October 26, 2017

"Veteran journalist Mark Halperin sexually harassed women while he was in a powerful position at ABC News..."

"... according to five women who shared their previously undisclosed accounts with CNN and others who did not experience the alleged harassment personally, but were aware of it," CNN reports.
"During this period, I did pursue relationships with women that I worked with, including some junior to me," Halperin said in a statement to CNN Wednesday night. "I now understand from these accounts that my behavior was inappropriate and caused others pain. For that, I am deeply sorry and I apologize. Under the circumstances, I'm going to take a step back from my day-to-day work while I properly deal with this situation."...
Pursue relationships.... there's a phrase that invites mockery. What did he do? He now understands that it was inappropriate? What did he do that he couldn't understand at the time was inappropriate but he understands now? Either he's lying or he was too dumb/unperceptive to be in "a powerful position at ABC News."

Notice that if the answer is he's lying, he could be lying about not knowing in that past that it was inappropriate or lying about currently believing that it's inappropriate. There's also a middle ground, a limbo, where you believe that according to the standards of the time it was acceptable and you enjoyed those standards and even wish they still prevailed, but you know times have changed and it's inopportune now to defend yourself.
The stories of harassment shared with CNN range in nature from propositioning employees for sex to kissing and grabbing one's breasts against her will. Three of the women who spoke to CNN described Halperin as, without consent, pressing an erection against their bodies while he was clothed. Halperin denies grabbing a woman's breasts and pressing his genitals against the three women.
You have to deny the things that are criminal offenses, even as you are appeasing with apologies.
Widely considered to be one of the preeminent political journalists, Halperin, 52... co-authored the bestselling book "Game Change"....
He went after the woman, Sarah Palin.

ADDED: I clicked on my "Mark Halperin" tag. I haven't bothered with him much over the years, but once he called Obama a "dick" and professed "I can't explain why I did it," causing me to say "Why is he editor-in-large at Time if he can't explain things as accessible to him as his own mind?" And once he interviewed Ted Cruz in a way that caused a liberal website to award him "The Prize For The Most Racist Interview Of A 2016 Candidate."

105 comments:

rhhardin said...

Where did the offending erection come from. Not a normal adult event.

rhhardin said...

The old rules are still in effect, just being decried at the moment as part of a hissy fit.

Public relations go with the hissy fit.

Lem said...

He can make it go away by going after the guns or something.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

rhhardin said...
Where did the offending erection come from.

Lem said...
He can make it go away by going after the guns or something.

He's a lefty. The erection may well have been caused by thinking about gun control.

Hagar said...

I flat do not understand these claims that the rules were looser in the past.
Creeps have always been around, but if they were not publicized as much in the past, it was because they kept their behavior better under cover because the rules were tighter.

Ann Althouse said...

Maybe it was a gun in his pocket and he was not happy to see her.

tim in vermont said...

Men have a weakness for beautiful women, and beautiful women seem to gravitate to power, and to television.

Certainly doesn't excuse it, just means expect more.

rhhardin said...

It's not celebrities. They're just acting it out in public sot here's a hissy fit morality play to watch.

Guys won't associate with women at all because it's all over, unless they have a sense of humor and nothing to lose financially.

rhhardin said...

Fear thge hissy fit.

Hagar said...

When I was growing up, I did not even know this kind of behavior existed.

Laslo Spatula said...

He was experiencing a Late-Breaking News Flash.

In his pants.

I am Laslo.

FIDO said...

Let's be clear here: Propositioning a woman for sex, even if he is married, even if she is married, may be skeevy, but it isn't illegal or sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment is using one's power EXPLICITLY to get a quid pro quo for sex.

It is far grayer to consider two co-workers having a sexual relationship. Feminists want to use that.

That being said, groping someone isn't defensible (nor am I defending him).

But if we are going to go down this path (and I am just DANDY with that. Watching Liberal Dem guys being eaten alive by The Third Wave of Tiamat has given me a huge schadenboner) we need to keep things from going off the rails.

This is not going to end well.

tim in vermont said...

I used to work in a building with a cable channel, some of those women could give you a semi just riding in an elevator with them. Not that I would ever engage in anything like this, but I can understand the impulse, that's why managers are supposed to be grownups. Islam neuters this brand of female power with burqas.

gspencer said...

