Said the Virginia state legislator Robert G. Marshall, back in 2006. He called himself Virginia's "chief homophobe."
And — perhaps because the natural order of things is that pride goeth before a fall and the first shall be last — he lost his bid for reelection to Danica Roem, a transgender woman.
“Discrimination is a disqualifier,” a jubilant Roem said Tuesday night as her margin of victory became clear. “This is about the people of the 13th District disregarding fear tactics, disregarding phobias . . . where we celebrate you because of who you are, not despite it.”
पोस्ट्स
१०७ टिप्पण्या:
It's a pity for people who should know better to laud these poor sick creatures.
She's a man, baby!
I'd also point out that, while they're making a big deal about this and other Democrat victories at the state level, state legislatures are the minor leagues of politics. There are fifty state legislatures and thousands of state legislators. This is like getting all excited because a Triple-A batter hit a game-winning home run. Big news in the Triple-A city; elsewhere, not so much.
As long as Harvey Weinstein can meander into the women's bathroom, I'm cool with it.
Democrats actually won very little last night. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HOBTUCv4o0
In my darker moments I find myself thinking this is a salvage operation. The people are so sensitive in the pursuit of freedom that any authority is seen as invalid, and authority is still seen as the means to achieve more freedom. Worse and worse people (in relation to their own passions) will come to want to rule tame this state of affairs.
Any countering models to this model of political philosophy are welcome. It may get much worse yet.
"disregarding fear tactics, disregarding phobias . . . where we celebrate you because of who you are, not despite it."
Unless you drive a pickup truck.
"A woman's arm is constructed to hold a baby."
Why - that BIGOT! burn him at the stake!
A woman's arm is constructed to clear wide hips while she's walking.
Her victory is a milestone for women...or is it for men...or is it for women?
Anyway, congratulations to her for her courage.
The trannies can thank Trump for their first significant electoral victory. A uniter not a divider.
There is a natural order of things... a woman's ass is constructed at a certain angle so that she can look hot in high heels.
I am Laslo.
Celebrating people "despite" who they are is actually the right answer. If all you care about is who they are (their demographic characteristics), you're saying that a person's character and their deeds don't matter, just their checkboxes. That way lies ... apartheid, I guess? But that's Democratic identity politics for you.
...perhaps because the natural order of things is that pride goeth before a fall...
Which of Marshall's statements signify "pride"? Or does "discrimination" now subsume or supersede all the seven deadlies in liberal theology these days?
The male pride was the assertion that female body had the wrong parts to be a man.
But Transgenders won that argument with a little help from their Surgeons.
The GOP needs younger fresher faces. And a non-stop message that the dems are big government cronies and statists who want to tax us into oblivion and waste it all, all while they personally get rich.
That district -- the 13th district of the House of Delegates -- is suburban DC and was won by Hillary by 14 points. Although Ed Gillespie won it (barely) in his unsuccessful 2006 Senate race.
I know I would have voted for that Republican but the guy needs to know his district better.
The Dems needs younger fresher faces. And a non-stop message that the Repubes are big government cronies and statists who want to drive us into debt oblivion, all while they personally get rich.
"where we celebrate you because of who you are" Then, if you decide you are actually not who we thought you are, should we still celebrate?
Of course, progs don't mean it. These tenets are just tools. Rest assured, they don't celebrate you--you deplorable whatever you are.
Blogger Clyde said...
I'd also point out that, while they're making a big deal about this and other Democrat victories at the state level, state legislatures are the minor leagues of politics. There are fifty state legislatures and thousands of state legislators. This is like getting all excited because a Triple-A batter hit a game-winning home run. Big news in the Triple-A city; elsewhere, not so much.
That is so wrong. State legislatures, in almost all states, determine the decennial redistricting. Including US House district lines. And Virginia is a deep purple swing state where we got to do the redistricting last time with a Republican governor and legislature.
I've studied politics all my life and have become convinced that it's something I will never understand.
