personal values not political stance) I think his problem in defending himself against the charge of defending pedophilia is that he very much defends something that is in the gray zone- older men forming relationships with much younger men who are still in the late stages of adolescence.

I think society would be better served by accepting much stronger wariness about those kinds of relationships, whether heterosexual or homosexual. Way too much potential for exploitation- and that itself (the idea that sex generally invites exploitation, and causes psychological harm when engaged in that way) is an idea that we'd do well to consider. On the particulars here....why is it healthy for an adult man to mentor someone still in high school, if that mentoring includes his own sexual gratification? Grow up and find a grown up partner, and if you care about the young person then don't seduce him or her.

Yancey Ward said...

ARM wrote:

"I am not defending the protests against Milo, which I oppose, but don't universities have the same right to make these same decisions for the same reasons as CPAC has?"

It is stuff like this that discredits you. You are either being intentionally dishonest, or you are unintentionally ignorant. CPAC is the issuer of the invitation in the case of Milo- as such, they can invite, not invite, or disinvite whomever they wish and for any reason. However, in almost every single case I have seen in the news, speakers being driven from planned speeches on campuses weren't being invited by the university itself, but rather by a student group. Yes, a university's management can do the same for any speaker, but that is almost never the issue being discussed when a conservative is driven from a speaking engagement like Milo at the U of C.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

And to the person who asked what can Liberals complain about . I say give the man a chance. Wait for evidence and then make a reasonable argument. I'll listen to them then.

But I'm not going to listen to a temper-tatrum, violence and vicious personal attacks. In other words GROW-UP!

Rick said...

Unknown said...
[""We care more about public opinion in foreign countries than in changing the minds/votes of the people who beat us in the last election."
Smart; go with that."]


Any rightist who thinks we are an island and not interconnected to this very small world is an ignoramus.


Anyone who thinks this conclusion can be accurately drawn from the statement is an idiot.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

You brought it upon yourselves.

Apparently unknown is unaware of the concept of schadenboner

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=schadenboner

Known Unknown said...

"What about a representative from NAMBL, should he be feted on university campuses? He will certainly have controversial views."


Sure. Why not? Losers and scumbags have free speech rights, too. Your term "feted" is revealing, though.

Achilles said...

5. Foreign policy generally: do you feel safer with Trump in office? Are his apparent ignorance, volatility and inability to hire anyone who ever opposed him fair subjects of criticism?

Funny watching the left bring this up after 8 years of the Obama administration. President Red Line will go down in history as the most pathetic foreign policy president ever.

Worst President Ever

6. Falsity: I know you hate to call anyone a liar, because as you've said, you can't read someone's mind. I haven't noticed that you commented on his statement that the press is the enemy of the people. So is there a critical framing of Trump's evident and repeated disregard for facts that is persuasive to you?

Most of us agree with Trump. The main stream media is owned and operated by the oligarchs and it is a tool they use to push open borders and crony government.

7. The Roll Out Order: I know you believe that Trump will ultimately get some form of his order through if he does his homework, and so do I. Do you actually think, though, that the order is actually good policy? That the net balance is to make us safer? That the roll out inspires confidence is the competence and basic decency of the administration? Are these legitimate subjects of criticism?

Keep telling us we need more sharia law and people who want sharia law here. That's a winner for you.

8. Partisanship: Trump keeps saying things that are untrue about his electoral college margin and the reason why he lost the popular vote. In fact, his electoral college mandate was on the small side, and he lost the popular vote by a pretty large margin (the last election where someone who lost the popular vote that badly was elected, the fix was in). But he didn't keep anyone on (as Obama did) and he has appointed only Republicans to his cabinet, many of them (Sessions, Pruitt, DeVos, Carson) from the very far right wing of the party. His chosen foreign policy advisor was, as you noted, an active promoter of Clinton conspiracy theories. Trump routinely calls Schumer names in public. He can't find the phone number of the Black Congressional caucus. Is this a legitimate subject of criticism?

Oh noes republican wins election and appoints republicans to cabinet! You are a joke.

You get the idea, anyway. I and I am sure many other liberal readers of your list would love to see your thoughts on the scope of criticism of Trump that would be persuasive to embattled moderates.

We get it. You are a troll and you are pushing garbage.

J. Farmer said...

@CStanley:

I think his problem in defending himself against the charge of defending pedophilia is that he very much defends something that is in the gray zone- older men forming relationships with much younger men who are still in the late stages of adolescence.

Very true, but distinguishing those kinds of relationships from pedophilia is very important. Pedophilia is orders of magnitude different than sexual attraction to people in late adolescence. For example, if you saw a nude 16-year-old girls body who had breasts, pubic area, and pretty much every other outward sexual characteristic of an adult, there's a good chance you would find that image highly sexually arousing. That wouldn't make you some kind of abhorrent pervert. Now if you looked at a nude 8-year-old girl and had the same reaction, that would be highly abhorrent and for very good reason.