"MH sexually harassed women while in a powerful position at ABC News"

Mark Halperin as George: Was that wrong? Should I have not done that? I tell you I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, cause I've worked in a lot of offices and I tell you people do that all the time.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Burn the Media to the ground.

Geez if some rich Righty billionaire isn't already funding investigations and lawsuits into Media companies and personalities...but they can't have been, or the Weinstein stuff would have come out already, right?

Pop culture is filth, the Media is garbage, and most of the celebrities who lecture us lowly normals on various topics do so from positions of (at best) extreme hypocrisy.

Side point: how pissed must these women be, all the women #MeToo-ing now about powerful men I mean, knowing that one of Bill O'Reilly's victims got $32M!? It's gotta burn just a little bit more knowing they got nothing/comparatively so little.

holdfast said...

Maybe he was thinking about Katy Perry's big guns?

Tommy Duncan said...

When a liberal twit gropes another liberal twit is a crime committed?

Maybe this is just the way Mark Halperin was born?

It's just about sex.

Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a news room, you never know what you'll find.

rhhardin said...

All men are powerful men. That's the problem with them.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ann Althouse said...Maybe it was a gun in his pocket and he was not happy to see her.


That's not funny.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Mark Halperin is, according to wikipedia, the son of Morton Halperin. Morton's bio from wikipedia:

"Morton H. Halperin (born in Brooklyn, N.Y., on June 13, 1938) is a public servant and longtime expert on U.S. foreign policy, arms control, civil liberties, and how government bureaucracies operate.

He is currently a senior advisor to the Open Society Foundations, which was founded by George Soros.

He has served in the Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, and Obama administrations. He has taught at Harvard University and as a visitor at other universities including Columbia, George Washington, and Yale.

He has served in a number of roles with think tanks, including the Center for American Progress, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Twentieth Century Fund."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Halperin

rehajm said...

I like that I’ve never heard of him.

Martha said...

Mika of Morning Joe had to set aside her sanctimonious non-stop Trump drubbing to deal with Halperin’s sexual harassments.
It’s not like Halperin grabbed them by their pussies, is it?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

By the way, wikipedia was a bad move by the PTB, no matter how hard they try to make it conform to the narrative.

Ralph L said...

Where is the male CNN newsreader aiming his eyes?

EDH said...

Lends a whole new meaning to the terms "poll-tested response" and "left-leaning media."

rhhardin said...

Nearly all women are unaware that eyes are receivers, not transmitters, of what's visible. The male gaze is just picking up stuff that women themselves are sending their way.

Since women can't understand physics, they're mad about it nevertheless.

Trumpit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mac McConnell said...

Do Ivy Leagues believe this is how you get laid?

Bob Ellison said...

Some of us guys are just scared by beautiful women. Some guys just go Trump. If I had a daughter, I'd warn her that 'most any guy that comes after her is likely to be a creep.

Mike said...

...Morning Joe and LLR hardest hit.

Ralph L said...

I haven't bothered with him much over the years
That's a low blow for a TV newsy.

Trumpit said...

To be, or not to be erect, that is the question:
Whether 'tis bolder in the pants to suffer
The dings and dongs of outrageous flaccidity,
Or to take Viagra against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them: to harden, to bleep
Once more; and by a bleep, to say we end
the dingle-dangle, and the thousand natural shocks
that Flesh is heir to? 'Tis a consummation
devoutly to be wished.

Snark said...

The erection thing reminded me of Julian Assange and one of the allegations against him. I thought then that that move indicates a man who has amassed sufficient power to be deluded into thinking he can pull it off, but one whose rise (ha ha!) is not buttressed by any actual skills or comprehension in the seduction department.

Also, Bill O'Reilly is "angry at God". How hilarious is that?

The Drill SGT said...

FIDO said...
Let's be clear here: Propositioning a woman for sex, even if he is married, even if she is married, may be skeevy, but it isn't illegal or sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment is using one's power EXPLICITLY to get a quid pro quo for sex.


I agree. Some people are throwing around a much more nebulous term:

"unwanted sexual advance" as though it were "Sexual harassment"

It might be from your boss. But from the schmuck in the next cube?