Political operators-- pros like Karl Rove and Donna Brazile-- are a different breed of human. Those two exemplify serious and talented work in the field of running for political office. They juggle numbers and cultures and regions with such passion and lack of apparent morality. They are usually smart enough to know that the candidate matters, unlike Ed Gillespie. And they are usually smart, unlike Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
Sometimes they just get lucky, though, like whoever ran Obama's 2008 campaign. Almost anybody could've got that guy in the White House. Sometimes they get unlucky, like with Hillary in 2016.
"Chuck said...
I know I would have voted for that Republican but the guy needs to know his district better."
If only you could have been there for him. To lead him to the promised land.
Karma.
I'm not sure where the "pride" tag is coming from. Marshall holds certain positions and he sticks to them, apparently because he believes in them. He'd rather stick to his principals than win. Whether you like his positions or not, you do have to respect that. Most politicians are phonies.
I do see the irony of losing to that particular candidate, but honestly I think it reflects on the poor judgment of the district's voters than anything else.
And if discrimination was a disqualifier, the Democratic party would be banned.
From what most articles say, the vote was more about substantive issues than about political ideology.
"'A woman's arm is constructed to hold a baby.'
"Why - that BIGOT! burn him at the stake!"
It's not that he's a bigot--there are plenty of those in public life--it's that's he's a frigging ignoramus, (which generally goes along with bigotry).
What harm can yet another mentally ill politician inflict?
Ok, that's too flippant. I am truly sorry for this person, and I am truly sorry that society is now glorifying this illness.
On second thought, the victory in Virginia is a very big deal for the democrat party. A story on the internet said that Gorsuch has to step down from the Supreme Court because of it. That's bad news for the right.
Chuck said...
Blogger Clyde said...
I'd also point out that, while they're making a big deal about this and other Democrat victories at the state level, state legislatures are the minor leagues of politics. There are fifty state legislatures and thousands of state legislators. This is like getting all excited because a Triple-A batter hit a game-winning home run. Big news in the Triple-A city; elsewhere, not so much.
That is so wrong. State legislatures, in almost all states, determine the decennial redistricting. Including US House district lines. And Virginia is a deep purple swing state where we got to do the redistricting last time with a Republican governor and legislature.
And the Democrats went from being down 66-34 to almost parity in the lower house for 2018, with a handful of other races still too close to call. It should be noted that they serve a two-year term and there will be another race in 2019 that will determine the composition of the legislature that actually serves in 2020 and influences the redistricting. So no need for pants-wetting just yet.
Democrats celebrate their profound mental health issues by electing someone with profound mental health issues. I'm guessing the broader appeal of hysterical virtue-signaling may be limited. Limited as in virtually non-existent outside areas not so crushingly dependent on federal largesse.
Also, Chuck, Hillary Clinton won that "deep purple" state in 2016. Trump could win re-election without Virginia in 2020.
I know that thought pains you.
Robert Cook: It's not that he's a bigot--there are plenty of those in public life--it's that's he's a frigging ignoramus, (which generally goes along with bigotry).
His comment was no more ignorant than the nonsense any random politician, right or left, blathers about matters biological on any given day. Rather less, I'd say, since it does allude to the reality of sexual differences, even if silly in itself.
The idiotic things the prog version of the biology ignoramus will spout, on the other hand, tend to be entirely at odds with reality, and every bit as likely to have noxious social consequences, so spare us the sputtering about "bigots", Cookie.
So does a sex reassignment operation include arm angle optimization?
What if the patient doesn't plan to raise kids? Could they save money by skipping the arm work? Maybe put it into say, bigger boobs or something or pay off their car loan or whatever?
Robert Cook, if we got rid of all the ignoramus politicians we would have a lot less politicians. For instance, anyone who believes in socialism would be right out.
pride goeth before a fall
Saying that women are better at carrying babies is prideful? Really? Or is it the "natural order" thing? When it comes to humans, there's no such thing as nature; we all know that.