In the particulars here....why is it healthy for an adult man to mentor someone still in high school, if that mentoring includes his own sexual gratification? Grow up and find a grown up partner, and if you care about the young person then don't seduce him or her.

Youthful prowess will always be a sexual turn on to a large number of men. Look how much heterosexual pornography uses phrases like "barely legal" or "jail bait." What defines adolescence is the emergence of sexuality. Teenagers have sexual urges and are driven by sexual desire. An adolescent can just as easily seduce an older partner as the other way around.

Yancey Ward said...

ARM again:

"What about a representative from NAMBL, should he be feted on university campuses? He will certainly have controversial views."

If a student group wants to invite such a speaker, then, yes, he should be allowed to speak.

Drago said...

Post-Trump Win

Unknown: "The anti Trump sentiment is growing world wide. It'll only grow stronger the longer he's in office. It's not a concern to us if it also energizes Trumpists. It doesn't matter."

Pre-Trump Win

The anti Trump sentiment is growing across the US. It'll only grow stronger the longer he stays in the race. It's not a concern to us if it also energizes Trumpists. It doesn't matter.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Unknown said...You have really lost your moorings.

Speaking of dead metaphors & overused cliches...

Anonymous said...

"Never followed Milo related news other than cursorily. I figured that, as a social conservative I wouldn't like him but would still defend his right to speak."

So are you saying CPAC shouldn't have cancelled him?

SukieTawdry said...

I'm resisting being driven into Trump's arms, but I have to tell you, they aren't making it easy. I play a game online most days and there's another regular player who calls himself "tuckfrump." It's become my main goal to post a higher score than his, particularly if I can knock him out of first place. That's what they've reduced me to.

I sense the movement is running out of steam. It's hard to maintain a fevered pitch indefinitely.

tim in vermont said...

Maybe Unknown should check the polls in France and Germany.

Drago said...

Unknown: "Oh yes, we most assuredly will and no amount of concern trolling or threats will stop it."

Allow me to offer our early "thanks" for your efforts.

tim in vermont said...

Short version, Merkel, like Hillary before her, is toast.

Achilles said...

Unknown said...
""We care more about public opinion in foreign countries than in changing the minds/votes of the people who beat us in the last election."
Smart; go with that."


Any rightist who thinks we are an island and not interconnected to this very small world is an ignoramus.

We know the left is organized by globalists. One of the main reasons Trump won was "America First."

M15ery said...

What about having the courage of their convictions? Very few people here agree with my viewpoint, and it doesn't bother me. In fact, that's why it's stimulating for me to post here. It would be awfully boring to spend all my time on a blog where everyone shared my viewpoint, where each commenter was simply another "dittohead."

I do on message boards under a pseudonym, sure.

But I dare you to take a pro-Trump stance on social media and affix your name to it. Watch how quickly you get insulted, called a racist, a moral cretin, and how quickly you get unfriended. Courage? There is no dialogue with that. It simply opens up your person for ad hominem degradation.

And this is exactly what's driving people to Trump.

When Trump was elected I was probably 51/49 Trump. Now I'm about 75/25 Trump. If force upon me the choice of "0/100 or you're a Nazi too," my response is "Fuck you."

Anonymous said...

Thanks for creating the anti Trump movement. It'll be energized until Trump is out of office and beyond.

tim in vermont said...

She, like HIllary, is reduced to speakng before invited crowds.

You guys missed last night when ARM was defending Hillary's invasion of Libya all the while denying she was behind an invasion that she was careful to take credit for.

"We came! We saw! He died!" - HRC

That's the stuff eh chickenhawk?

Drago said...

tim in Vermont: "Maybe Unknown should check the polls in France and Germany."

Shhh.

The lefties are having a difficult enough time dealing with muslim mass sexual assault in Germany and Sweden.

Achilles said...

Unknown said...
"Yes. This is perfect. Keep it up."

Oh yes, we most assuredly will and no amount of concern trolling or threats will stop it. We don't care how so called energized our anti Trump movement makes you people. You brought it upon yourselves.

The only threats are if you leave your little blue enclaves and come out here to the rest of the world. For now we are happy to watch you shit in your own bed.

I didn't know Trump 2020 had so much steam.

tim in vermont said...

I remember all of dear Unknowns predictions from before the election too! All gloom and doom for we deplorables! Dooom! Dooooooom!

Drago said...

Unknown: "Thanks for creating the anti Trump movement. It'll be energized until Trump is out of office and beyond."

We didn't create the anti-Trump movement.

The anti-capitalist, anti-US, anti-Nixon, anti-Reagan, anti-Bush, anti-McCain, anti-Romney movement (which is exactly as it has always been) simply relabeled itself.

I am more than happy to accept thanks for your astro-turf & useful idiot movement changing its name to this latest iteration.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Yancey Ward said...
If a student group wants to invite such a speaker, then, yes, he should be allowed to speak.


What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens? Should he/she be feted on university campuses?

Yancey Ward said...