It's just an approach my a man you reject. as in:

unwanted sexual advance
wanted sexual advance

Curious George said...

"from propositioning employees for sex to kissing and grabbing one's breasts against her will."

Chuckles will want to know why Trump is getting a pass.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

It seems that people (lefty women) have lost all sense of proportion.

Of course there have been instances of sexual aggression and inappropriate use of power over subordinates. But to equate actions on a Harvey Weinstein level with a guy doing what normal guys do..which is appreciate and try to "put the moves" on attractive women is ridiculous.

The over the top, exaggerated and retroactive remembrances only make the rest of us sincerely doubt the veracity of their claims. Me Too!!!! Like everyone wants to be part of the club. All the cool girls were sexually harassed.

Guy says. Your hair looks very nice today. She gets all bent out of shape and cries sexual harassment. or....

Him: "Hey, would you like to go to get a drink after work?"

She: "YOU PIG!!!! How dare you sexually harass me. I'm going to take this to HR and you will be fired!!!"

Him: Um...nevermind

Welcome to spinsterhood ladies. Hope you like cats.



Achilles said...

This is one way to break down the media I guess.

I think they would prefer this way to other ways.

bagoh20 said...

Speaking of female privileged, I wonder if I can get my genitals pumped up with silicone and then go to work with them half-covered and propped up in a sling presenting them to my fellow workers like a meat entree while they talk to me, and then get offended if they glance at them.

JMS said...

A few minutes ago on Good Morning America, Diane Sawyer asked Ashley Judd if she had anything she wanted to say to Weinstein. She said "I love you and I understand you, and I understand that you are sick and suffering." Sawyer also asked several questions about how Judd, an activist Democrat, could have kept silent about Weinstein for so long, and Judd refused to answer those questions saying "let's not make this a partisan issue." The rehabilitation of Weinstein is going very well.

Saint Croix said...

It's interesting that all the people who are being exposed are on the left.

What this means, among other things, is that John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Joe Biden would all have to resign, go to counseling, etc. If the sexual hypocrisy is over, men on the left will be held to the same feminist standards as men on the right.

I think feminist hatred of Trump is what is inspiring all this cleansing of the left.

I also think the male/female divide will become more severe, with more and more men becoming Republicans (i.e. normal). I don't see this anti-male hysteria being good for the Democrat party.

Saint Croix said...

Also it's interesting that it's multiple women bringing the charges all at once. That requires organization. Presumably there was some sort of litigation or complaint in the past that was covered up. I think that's another part of this story. In many of these cases, women were paid lots of money, and they took it, and kept quiet. And now they're violating the legal agreements in order to badmouth the men. Okay, but are you keeping the hush money?

Saint Croix said...

She said "I love you and I understand you, and I understand that you are sick and suffering."

I think she had a sexual relationship with Harvey Weinstein, and he helped her career, and she feels guilty.

Just a guess.

bagoh20 said...

Everything is rape, just as everything is racism, sexism, imperialism, bigotry, and patriarchy. I thought women were the verbally superior sex, but now I know I can't even converse at the level where many of them and their beta males are now functioning.

Ralph L said...

That requires organization.
There's a reason they call it mass hysteria.

MayBee said...

David Letterman must be happy he wasn't exposed during a purge year.

bagoh20 said...

The left and lawyers will now bring the sexes together in harmony and respect like they did with Blacks and Whites.

Someone's singing Lord, kumbaya
Someone's singing Lord, kumbaya

40% of any settlement, is standard, my friend.

Martha said...

#MeToo
Emily Miller—another Halperin victim—tweeted:

To be clear, I was NOT one of the victims in this story about Mark Halperin. I was ANOTHER junior ABC employee he attacked. #MeToo

She also claims Halperin was nasty to her when she appeared on Morning Joe.

Emily Miller tweet:
Go back and watch the episode I was on of Morning Joe. This will explain why so many of you asked why he attacked me on live TV

Roughcoat said...