"The recent popularity of men choosing to be castrated and wear a dress ( a ‘sex-change’) has some similarities to certain past practices. The people involved had very different things to say about their reasons, but it’s sometimes better to consider actions, rather than words.
The Skoptys were a secret sect in Tsarist Russia, known for castration of men and mastectomy of women.
Nobles, military officers, priests and merchants joined its ranks – not just peasants. In the late 19th century, there were scandals when some high-ups in the Orthodox church were found to be Skoptys. Pull down their pants: surprise! Cf The Kreutzer Sonata."
If this quote is a fair standard by which to judge the man, then good that he lost. He deserved to. The only shame is that he won several times first.
It's not that he's a bigot--there are plenty of those in public life--it's that's he's a frigging ignoramus, (which generally goes along with bigotry).
That's why it is called "The Carrying Angle" Cookie, but you know better.
The "carrying" part is described here.
I suspect that it is no longer allowed to mention what women spent millennia carrying.
Democrats are idolaters. Trannies are among their current idols. Public toilets, dressing rooms and school locker rooms are their burning issues.
Lunacy abides.
Stunning and brave.
You go, girl. #LoveWins or something. Point and laugh at the prideful, hateful bigot's fall, ya'll!
Johnny Cash: Run On
" . . . where we celebrate you because of who you are, not despite it.”
Aren't you transexual because you don't know who you are? And what qualification is who you are for any job where results are important?
@Michael K. at 8:39AM:
It seems the carrying angle has to do with allowing the female's arms to clear their wider hips when walking, not to allow them to "better carry" babies.
Sheesh!
(And yes...I know the wider hips are to allow for passage of the baby through the birth canal.)
"I know I would have voted for that Republican but the guy needs to know his district better."
Maybe he was counting on his opponent celebrating him.
I do not know about the baby carrying thing but somewhere along the line in a phys-ed archery class the instructor cautioned the girls regarding hypertended elbows. Apparently females have them and they can get zapped pretty good by the bow string if you are not careful.
Although there will be a lot of noise over this election - and it is significant- my read is that it is the first opportunity for the close-to- DC Dems to do something concrete since Clinton's loss, and they took their opportunity. I'l bet turn out in the DC suburbs was very high for just that reason. I think Gillespie really never stood a chance and that the late polling was as wrong in VA as it was nationally in 2016. If you look at the county map ( Link ) you can see the same split that was prevalent throughout the country in 2016. Urban areas blue, everything else red. The biggest news is probably the old news that VA is no longer a conservative state; it has joined the other liberal states in the NE corridor.
All animals are designed around reproduction.
The rest of the beast is there just to keep the reproductive systems going, in whatever ecological niche nature, through happenstance or divine plan, has placed that sort of creature.
Reproductive systems include anything required for optimizing the search for the best possible mate; hence the vast variety of traits, including behaviors and instinctive reactions to these traits.
These traits often become counterproductive in contingent circumstances when other selective pressures are relaxed. The creatures under these circumstances can be bred with a high degree of what would be unfitness for survival outside of this artificial environment.
Human brains (and bodies of course) are designed with mating functions, like peacocks tails or stags antlers, much elaborated capacities to signal fitness, among them complex social behaviors. Being bred in an artificial environment, without the natural discipline of survival fitness, these are often false signals.
Its possible that human capacities for technology and social organization are in large part an extreme case of elaborate mating traits, gone wild in the artificial environments mankind has learned to create. Ultimately this is a death-spiral, as, due to technology, there is no limit to the individual unfitness tolerated by the system, until large parts of the population are unable (mostly unwilling, because nearly all of this is in the brain) to breed successfully no matter the environment. You can breed an animal until it is a freak entirely unfit to exist at all without medical and surgical assistance.
What we see here is evidence that humanities' antlers have grown too big.
"he's a frigging ignoramus" Correct. And by that standard, of course, we should never vote for a VP candidate, or a senator who might serve on the judiciary committee, who doesn't know what Article I of the Constitution says.