Unknown asked a commenter:

'Never followed Milo related news other than cursorily. I figured that, as a social conservative I wouldn't like him but would still defend his right to speak.'

"So are you saying CPAC shouldn't have cancelled him?"


You display the same ignorance ARM did. I am sure the original commenter can probably answer for himself, but I will predict the answer- he would say that his opinion doesn't matter since it was CPAC's invitation do with as they wish. The same would apply to any student group issuing an invitation whomever they wish.

Now, if a university wishes to issue a blanket ban on all invited speakers for student groups, that is one thing. However, that isn't what is happening.

Drago said...

ARM: "What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens? Should he/she be feted on university campuses?"

What is it with you and use of the word "feted" which means "honor or entertain lavishly" when everyone else is simply talking about free speech on campus with speakers that are invited by existing student groups?

Your disingenuousness is showing thru quite brightly on this one.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Matt Schlapp, chairman of American Conservative Union, which is CPAC’s sponsor said...

“We realize that this invitation will be accompanied by controversy which we think the conservative movement and our CPAC attendees can handle. We look forward to hearing Milo’s message, [and having Yiannopoulos] answer some tough questions ... at a time when political correctness is properly being discarded.”


Apparently PC is alive and well at CPAC.

Schlapp also told The Hollywood Reporter that Yiannopoulos has an “important perspective.”

No doubt NAMBL thinks the same.

Known Unknown said...

"What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens? Should he/she be feted on university campuses?"

Sure. Bring on the Illinois Nazis.

You must know the freedom of speech is not accompanied by a freedom from the consequences of that speech. I would rather my neo-Nazis be out and identifiable, and subject to speech back at them.





Yancey Ward said...

ARM again:

"What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens? Should he/she be feted on university campuses?"

If a student group wants to invite such a speaker then, yes, he should be allowed to speak to that student group.

It is indicative, though, of your fundamental intellectual dishonesty that you keep using to word "feted" in your questions- I guess in your case, freedom of speech only applies if you agree with the speech. Right? What are going to do now, ARM, try to claim I think Jews should be burned in an oven because I don't want to silence those who do believe that?

Rather than play twenty questions with you, why don't you define the restrictions you would be ok with on the extending of speaking invitations on campus? My position is simple- if some student group wants to invite someone, they get to do so with no prior restraint.

Known Unknown said...

What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Kulaks? Should he/she be feted on university campuses?

tim in vermont said...

The US's role in the conflict was limited to air strikes and was mocked at the time as 'leading from behind'. Not a single US life was lost in the initial conflict. Obama was right to complain about the lack of follow-up by the NATO allies following Gaddafi's removal. Unlike Saddam, Gaddafi had unquestionably sponsored terrorists who had killed US citizens. - Chickenhawk ARM.

Poor powerless Obama. He complained! It was all he could do!

ARM is a tool. Full stop.

Bob Loblaw said...

What about having the courage of their convictions? Very few people here agree with my viewpoint, and it doesn't bother me. In fact, that's why it's stimulating for me to post here. It would be awfully boring to spend all my time on a blog where everyone shared my viewpoint, where each commenter was simply another "dittohead."

There's a big differenct between discussing politics with strangers on the internet and having your sister decide you're a Nazi because you didn't vote for Clinton.

Known Unknown said...

"My position is simple- if some student group wants to invite someone, they get to do so with no prior restraint."

I'll add -- anyone who would like to protest that speaker is free to do so. Protest is also speech. What they are not free to do is hurt others or destroy property. Those are crimes.

Known Unknown said...

What about a speaker who advocates the killing of the unborn? Should he/she be allowed to speak on university campuses? Yes.

What about a speaker who advocates the imposition of Sharia law? Should he/she be allowed to speak on university campuses? Yes.

I could do this all day.

Rick said...

Yancey Ward said...
ARM wrote:

"I am not defending the protests against Milo, which I oppose, but don't universities have the same right to make these same decisions for the same reasons as CPAC has?"


It's revealing ARM compares universities with a political organization. Universities pretend to be places for inquiry and claim they are not advocating any particular viewpoint. Only by inappropriately omitting this distinction can you judge both by the same standard.

J. Farmer said...

@AReasonableMan:

No doubt NAMBLA thinks the same.

First, NAMBLA is practically a nothing of an organization. Second, NAMBLA only really has one political objective: the elimination of age of consent laws, which of course is an extreme, radical proposal that most people in the society do not agree with. Hence, it's a fringe organization. That's qualitatively different over arguing where the boundary for consent should be. 18? 17? 16? 15? I think you would agree that reasonable people can have reasonable disagreements to the answer to that question.

Anonymous said...

"Maybe Unknown should check the polls in France and Germany."

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-02-12/germany-picks-anti-trump-president-as-trans-atlantic-bonds-fray

Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the former German foreign minister who was a vocal critic of Donald Trump during the U.S. campaign, was elected as the country’s 12th postwar president.

Michael K said...

I do not doubt that there are older women who pursue younger women. My point was that it is nowhere near as a robust and as well defined as among men.