Yet another instance of a powerful, married, physically unattractive Jewish man in the media/entertainment/film industries behaving badly toward women. Reminds me of what Timothy Snyder observed in "Bloodlands" concerning the Bolshevik/Soviet terror apparatus: "Although few Jews were Bolsheviks, many Bolsheviks were Jews." He goes on to say that it is important to grasp the difference between the two propositions and to give both equal weight in considerations of the Red Terror and, later, of the Holocaust that resulted in the murder of 6 million Jews. The same can be said for the media/entertainment/film industries. As I have mentioned before in this forum, I once worked in those industries and encountered the "powerful Jewish man behaving badly" phenomenon with alarming frequency. This experience threatened to have the same effect on me vis-a-vis my attitudes toward Jews that attending a mixed-race high school in an inner city neighborhood almost had on my attitude toward blacks. I had to remind myself that the Irish and Germans can also be spectacularly awful shits, in conformance with negative ethnic stereotypes. I still have to remind myself this on occasion. This and a good upbringing by good parents has kept me more or less on the right side of things. But at times I do waver. God forgive me, but I do waver.

Snark said...

“David Letterman must be happy he wasn't exposed during a purge year.“

Ha. Interesting observation.

Snark said...

Well if you appreciate Timothy Snyder, he has sure made fantastic reading and listening on the subject of Trump.

Roughcoat said...

Snark:

I've given up on Timothy Snyder. I'm well familiar with his views on Trump and those views are disgusting -- and stupid. Snyder has revealed himself to be both a jerk and an idiot. What a disappointment. Because "Bloodlands" was excellent.

Roughcoat said...

Re Snyder: I was shocked when I first read his bizarrely obnoxious rants on Trump. I could scarcely believe that this was the same man who wrote "Bloodlands."

Saint Croix said...

The stories of harassment shared with CNN range in nature from propositioning employees for sex to kissing and grabbing one's breasts against her will. Three of the women who spoke to CNN described Halperin as, without consent, pressing an erection against their bodies while he was clothed. Halperin denies grabbing a woman's breasts and pressing his genitals against the three women.You have to deny the things that are criminal offenses, even as you are appeasing with apologies.

One of the criminal issues is the nature of intent.

It's a little tricky, so please correct me if you think I am wrong on this.

Stuff like kissing a woman, grabbing her breasts, or pressing in for erection hugs, is normal sexual behavior if the woman consents.

If she doesn't consent, then it's sexual assault.

This is why rapists often say "she wanted it," and feminists often say "no means no." The idea being that the woman's consent is the key issue. But what's also important in prosecuting crimes is the intent of the person charged with the crime. Some crimes require general intent (did you intend to grab her breast?) Other crimes require specific intent (did you intend to grab her breast against her will?). That's how innocent men--or men who are convinced of their own innocence--can kiss a woman or otherwise touch her when she doesn't want to be touched. He thinks this is fun and she'll like it.

Feminists seem to be moving to a standard of "yes means yes," by which they mean every kiss, every touch, every feel is a sexual assault, unless the woman first consents out loud. So what was before just an awkward thing now becomes a crime.

The great movie Demolition Man (a reworking of The Time Machine) seems to be coming true! (In that movie there was no sex because touching other people was dangerous and bad).

Snark said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Snark said...


I find Snyder’s ideas fascinating. Both he and Masha Gessen are informed by history and have a unique, immersive knowledge of Russia and Eastern Europe. They recognized patterns and were among those who anticipated Trump’s ultimate success very early on. I have found all of it more than worth reading, watching and listening to.

Roughcoat said...

Snark:

Bloodlands was excellent, a definitive work on the subject. I speak here as an author of a critically acclaimed book on the Holocaust. But his analyses of Trump and the political currents that brought him to the presidency are spectacularly wrong and laughably stupid. Emphasis on laughably. E.g., his solemn pronouncements concerning the certainty of a Trump overthrow of the constitutional order and the establish of a dictatorship are just plain stupid.

Roughcoat said...

establish = establishment

Big Mike said...

So the rule that said it was okay to molest women as long as you were rich, had the power to assist — or damage — a woman’s career, and had impeccable progressive credentials is now null and void — retrospectively.

Pass the popcorn.

Bob Ellison said...

I had a friend in high school. Kinda dorky, but good-natured in a way that everyone recognized.

He and I were in class once when a girl classmate walked in, and he said, "hey, you look nice today." She smiled and thanked him. I am still in awe. Can't do that.

rcocean said...