And any Rep concerned about an island tipping over: outta here!
It seems the carrying angle has to do with allowing the female's arms to clear their wider hips when walking, not to allow them to "better carry" babies.
Sheesh!
The "ignoramus" weighs in. Those thousands who called it "carrying angle" did not get "Woke" soon enough.
Socialism lives by those who have no memory beyond last week.
@Clyde, luckily there will be another election in 2019, because the House of Delegates has a huge say in redistricting and the House went from almost veto-proof (66-34) to 50-50, depending on how five too-close-to-call races turn out.
This was a shellacking and the first step in recovering from a shellacking is to understand that you've been shallacked.
I see acceptance of transgenders as a stepping stone to the brave new world of artificially created life forms.
The scenario above was once quite a common dystopian trope in Science Fiction, in a vast range of variants. I think this may have especially appealed to SF writers as by nature this tribe, and its fans too, had a secret suspicion of their own unfitness. There is no better campfire horror than that which is both unspeakable and familiar.
For some examples, parts of Brian Aldiss' "Helliconia". One thread in it can be described as "extinction through porno".
I'm not too au courant anymore, but this line of dystopianism seems to have gone away lately. I suspect that the reality of the thing is much too close now. The secret horror is too real.
Overall turnout in VA was up 16% while R voters were apparently down. The Dems first chance for revenge and they took it. Although in some ways Gillespie's campaign parallels Clinton's. A weak performance.
I knew Bob Marshall when I lived in Virginia. He's a very bright, very amusing guy. Most commenters on this blog would like sitting around talking with him. Some of the quotes from him sound like jokes turned into policy statements by the Press. And Bob Marshall was a gadfly; he liked to propose resolutions and policies that put the Democrats or the Republicans, either one, on the spot and made them declare their convictions. Ultimately, of course, he is a conservative, very conservative. In Virginia the area which is DC suburb rather than part of Virginia is spreading west and south all the time. Bob Marshall's district was not part of the DC Realm when he first won the seat but it probably is now. Regardless, he might not have lost his seat in a less polarized era. But this is now. I have no doubt that Althouse is right, that Marshall's opponent ran in a way that emphasized the district's disagreement with him, a disagreement that reflected changing demographics and the expansion of Area Acela.
In 2016 Clinton won 5% of the vote and a third party person got 3%. The third party candidate is gone and the Democrats are dominant in Virginia. But Virginia is still deeply split and being governed by a leader who dislikes most of the state, who thinks if you get off I-95 you will hear a strange banjo twanging and see snaggle-toothed figures peering from behind trees. How will this situation develop?
Steve Sailer is of the opinion that transgenderism is an autism spectrum disorder. Late in life male to female transitioners often show interest in nerdy things. Roem is a singer and guitarist in a metal band, which may or may not confirm this new archetype.
Transgender homosexual or transgender neo-female?
The Pro-Choice Church has a prominent establishment in Virginia.
The history of human progress is the history of escaping the natural order. Modern structures, indoor plumbing, factory farming, vaccines, antibiotics. It is all an effort to protect ourselves from the natural order. Having sex at 12 or 13 is part of the natural order, but I doubt anyone would find that advisable or preferable to waiting until you are married and have the financial resources to care for children.
Transgenderism is a spectrum disorder that includes homosexual, bisexual, transvestite, and crossover deviations from the narrow normal distribution of masculine and feminine mental and physical gender attributes of the male and female binary human sex, respectively.
"The history of human progress is the history of escaping the natural order. "
True. Creating environments that are increasingly artificial, with bizarre personal incentives unrelated to physical facts. One result it seems is a collapse in the ability to reproduce, or just as significant, the inability to reproduce the sort of person that can keep the artificial environment going.
Given your commenters' beliefs, this post is like using bait to hunt cows.
To work around the failure of the human animal at this point, to adapt to the negative-fitness-selection artificial environment, it has become necessary to transition human reproduction entirely into technological systems.