My daughter, when she was at UCLA, was looking for some sort of intramural sport to get some exercise.

She made the mistake of going to the women's rugby practice to see what it was like.

She said they were all really dikey lesbians and they went for her in a big way. She made one visit and told them she wasn't interested (although not why) and she could not get rid of them. They were calling her for the rest of the school year.

Anonymous said...

http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/policy/international/europe/318123-german-magazine-germany-must-stand-up-to-trump

"The magazine Der Spiegel has called for Germany to lead global resistance to President Trump and his administration in an editorial published over the weekend.

“Germany must stand up in opposition to the 45th president of the United States and his government,” executive editor Klaus Brinkb√§umer wrote Sunday in an editorial.

“That’s difficult enough already for two reasons: Because it is from the Americans that we obtained our liberal democracy in the first place; and because it is unclear how the brute and choleric man on the other side will react to diplomatic pressure,” he wrote. “The fact that opposition to the American government can only succeed when mounted together with Asian and African partners — and no doubt with our partners in Europe, with the [European Union] — doesn’t make the situation any easier.”
In one of the toughest sections of the editorial, Brinkbäumer described Trump as a "pathological liar" and racist.

“It is literally painful to write this sentence, but the president of the United States is pathological liar,” he wrote. "The president of the U.S. is a racist (it also hurts to write this).""

Known Unknown said...

"Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the former German foreign minister who was a vocal critic of Donald Trump during the U.S. campaign, was elected as the country’s 12th postwar president."

Get back to me when they elect a Chancellor, you know, the person who actually influences the policy.

Bob Loblaw said...

Unlike Saddam, Gaddafi had unquestionably sponsored terrorists who had killed US citizens.

Gaddafi had also given up his nuclear program as a result of the Iraq war. By attacking Libya we gave every tinpot dictator in the world a very clear message: "Nothing will save you from the US except nuclear weapons." There's a reason Iran has been willing to pay any price to maintain its program.

Known Unknown said...

""The magazine Der Spiegel has called for Germany to lead global resistance to President Trump and his administration in an editorial published over the weekend."

Oooooh. Der Speigel. That's like posting a WaPo editorial link. Zinger!

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

She said they were all really dikey lesbians and they went for her in a big way. She made one visit and told them she wasn't interested (although not why) and she could not get rid of them. They were calling her for the rest of the school year.

But "they" I assume you mean the team members, who would also be UCLA undergraduates and thus around your daughter's age, no?

Andrew said...

"Any rightist who thinks we are an island and not interconnected to this very small world is an ignoramus."

Who needs who? You fucking ignoramus.

J. Farmer said...

@Bob Loblaw:

There's a reason Iran has been willing to pay any price to maintain its program.

It isn't willing to pay any price. Sanctions brought Iran to the table and got them to accept limitations on their nuclear program beyond even what they are permitted under the NPT.

John henry said...

Up til today, when I read that CPAC had invited President Trump to speak, I had thought they were rabid Never Trumpers.

It will be interesting to see the reception he gets.

John Henry

SukieTawdry said...

What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens?

Remember when neo-Nazis wanted to march in Skokie, a largely Jewish community with a fair number of Holocaust survivors? The village council denied them a permit and the ACLU sued. The case went to the Supreme Court where Skokie lost. It was one of those times when I supported everyone involved. I supported the village for making its stand and I supported the ACLU suit and the SCOTUS decision. The neo-Nazis got their march and it was a big bust. Which is the long way around to saying, yes, even a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens.

CStanley said...

@JFarner:

Very true, but distinguishing those kinds of relationships from pedophilia is very important. Pedophilia is orders of magnitude different than sexual attraction to people in late adolescence. For example, if you saw a nude 16-year-old girls body who had breasts, pubic area, and pretty much every other outward sexual characteristic of an adult, there's a good chance you would find that image highly sexually arousing. That wouldn't make you some kind of abhorrent pervert. Now if you looked at a nude 8-year-old girl and had the same reaction, that would be highly abhorrent and for very good reason.

Agree, except for the part about my attraction (I'm a heterosexual female.) I don't think that what Milo defends is the same thing as pedophilia.


Youthful prowess will always be a sexual turn on to a large number of men. Look how much heterosexual pornography uses phrases like "barely legal" or "jail bait." What defines adolescence is the emergence of sexuality. Teenagers have sexual urges and are driven by sexual desire. An adolescent can just as easily seduce an older partner as the other way around.

In which case the mature moral adult would say no.

CStanley said...

Blogger Yancey Ward said...
Unknown asked a commenter:

'Never followed Milo related news other than cursorily. I figured that, as a social conservative I wouldn't like him but would still defend his right to speak.'

"So are you saying CPAC shouldn't have cancelled him?"

You display the same ignorance ARM did. I am sure the original commenter can probably answer for himself, but I will predict the answer- he would say that his opinion doesn't matter since it was CPAC's invitation do with as they wish. The same would apply to any student group issuing an invitation whomever they wish.