CNN - like all big corporations - has had strict written policies against sexual harassment, and almost all of them require EVERYONE to attend some sort of brief training on it.

That he didn't realize grabbing a women's breast or having sex with women worked for him was wrong, is impossible.

But then, why are hearing about it now? Where were these strong, liberal, feminists, who worked at ABC? Too "scared" or did they want to give Halprin a pass and/or a Lewinsky for helping keep abortion legal. Anyway, just more reason to despise reporters.

rcocean said...

PS these written policies/training sexual harrassment have been common in the workplace since the late 1980s - at least.

Sebastian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MadisonMan said...

It's all well and good to laugh and experience a little schadenfreude at these clowns at CNN/ABC being hoisted on the petard of Sexual Harassment -- but at some point the wheel being pushed up to the top of the Mountain of Equality by these Powerful Women claiming they were paralyzed by fear, at some point the pushing will stall and the wheel will come rolling back down, crushing everyone.

Sebastian said...

@Saint Croix:

"If the sexual hypocrisy is over, men on the left will be held to the same feminist standards as men on the right." It's not over yet, but it is striking that in this witch hunt, lefty men are targets. Progs are trying hard to escalate to GOP men and all men, but meanwhile there's lot of collateral damage on the left. They are beginning to get to Ted; when Bill and Slow Joe are fully held to account, we'll know the same standards are being applied.

"I think feminist hatred of Trump is what is inspiring all this cleansing of the left." But with unintended consequences. Trump is an idiot savant that way. But the breakdown of the Clinton empire is the more proximate (though related) cause.

"I also think the male/female divide will become more severe, with more and more men becoming Republicans." Hey, hey, you must not be reading blog comments carefully enough. This was predicted here, you know, as soon as the HW scandal broke. Please do your homework before commenting. (\snark). Anyway, prog escalation may be counterproductive. Their potential miscalculations in the culture war are the most interesting part of this phase.

tim in vermont said...

So Snark, you never did answer the question of where these published "psychologists" were able to do a "record review" of Trump's private medical records, presumably with some level of psychiatric professionals, and how they were able to interview people personally very close to him, to support their findings that he is a "sociopath." If they were able to do all of that, wouldn't it be a HIPPA violation to discuss it publicly?

It's OK, it's just a rhetorical question. We both know that the "sociopath" label is a psychobabble smear.

rcocean said...

"It's interesting that all the people who are being exposed are on the left."

Leaving aside a couple men at Fox, Right-wingers know the media won't protect them. Nor will their fellow conservatives. And given their minority position in the news-biz, entertainment, K street, Wall street, etc. their ability to bribe/threaten into silence is incredibly limited.

Plus, left-wing women will "Take one for the team" - most conservatives women have some self-respect, thank God.

Snark said...

Roughcoat, I woulldnt charcterize Snyder’s statement that way. What I recall is that he said he’s certain Trump would try given the opportunity through a crisis or event that shocked the public consciousness. His central point as I hear it is that changes to democratic norms are incremental and insidious and that awareness and resistance to the changes must be deliberate, conscious efforts.

MadisonMan said...

But the breakdown of the Clinton empire is the more proximate (though related) cause.

Maybe it's the ultimate goal, not the cause. Finally sweep the Clinton Crime Family off the National Stage.

mccullough said...

Halperin is a creep.

William said...

I think Mark Halperin and Bill O'Reilly were good looking in their youth, but there comes a time in a man's life when young women believe that he has passed over into the unfuckable phase. It's probably hard for men of wealth or power to deal with this fact.......And, in truth, many of them don't have to deal with it. No man of wealth or power is completely unfuckable. If Halperin or O'Reilly had met with with constant, universal rejection they would have become better citizens.......The women coming forward at ABC have the unintended effect of subverting the other women there. What dark story lies behind (insert name of famous female newscaster) rise to fame and prominence.

Gahrie said...

Feminists seem to be moving to a standard of "yes means yes," by which they mean every kiss, every touch, every feel is a sexual assault, unless the woman first consents out loud.

Most of them believe it can still be rape, including our host.

Snark said...