I think that's coming, much sooner than anyone thinks, because demographic disaster is also closer than most assume.
That will a decisive step - humanity will (mostly) not be able to reproduce, and therefore exist, naturally in a natural environment. That makes humanity far more vulnerable to systemic risk.
LGBQ whatever are all transgender. Why do transgenders insist to discriminate by "color of skin"?
Their numerous Labels of orientations and behaviors is akin to the diversitists Labeling of people as white, black, brown, etc.
Blogger rhhardin said... A woman's arm is constructed to clear wide hips while she's walking.
Exactly! That's also how to spot undercover and off-duty cops... they swing their arms like women to avoid brushing their gun and all the other crap hanging off their phantom ammo belt
Blogger Earnest Prole said...Given your commenters' beliefs, this post is like using bait to hunt cows.
Be sure to exit through the Amazon Port Hole
I read somewhere that traffic problems were the big issue in that district. It remains to be seen whether a homophobe or a transgendered person have more competence in solving traffic problems. I have an open mind on the subject. My spidey sense tells me that if this transgendered person turns out to be a competent legislator we will be hearing lots more about her. Alternately, if she turns out to be a disaster, this is the last news story you will ever read.
Attractive trannies have an uncanny valley look about them. Perhaps all this celebration of the transgendered is prepping us for sex robots.......Stereos were a huge improvement over symphony orchestras, particularly in smaller apartments. I have no real objections to sex robots over real women, but that uncanny valley look is a real stumbling block.
Its a common idea, that of humanity becoming so attached (and through complication, automation and specialization, actually detached from) to its technology that survival becomes impossible without the tech and the system in which it works.
The original here is probably E.M. Forster's "The Machine Stops" - which I have always thought should be required reading.
@n.n:
Transgenderism is a spectrum disorder that includes homosexual, bisexual, transvestite, and crossover deviations from the narrow normal distribution of masculine and feminine mental and physical gender attributes of the male and female binary human sex, respectively.
I disagree with this, and I have long opposed the inclusion of the transgendered in the whole "GLBTQ" formulation. Gender identity and sexual orientation are discreet phenomena that are only tangentially related. Sandra Samons' book When The Opposite Sex Isn't: Sexual Orientation In Male-to-Female Transgender People covers this territory pretty thoroughly. It's a bit too PC-minded for my taste but musters a fair amount of research in support of its thesis.
Its a common idea, that of humanity becoming so attached . . . to its technology that survival becomes impossible without the tech and the system in which it works.
That's nothing new. Without technology the human race would at best be a few thousand naked monkeys trying to stave off extinction (if not already long extinct).
"The 'ignoramus' weighs in. Those thousands who called it 'carrying angle' did not get 'Woke' soon enough.
Socialism lives by those who have no memory beyond last week."
A completely incomprehensible comment.
Of course, given its times, Forsters dystopia had humanity becoming infertile through excessive nerdiness (which is also happening now of course), not sexual weirdness.
"Without technology the human race would at best be a few thousand naked monkeys trying to stave off extinction (if not already long extinct)."
But a humanity over-adapted to tech will no longer be able to exist even as a few thousand naked monkeys. Or, I think, more proximately, an over-adapted humanity will be unable to maintain its tech.
Gender identity and sexual orientation are discreet phenomena
They are the same. Gender refers to masculine and feminine mental and physical characteristics that correspond to the male and female sex, respectively. The sexual preference of a woman for another woman is transgendered with respect to the natural order where the feminine gender of females is oriented to select the masculine gender of males.
Blogger Clyde said...
Also, Chuck, Hillary Clinton won that "deep purple" state in 2016. Trump could win re-election without Virginia in 2020.
I know that thought pains you.
The thought that pains me is Trump winning the 2020 Republican primary.
@n.n:
They are the same. Gender refers to masculine and feminine mental and physical characteristics that correspond to the male and female sex, respectively.