Now, if a university wishes to issue a blanket ban on all invited speakers for student groups, that is one thing. However, that isn't what is happening.


Original commenter here, speaking for herself....

Your assumptions are wrong, Although it's true that CPAC is not violating his First Amendment rights, I believe they are making a mistake in cancelling him. They already knew they were inviting controversy when they invited him, and pulling the invitation lends support to the suppression of speech. Let him talk, and if I or any other conservatives dislike what he says let us take part in the free exchange of ideas.

mockturtle said...

J. Farmer said: Let me give an example, a "chickenhawk" is gay slang for an older man who primarily prefers sex with a adolescent males.

My gay male friends used to call them 'old trolls'.

mockturtle said...

And also, one reason there might not be a lesbian corollary is that women, gay or straight, are far less inclined to discuss their sexual exploits than men.

CStanley said...

To clarify my ideas that JFarmer pushed back on...

I think that adults more than a year or two past adolescence should refrain from acting on sexual attraction with minors as a matter of principal, to create a buffer zone for the development of a mature sexual identity for the adolescent. It's precisely because the adolescent is full of raging hormones, making him or her potentially willing participant, that the more mature person should steer clear.

Having said that, I don't believe that relationships like that are ALWAYS exploitative or harmful. It's similar to workplace relationships or any other situation with a power differential. There are cases where those can work out too...but because of the potential for harm, we shouldn't go around recommending those practices and we should try to make people consider the potential harm.

M15ery said...

I do not doubt that there are older women who pursue younger women. My point was that it is nowhere near as a robust and as well defined as among men.

What does that mean "as robust and well defined"? You mean because there's a NAMBLA but no NAWGLA? How much exposure do you have to lesbians and lesbians subcultures?

mockturtle said...

J. Farmer asserts: An adolescent can just as easily seduce an older partner as the other way around.

For a price.

Unknown said...

If you are going to be called extreme names like racist and sexist and screamed at for what are essentially moderate views, or because you voted for the least of two evils, then yes you get pushed to the right. What do you have to lose? You are already called evil and a nazi!! That is why people started wearing "deplorable" hats and shirts.

J. Farmer said...

@M15ery:

How much exposure do you have to lesbians and lesbians subcultures?

I have two lesbians relatives in my extended family, have been out since I was 17 years old, and maybe a fifth of my social circle is lesbian women, so I'd say I have had a decent exposure to lesbian culture.

mockturtle said...

And, C. Stanley, I agree with you 100%. Adolescents are in the process of developing and should not be exploited by adults. I've always been amused [but not pleased] by movie or book themes that discuss some geezer helping a young girl through her 'sexual awakening'. How disgusting! And it's just as disgusting in a gay relationships. Young people should feel that adults--teachers, parents, clergy--are there to help them, not take advantage of them sexually. There is no rationale or justification for organizations like NAMBLA other than wishful thinking by perverts.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Hillary's 'deplorables' remark revealed something crippling about today's Democrats, especially since she coupled it with the word 'irredeemable.'
Today's Democrats have no interest in talking to Trump voters, and they comprise nearly half of the electorate. They don't even have the vocabulary to talk to Trump voters. An example would be the supposed 'day without immigrants' strike. They mean 'illegal immigrants,' of course, but they cannot use the phrase that most Americans would use to describe people who immigrated to the US illegally.
The MSM, of course, speaks the vocabulary of the Democrats.
I don't think that you can make the same argument against Republicans. They can find some common ground with everyone, except, maybe, Left wing academics.

Triangle Man said...

They mean 'illegal immigrants,' of course, but they cannot use the phrase that most Americans would use to describe people who immigrated to the US illegally

You mean bureaucratically-challenged immigrants? The paperwork-impaired?

CStanley said...

Glad someone agrees, mockturtle! It's not a popular opinion, judging by our cultural obsession with youth and sex.

J. Farmer said...

@mockturtle:

Adolescents are in the process of developing and should not be exploited by adults.

That's of course an easy position to have in principle but is much more complicated to make sense of in real life. When is an adolescent done developing? How old is too old? Is a 21-year-old and 17-year-old as explosive as a 25-year-old and a 17-year-old. Is an 18-year-old girl, considered a legal adult in every jurisdiction in the country, who has a 40-year-old boyfriend being exploited or just making a dumb decision? Or both. The reason that states have varying age of consent laws is because it does involve a turkey grey area which requires some arbitrary legal line to be drawn.

CStanley said...

The law creates the line and then we all blur the line, but at least there is a line, s what makes a much older person think twice before acting on an impulse with someone who is just barely "legal". If the older person genuinely doesn't want to cause harm, he (she) will step back and try to figure out if the younger person is mature enough. If he/she doesn't care, then that is exploitation.

Given that societal messages are so mixed, with the entertainment industry having incentive to promote teen sexuality by playing to the biological triggers, if the law didn't exert a counterbalance I'm not sure where we'd be.

Bob Loblaw said...