Tim, people like Robert Hare have written books like “Without Conscience” and “Snakes in Suits” precisely to teach people how to recognize the personality disorder when they encounter it. This is not inaccessible or esoteric stuff. Medical records are not necessary or even particularly relevant. When I referenced a record review previously I was referring to the review of institutional records in the case of people in prison, for example. Trump’s “records” are his decades of public statements and behaviours, and more private insights like those from his biographer or people that worked for him, for example. It’s easy to dismiss it as an psychobabble smear when you’ve made no effort to understand the disorder, no effort to assess why it is being applied to Trump by a great number of people beyond dismissing it as political, and no interest in why it should cause alarm. The president is profoundly personality disordered. Non-partisan fact right there.

JMS said...

@Saint Croix re Judd felt guilty.

She said she promised him sex later in order to get away from him, but didn't say they ever had sex. I agree that she feels guilty, though. I think she thought talking to the NYT would lead to changes, but she didn't anticipate the firestorm and the complete downfall of Weinstein and his company. For that she feels bad. When she came forward, she probably assumed Weinstein would get the Bill Clinton treatment--a little public embarrassment and shaming, but that's all (she claims she didn't know about the rapes). Heck, maybe the NYT's reporters even assured her Weinstein's suffering would be short-lived.

Yancey Ward said...

I see Gspencer has already referenced the Seinfeld scene where George is fired for having sex with the cleaning lady in his office.

Roughcoat said...

Roughcoat, I woulldnt charcterize Snyder’s statement that way.

I stand by what I said.

For him to say that he's "certain Trump would try [to overthrow the constitutional order and establish a dictatorship] given the opportunity through a crisis or event that shocked the public consciousness -- that's sheer lunacy, a laughably stupid, almost unhinged assertion with absolutely no basis in anything approaching fact. But that's not what he said. He said, with certainty, that Trump would make his bid for dictatorial power in 2018. He was quite uncategorical on this score. As for the notion that Snyder's central point "is that changes to democratic norms are incremental and insidious and that awareness and resistance to the changes must be deliberate, conscious efforts": that's a statement of the obvious, no one could disagree with it, except, except . . . in the context they are weasel words. And the context is, he's a leftist, elitist, academic who hates Trump and everything he seems (in Snyder's eyes) to stand for.


Birches said...

I'm glad someone brought up Emily Miller already. I listened to a podcast with her a couple of weeks ago and she described what had happened to her. It starts about 12:55. I'm wondering if the guy with the creepy emails was Halperin. What she describes though is not part of a witch hunt or misunderstandings. It is sexual harassment.

lgv said...

Every inappropriate act will now be publicized. There are going to be a lot of job openings. They should all go to women.

tim in vermont said...

What I recall is that he said he’s certain Trump would try given the opportunity through a crisis or event that shocked the public consciousness.

Anybody who is "certain" of anything happening in another person's mind is an idiot.

no effort to assess why it is being applied to Trump by a great number of people

See above.

You sincerely do not like his politics. I get that. He is taking on a whole media-government cesspool of corruption. I know you find that scary. You were shocked when he won, this is your way of dealing with the fact that you were so wrong. See how easy this is?

But show me the rules in psychiatric medicine that allows a medical doctor to make public diagnoses [for one thing] of persons they have never met [another thing] based on conversations with people who also had a political ax to grind, citing their medical credentials.

tim in vermont said...

is that changes to democratic norms are incremental and insidious and that awareness and resistance to the changes must be deliberate, conscious efforts": that's a statement of the obvious

True that! And that's why I won't stop pounding the stake into the heart of Clinton's political corpse until it stops twitching!

Howard said...

Don't you just love those standard canned PR lawyer non-apology non-denial statements after getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar? I suppose one has no choice because you might get Bill O'Reillied.

tim in vermont said...

Medical records are not necessary or even particularly relevant.

Ha ha ha! I am sure that if you played poker with a particularly astute player who took all of your money and yet you were completely unable to read his emotions, you could claim he lacked "empathy" and was a "sociopath," same as if you had. been outmaneuvered by the same person in business or politics?

I don't pretend to understand Trump, he is either far smarter than I am, and I don't say that about a lot of people, or he is just incredibly lucky in his intuitions and the fact that he has the balls to follow them.

tim in vermont said...

I would never have advised him to make the moves that ended up with him being POTUS.

glenn said...