They are not the same. Gender identity refers to one's experience of their gender. For 99% of the population, there is little to no conflict between one's biological sex and one's gender. For a small fraction, there is a conflict, and this is what we call gender identity disorder. Gender is mainly about one's social identity. So, for example, the desire to wear stereotypically female clothing or makeup is an expression of one's gender, and it has nothing to do with "mental or physical characteristics." I presume that you are a man; that you are sexually attracted to women is not a function of your gender identity. The best evidence for this is that pretty much all children engage in gender expression without any discernible sexual orientation, since pre-pubescent children do not really have a sexuality. The majority of gay men and women's genders are aligned with their biological sex.
Trump could win re-election without Virginia in 2020.
True. Florida is much more of a question. With the PR migration, the numbers could put FL into play w/ out a change from 2016 turnout.
He has to hold everything he won if he can't expand beyond 2016. -- That means he'll need Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida.
This thread is almost completely devoid of any female commenters. I don't think women are completely on board when it comes to the transgendered and the labor saving devices of sex robots.......I think that women would feel better about it if their husband left them for another woman rather than if a sex robot or transam alienated their husband's affections. That's just speculation on my part.
@William:
I think that women would feel better about it if their husband left them for anther woman rather than if a sex robot or transam alienated their husband's affections.
This is the second comment you've posted in this thread on the subject of sex robots. Am I missing something? I am not sure I know too many people (who aren't socially maladjusted in some way) who prefer sex toys to the real thing. If anything, these are mostly used as aids during what you might call a "dry spell" in your sex life. I agree that women would probably feel a certain way about their marriage breaking up over a sex toy than a real person, but isn't that mostly because women's sexuality is quite different from men's? I mean, there's a reason men's pornography tends to be cold, emotionless, and visual and women's tend to be cloyingly emotion and literary.
Research shows that women’s sexual attraction, unlike men’s, has nothing to do with “the natural order where the feminine gender of females is oriented to select the masculine gender of males.”
“Males who identified themselves as straight swelled while gazing at heterosexual or lesbian sex and while watching the masturbating and exercising women. They were mostly unmoved when the screen displayed only men.
“All was different with the women. No matter what their self-proclaimed sexual orientation, they showed, on the whole, strong and swift genital arousal when the screen offered men with men, women with women and women with men.”
a humanity over-adapted to tech will no longer be able to exist even as a few thousand naked monkeys
Fine, as long as you understand that for thousands of years, technology has been as essential to human existence as chlorophyll is to plants.
Earnest Prole: Fine, as long as you understand that for thousands of years, technology has been as essential to human existence as chlorophyll is to plants.
Since it is improbable that a successful engineer is unaware of the importance of technology in human existence, it seems more likely that you're missing his point.
I wonder if anyone in the establishment GOP is smart enough to realize that this means that a "Jeb" candidate is toast and they need to (reluctantly) embrace Trump or build themselves a nest in the wilderness because that's where the party will be if they are too "nice" to fight back.
@Delayna:
I wonder if anyone in the establishment GOP is smart enough to realize that this means that a "Jeb" candidate is toast and they need to (reluctantly) embrace Trump or build themselves a nest in the wilderness because that's where the party will be if they are too "nice" to fight back.
Largely agree but with one caveat. They should embrace Trumpism, not Trump. That is, they should embrace immigration restrictionism, economic nationalism, and anti-interventionism. That is the kind of triangulation that a candidate can craft a winning strategy out of. Trump sort of fell into it and had the help of folks like Bannon and Miller. Someone will have to pick up the banner once Trump is out of office. And it is important for people within the coalition to hold Trump's feet to the fire. I think people should avoid the Hannity strategy of simply embracing and defending anything Trump says or does.
it seems more likely that you're missing his point
I understand his point perfectly well. My point is that we passed his threshold a thousand years ago.
Delayna: I wonder if anyone in the establishment GOP is smart enough to realize that this means that a "Jeb" candidate is toast and they need to (reluctantly) embrace Trump or build themselves a nest in the wilderness because that's where the party will be if they are too "nice" to fight back.