It isn't willing to pay any price. Sanctions brought Iran to the table and got them to accept limitations on their nuclear program beyond even what they are permitted under the NPT.

Sanctions brought them to the table and got them to pretend to accept limitations on their nuclear program. They haven't actually slowed development, though. I expect they'll test a weapon sometime this year or the next.

Bob Loblaw said...

Oh yes, we most assuredly will and no amount of concern trolling or threats will stop it. We don't care how so called energized our anti Trump movement makes you people. You brought it upon yourselves.

And you're winding up the backlash, and you will be reminded when it happens.

J. Farmer said...

@Bob Loblaw:

Sanctions brought them to the table and got them to pretend to accept limitations on their nuclear program. They haven't actually slowed development, though.

And yet hardliners opposed the deal all the time and denounced it as a giveaway to western powers. Iran's negotiator was also constantly called into question by the hardliners because he had been educated in the United States. I'd be willing to make a cash bet that the Iranians do not test a weapon this year or next. If you're interested in taking me up on it, let me know and we can get in touch privately.

Fandor said...

This is a seminal moment in the history of the United States.
It's a titantic battle between liberal ideology and the United States Constitution.
Liberals are the status quo. Trump and those who voted for him support the Constitution.
Liberals want their ideology to trump the Constitution and our Bill of Rights.
The lines have been drawn.
This is a civil war, by other means.
Who's side are you on?

Steven said...

I'm a NeverTrumper. Voted against him in the primaries, walked away from the Althouse comment section in the general because his supporters here were infuriating, voted against him in the general. Would be glad enough to see him resign or otherwise get removed.

And I'm shaking my head at these idiot left-wingers like Unknown, who are doing everything in their power to make Trump a two-term president.

Seriously, let's look at right direction/wrong track polling among registered and likely voters, starting with the inauguration of Obama. You see that dip in wrong track and spike in right direction right at the end, coincident with Trump's inauguration and your temper tantrums, giving Trump's time in office a better rating than Obama ever had? The American people in general don't like Trump as a person (as shows up in his personal approval ratings), but you're convincing them he's moving the country in the right direction anyway.

And you know what's worse? The "antifa" violence. Y'all are screaming that Trump is a fascist . . . and then in your protests provide cover for the kind of public violence and disorder that lead to the ascendance of fascists over and over. Not only is that pissing off middle America, but if Trump really is an aspiring dictator, you're apparently insisting on providing a Reichstag Fire in order to let him consolidate power.

Robert Reich was on to something when he suggested that the Berkley rioters were a false-flag operation. Not that it actually was false-flag; we know from the participants identified that it was indeed leftist morons doing it. But that it served the interests of Trump so well that it might as well have been choreographed by him. At the very least, can you idiots remember that this sort of shit re-elected Nixon with a huge majority?

Stop with the "Resistance" noise. Stop with the pointless protests that do nothing except piss off voters and give cover to moronic violence. Every time you speak, you're giving Trump more power. Just shut up for a bit! And then, after that, come back with a strategy to win elections, rather than just venting your spleen in public.

Anonymous said...

Unknown said...
"You guys used to mock the Right for being too uptight, too Puritanical, etc."

Homosexuality isn't pedophilia. It's high time rightists learned the difference.


Is pedophilia more homosexual in proportion to normal sex acts? I think that is what Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was saying.

Definitions from progressives don't mean much as they are always based in Marxist thought via class oppression psychology. A person should immediately discount any progressive trying to define something for everyone.

Anonymous said...

It seems pretty obvious to me. Trump is about jobs. Jobs. He wants people to have good jobs and thinks that is the bedrock of society. Is he wrong? Assist Trump in getting people jobs and he will spend less time being homophobic, racist, sexist, xenophobic. He'll leave all the hate and bigotry in the hands of the progressives. Unless you think maybe they would rather ....?

M15ery said...

J. Farmer:

@M15ery:

How much exposure do you have to lesbians and lesbians subcultures?

I have two lesbians relatives in my extended family, have been out since I was 17 years old, and maybe a fifth of my social circle is lesbian women, so I'd say I have had a decent exposure to lesbian culture.


And yet you haven't seen much old/young coupling? It's certainly common in mentoring relationships.

Wasn't trying to put you down; just surprised by the claim that this is uncommon.

Bay Area Guy said...

Steven nails it at 2/20/17, 4:34 PM.

J. Farmer said...

@M15ery:

And yet you haven't seen much old/young coupling? t's certainly common in mentoring relationships.

What do you mean by "mentoring relationships." What I am saying is that I am not aware of there being a large segment of the lesbian population that, regardless of age, seeks sexual relationships almost exclusively with younger, teenage females. The example I gave was that of an entire lexicon of gay slang devoted to his phenomenon while I am aware of no similar such lexicon among lesbians. And just to be sure, "I am not aware of..." is never meant to be read as "There is no..." I am completely open to having my mind changed. I can only speak from what I've observed in my life as an adult gay male.

Francisco D said...