I keep waiting for one of these mashers to show up for work with a broken nose and two black eyes.

Snark said...

Roughcoat, this is the quote we're discussing, in context. It's from a May 2017 interview with Salon.

Devega: In your book you discuss the idea that Donald Trump will have his own version of Hitler's Reichstag fire to expand his power and take full control of the government by declaring a state of emergency. How do you think that would play out?

Snyder: Let me make just two points. The first is that I think it’s pretty much inevitable that they will try. The reason I think that is that the conventional ways of being popular are not working out for them. The conventional way to be popular or to be legitimate in this country is to have some policies, to grow your popularity ratings and to win some elections. I don’t think 2018 is looking very good for the Republicans along those conventional lines — not just because the president is historically unpopular. It’s also because neither the White House nor Congress have any policies which the majority of the public like.

This means they could be seduced by the notion of getting into a new rhythm of politics, one that does not depend upon popular policies and electoral cycles.
Whether it works or not depends upon whether when something terrible happens to this country, we are aware that the main significance of it is whether or not we are going to be more or less free citizens in the future.

My gut feeling is that Trump and his administration will try and that it won’t work. Not so much because we are so great but because we have a little bit of time to prepare. I also think that there are enough people and enough agencies of the government who have also thought about this and would not necessarily go along."

I'd be interested in his current assessment. There has been some elections since then, and we have the apparent collapse of people like Flake and Corker. The "traditional" way to be popular, at least popular enough to continue to wield power, does not seem closed to Trump at this point.

Saint Croix said...

He and I were in class once when a girl classmate walked in, and he said, "hey, you look nice today." She smiled and thanked him. I am still in awe. Can't do that.

I do that. Most women like a compliment. You run into some bad apples. But don't let the bad apples stop you from flirting with women.

George Spix said...

I assume T gets a pass because he has created a nuclear family that clearly cherishes their children, who are all a credit to the family. Contrast this to old Joe and JFK. This leads others who don't have a political agenda to think it humanizes him. Just like nobody faults Sir Mick Jagger’s groupies for being willing to jump two at a time into his bed, especially when dared to by their friends. Is it possible T. has groupies? BTW what is a definition of groupie in the feminist era? I do like the theory that senility is a valid defense. I'll have to use it more often. Yhere’s also the criticism of wife shopping. True enough. The spouse of a powerful successful person is often the role of holding up a mirror every day saying “thou are not a God, you idiot, you can and should do better, and here’s how” rather than being just eye candy. That’s an exhausting role, and when both have tired of it, they move on, respecting each other, often with a smile.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

n.n said...

Most women like a compliment.

Most women, and most men, are not chauvinist pigs, and are tolerant of Mother Nature's evolutionary orders reconciled with God's moral imperatives.

SDaly said...

"I pursued relationships..."

No, "Would you like to get a coffee, or go out for dinner?" It's straight to the pressing his erection against them. Is that how powerful people "pursue relationships"?

Angel-Dyne said...

Snark: Roughcoat, this is the quote we're discussing, in context.

Yeah, and it's crazy talk there, too.

Neurotic liberals (see, everybody can play "let's psychoanalyze!") have been flogging variants of this "authoritarian personality" tripe for over half a century and it's as much sociological vapor now as it was fifty years ago. No matter how much "context" it's given. (It's long past it's sell-by date by now, though from what I can see it does seem to be hanging on in the intellectual niche-market serving twitter/facebook catladies.)

But points to you and people like Snyder and Masha Gessen (Masha Gessen, lol) for gamely trying to keep up old-school Soviet flim-flam -- "democracy = people like us running things!", "political disagreement = mental illness!" -- for use against political opponents. While warning us all about being blindly led down the Soviet path! - extra nice touch.

Roughcoat said...

Snark:

Thank you for making my point for me. Snyder writes obliquely -- i.e., he uses weasel words -- but they amount to what I asserted: the Trump dictatorship will be implemented in 2018. As I said: stupid, laughable, unhinged.

Roughcoat said...

P.S. Snark:

The passage you by Snyder you quoted entirely supports my analysis/interpretation. I stand by what I said: and so, in his way, does Snyder.

JaimeRoberto said...