Stephen,

Maybe I can finish Achilles' response to your questions.

#5. Yes. I feel much safer with Trump replacing Obama as POTUS, infinitely safer. I'm sure many liberals feel the same way.

#6. If you could detangle the talking points into a coherent theme with some supporting evidence, I could respond.

#7. The guy is in office for a week with the Dems slow rolling his appointments, the media trying to create a crisis atmosphere and the usual suspects fantasizing about getting Trump out of office ASAP. I agree that order was not perfectly written or rolled out. Let's impeach him for that.

#8. Another mishmash like #6. Try Harder. Guess who was an early contribute to Schumer's first congressional campaign. Chuck is now trying to sabotage his good friend for blatantly partisan purposes.

Gk1 said...

Yes, absolutely the liberals are driving people to Trump. They have been a boon to the sagging republican party but they are too just self absorbed to notice. I think the smarter ones are catching on and trying to come up with a way of staying energized without calling for impeachment 1 month into the Trump presidency. I wish them luck.

Rusty said...

AReasonableMan said...
Yancey Ward said...
If a student group wants to invite such a speaker, then, yes, he should be allowed to speak.

"What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens? Should he/she be feted on university campuses?"

Palestinian student organizations already do that.

Rusty said...

J. Farmer said...
@Bob Loblaw:

"Sanctions brought them to the table and got them to pretend to accept limitations on their nuclear program. They haven't actually slowed development, though.

And yet hardliners opposed the deal all the time and denounced it as a giveaway to western powers. Iran's negotiator was also constantly called into question by the hardliners because he had been educated in the United States. I'd be willing to make a cash bet that the Iranians do not test a weapon this year or next. If you're interested in taking me up on it, let me know and we can get in touch privately."

Cmon Farmer. Don't you know political theater when you see it? You and Obama got played. It all turned out right along the lines I predicted.
Now , if you recall, I said within five years. I'm going to extend that to seven. But it doesn't make any difference if its twenty years as long as Israel exists and the The power structure in Iran stays the same eventually they will have their very own nuclear bomb. You can pomntificate all you want , but nothing in theor behsvior or rhetoric lesds to any other conclusion.

Unknown said...

Conservatives were criticized for years under Obama, but they seem to have done ok. Relentless resistance does work.

J. Farmer said...

@Rusty:

As always Rusty, if you're so sure of yourself, put your money where your mouth is. I'm willing to put $1,000 in an escrow account for the next two years. You match it. If by 02/28/19, Iran does not have a nuclear bomb, I get the money. If they do, you get it. I'll email you my contact information if you're interested.

damikesc said...

What about a speaker who advocates the mass extermination of Jews in ovens? Should he/she be feted on university campuses?

Didn't the President of Iran get a more respectful visit to Columbia than almost all conservatives?

Lewis Wetzel said...

Unknown said...
Conservatives were criticized for years under Obama, but they seem to have done ok. Relentless resistance does work.

This is truly pathetic, "Unknown." No conservative would ever describe the GOP congress as offering Obama 'relentless resistance.' That is because they have a better grasp of reality than liberals.
NPR? Still funded. Planned parenthood? Still funded. Obamacare? Still funded.

Gospace said...

Michael K said...

She made the mistake of going to the women's rugby practice to see what it was like.

She said they were all really dikey lesbians and they went for her in a big way. She made one visit and told them she wasn't interested (although not why) and she could not get rid of them. They were calling her for the rest of the school year.


Sounds like she was surprised this would be the case. Why? I'm not. Nor is any unbiased observer of the human condition. Most females are female, and identify that way. Rugby is an unabashedly macho sport. A normal heterosexual female might enjoy watching rugged men play, but doesn't see herself out the field. There's something a little bit off about rugby players, considering the most common rugby bumper sticker I see is Rugby players eat their dead.

grackle said...

From a NYT op-ed by Sabrina Tavernise titled "Are Liberals Helping Trump?"

I'll just answer from my personal perspective (about how it affects me): Yes.


Speaking as an early and enthusiastic Trump supporter, I couldn’t be happier with the way Liberals are reacting to Trump. I’m sure that on some level of consciousness that they are aware that they are losing the war but the virtue-signaling, fake outrage, idiotic fake news items and casual hypocrisy is just too, too tempting. They’ve been feeding on it for decades and it kept them fat and sassy.

But Trump has them locked in a logic-box. They took stupid stances early on in the Trump phenomenon and they kept doubling down, thinking they could bring him down as they have so many others. Now ALL they can do is triple-down and at this early date, not a month in, are already swimming in the treacherous waters of impeachment talk and eliminationist rhetoric. Jesus, what’s next?

Gospace said...

Bay Area Guy said...
@Hombre,

Similar story here. Growing up in SF/Bay Area, I didn't meet a Republican till I was 18.


You did, you just didn't recognize them. They're the ones who kept their mouths shut when the rest of the room was bashing Bush, Reagan, McCain, Scott Walker, Palin, or whatever Republican/conservative was featured on "Two Minute Hate" that day.

Sammy Finkelman said...

DKWalser said on 2/20/17, @ 10:33 AM

The Left is at war with the idea that people holding differing opinions can and should get along.

They are at war with the idea that (some opinions) are legitimae and they want people to be shunned. Now many people could agree with that, if we are talking David Duke, but sme of the opinions they want pushed outside the Pverton window are opinions that virtually everyone had till very recently, and others don't deserve that categorization, and it's almost at the point where having voted for someone who got 48% of the vote is cause to shun them.

Seeing Red said...

Look in the mirror Progs.

You are why you got Trump and the middle finger.

Sammy Finkelman said...

...pushed outside the Overton window.

Jon Ericson said...

Ooh damn, that steven guy @4:34 spilled the beans.

Jon Ericson said...

Unk #05 please ignore the post @4:34
repeat:
Unk #05 please ignore the post @4:34

-Uncle Ernie.

Jon Ericson said...

window

Jon Ericson said...

fiddle

Unknown said...

Is all about Dr. Ekpen, is good and powerful he can help you solve what problem you are facing, all you need to do is to contact him and tell him your problem, be rest assure that your problem will be solve. Contact him today at ekpentemple@gmail.com or on whatsapp +2347050270218.

Jon Ericson said...

ekpem is the greatest.
All hail ekpem.
All email from ekpentemple@gmail.com will be forwarded to:
bite-me-and-go-to-hell@gmail.com.

Rusty said...

Blogger J. Farmer said...
@Rusty:

"As always Rusty, if you're so sure of yourself, put your money where your mouth is. I'm willing to put $1,000 in an escrow account for the next two years. You match it. If by 02/28/19, Iran does not have a nuclear bomb, I get the money. If they do, you get it. I'll email you my contact information if you're interested."

Not relly the point, is it?
I'll save a C-note for 2022.
They have the money. They have the will. I wouldn't be surprise if they were in negotiations with Pakistan and N Korea for an actual bomb.

But here's my question.
What makes you think thy won't. Forget the "agreement" it was a fraud from the very beginning.

Anonymous said...

Did the NYT drop rheir paywall? Talking about debt. When 95% is borrowed amoney to prepare for another ww2, and big armies on both sides of the Ex-Iron Curtain Seems a silly game to play (as observed in an old movie). How to break the "cry wolf" make northern Virginia Richer cycle? Maybe focus on trade rather than the defense industrial complex. Why is the deep state fighting for their lives? They are about to have to go back to working for a living in every agency that thinks it knows better than the people what's best for them. Ok, maybe once upon a time. Good thing T. is going to reopen the mines and steel mills. Then there will be lots of jobs for these folks, no degree required. Just a strong back and ability to get up very earlier and save every penny. It may be that NYT has not dropped their paywall but if they have, we may be in the new millennium. Not BC but MSM telling us what to do and choosing our masters.

Anonymous said...

We csn't allow Iran to have nukes. What makes anyone think this is not already the case? If NK can (claim and well be able) build a H-Bomb, then anyone can.. A nuke means no more land invasions, seems to make the first world job's easier. Granted, it's good fun to make the first world grovel and pay extortion so their citizens are fooled into believing that's this is why the must maintain multi-trillion dollar armies (wolf! wolf)talk about a "win-win" and pay for an army dressed in $1,000 suits flying around the world to do the anti proliferation kabuki dance in a Trump hotel. If I were in charge I'd sell nukes to anyone who asked, and put Japan in the business of building them. Highest quality manufacturing in the world. And if they ever need to deal with NK or China they could take a few off the production line and solve their own problems themselves. It will make everyone very polite and responsible for their own problems. Besides at a few million dollars each, it'll make a tiny dent in our trade balance.

Kirk Parker said...

Stephen,

" failure to divest one's world wide business or even establish a blind trust"

All the furor over this is just a sign of how clueless and anti-business the "ruling elite" is. Say you own a 100k shares of, oh.... maybe... Halliburton. That's about $5.4 million as of this morning. You could easily divest yourself of that on a few days, because (a) there's an entire enterprise set up specifically for the purposes of expediting such transactions, (b) the buyers are mostly interested in the price and the likely near-term gains and/or dividends, and the really YUUUGE one (c) the shares don't have to be sold as a block; it could realistically be 10,000 separate buyers adding $540 worth of Have to their portfolios.

None of the above is true of a set of large-property real estate holdings. (Ever sold a golf course?)

The same is true with a blind trust: the trustees' charge isn't to maintain the same 100k shares of HAB and return them to you unharmed after you leave office, but rather to manage your portfolio to best meet your financial goals for it. The "blind" aspect means that you never have any idea what trades are made or what the current holdings are. Here again, the possibility of having a blind trust for large properties is laughable; imagine trying to sell Trump Golf LA without that becoming widespread public knowledge...

g2loq said...

I always knew it would be delicious. I didn't know it would be THIS delicious.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 302 of 302   Newer› Newest»