I'd be curious to know how Mika and Joe's relationship started. If she first rebuffed him would he be guilty of sexual harassment?

Roughcoat said...

Angel-Dyne:

Good comments, good analysis. I totally agree.

Martin said...

Apparently, Halperin can't keep a job, either--ABC, Time, Bloomberg, CNN,...

Enough to make you wonder if he was too forward with too many women and started to get scared they would compare notes and come after him, so, time to move on?

Snark said...

"Thank you for making my point for me. Snyder writes obliquely -- i.e., he uses weasel words -- but they amount to what I asserted: the Trump dictatorship will be implemented in 2018. As I said: stupid, laughable, unhinged."

Roughcoat - We see this differently. Fair enough.

Snark said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Snark said...

"Yeah, and it's crazy talk there, too.

Neurotic liberals (see, everybody can play "let's psychoanalyze!") have been flogging variants of this "authoritarian personality" tripe for over half a century and it's as much sociological vapor now as it was fifty years ago. No matter how much "context" it's given. (It's long past it's sell-by date by now, though from what I can see it does seem to be hanging on in the intellectual niche-market serving twitter/facebook catladies.)

But points to you and people like Snyder and Masha Gessen (Masha Gessen, lol) for gamely trying to keep up old-school Soviet flim-flam -- "democracy = people like us running things!", "political disagreement = mental illness!" -- for use against political opponents. While warning us all about being blindly led down the Soviet path! - extra nice touch."


I think you're probably right that neuroses is some part of liberal DNA, but so is it the case that a certain brutal self-certainty is part of the conservative bloodline. Things seem pretty clear to you. They're less clear to Masha Gessen (why are we laughing at her?) and Tim Snyder, who have long, immersive experiences in Russian and eastern European democracies that faltered or fell. I think people should include them in their reading, even if it is ultimately rejected in a zero sum game where people are either writing brilliant books or ranting, unhinged and ludicrous.

Unknown said...

Since making passes at women is now called sexual harassment, the human race is doomed because that is the only way men and women get together. Oh, and sometimes women make passes. I know this for a fact.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

the human race is doomed because...

Matchmaker, matchmaker, make me a match.

Either that, or Planned Matrimony, which logically implies a divorce or State-sanctioned activity, which in this case is obfuscating the realization of a socially unacceptable orientation, specifically male-female courting. Then Planned Coitus...

It's an industrial complex with investment potential matched only by social, welfare, and medical, and quasi-scientific prophecies for the end of the world.

William said...

Here's an apple to apples comparison. This time next week the Halperin story will be forgotten. ABC, MSNBC, and CNN will pursue this story with the same assiduity that Fox has pursued the O'Reilly story. In a year or two, perhaps after an apology tour on Ellen and Oprah, Halperin will be reinstated to his former status. O'Reilly will still be in the dog house,and frequent comparisons will be made between him and Harvey Weinstein.

EMyrt said...

Ron Winkleheimer

Shit, I used to quote Morton Halperin all the time in high school debate. Haven't seen that name in a few decades. Mark's his kid, eh?

EMyrt said...

26/17, 8:19 AM
Blogger rhhardin said...

Nearly all women are unaware that eyes are receivers, not transmitters, of what's visible. The male gaze is just picking up stuff that women themselves are sending their way.

Since women can't understand physics, they're mad about it nevertheless.

10/26/17, 8:19 AM

Most women are unconscious of the messages they are sending, just as most men are unaware how their unconscious reactions are perceived. Very few of us are hip to our inner primates. Ideologies that deny sex differences and normal human sexual behavior are particularly blinding to their adherents.

EMyrt said...

Jesus, St Croix,

Only a sociosexual idiot thinks he LEADS with the boob grab or forced kiss. In the workplace.
As opposed to on the second date when she's given nonverbal signals of interest.
What we are seeing is a form of courtship disorder.

Harvey was married 3 times, do you think he flashed them and said "will you marry me?"

EMyrt said...

Since making passes at women is now called sexual harassment, the human race is doomed because that is the only way men and women get together. Oh, and sometimes women make passes. I know this for a fact.

10/26/17, 6:56 PM

That depends on your definition of "making a pass". There's a lot of room between, you look nice today, would you like to go out on a date and groping someone in the office.