They don't have to embrace Trump to prosper politically. After a period of realignment and readjustment, the Jebs and their supporters will find their natural places on the Dem side, just as comfy as when they were members of the Rep/Dem uniparty.
The thought that pains me is Trump winning the 2020 Republican primary.
11/8/17, 12:54 PM
No worries, Chuck, there won't be one.
Angel-Dyne:
They don't have to embrace Trump to prosper politically. After a period of realignment and readjustment, the Jebs and their supporters will find their natural places on the Dem side, just as comfy as when they were members of the Rep/Dem uniparty.
Agree. It has been clear since at least the early 1990s that Democrats and Republicans are simply wings of the same globalist party, which is why it has always been laughable for the opposition to paint Clinton or Obama as extreme leftists or George W. Bush as an extreme right-winger. There was perhaps a dime's worth of difference between Clinton, Bush, and Obama. Under all three we got more outsourcing, more immigration, more interventionism, more corporatist managed trade deals, and more government. People were trying to point these things out as they were happening, but in today's fractured, dumbed down America, the most sophisticated political analysis people seem capable of is fighting over if we should elect more people with D's or R's next to their names.
It has been clear since at least the early 1990s that Democrats and Republicans are simply wings of the same globalist party
Democrat : Republican :: Coke : Pepsi
I dunno, Earnest Prole. You pour me a glass of Pepsi and another of Coke, I could probably pick them apart in a blind taste test. Dems and Repugs, not so much.
"There was perhaps a dime's worth of difference between Clinton, Bush, and Obama. Under all three we got more outsourcing, more immigration, more interventionism, more corporatist managed trade deals, and more government."
Agree, what's even worse is that McCain, Cheney, Dole, Ryan, Kemp and Romney were just as bad.
The only POTUS or VP POTUS Candidate that's "broken the mold" in almost 30 years is Trump and Palin. And i'm not sure about Palin.
Gillispe was Kasich's press secretary and made it clear he didn't want Trump's support or a rally. He ran your typical Moderate Republican campaign, which always loses unless the D's run a complete moron or crook.
I'm sure Althouse would've loved him.
When he got 17 points behind, he threw a trump themed "Hail Mary" but it was too late.
A thousand years ago (or in some cases fifty years ago, or even yesterday) you could give a Russian (or Filipino) peasant an axe (or bolo), and that fellow could clear a field, build a house, raise a crop, support a wife and family and still have a surplus for specialists.
They really could. Its surprising how little it takes to re-create civilization.
@buwaya:
They really could. Its surprising how little it takes to re-create civilization.
Aren't you referring to a knowledge base? After all, the use of simple tools by humans long predates what we would call civilization.
buwaya said...
They really could. Its surprising how little it takes to re-create civilization.
I can picture in my mind a peasant-farmer society without war, a society without hate. And I can picture us attacking that society, because they'd never expect it.
"I can picture in my mind a peasant-farmer society without war, a society without hate."
I can't. They too would have war and hate.
And, maybe, headhunting.
https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/3886653_f520.jpg
"Aren't you referring to a knowledge base?"
Yes, and a certain mental capacity, correct instincts, and what could be described as character - the ability to struggle through hardship and not just sit down and die.
Add in certain collective characteristics, a community, because man is a social animal and isn't really designed to be a lone survivor.
Karma.
No. That was last November, Inga.
“Discrimination is a disqualifier,” a jubilant Roem said Tuesday night as her margin of victory became clear.
Roem clearly discriminates against people like Marshall. She thinks that his views disqualify him from office, unlike Roem's.
A thousand years ago . . . you could give a Russian (or Filipino) peasant an axe (or bolo), and that fellow could clear a field, build a house, raise a crop, support a wife and family and still have a surplus for specialists.
Pick your ideal spot on the technology curve.
Odds are the technology curve ends right about where it hits Kurzweil's "Singuarity".
Because there will be no humans.
Whether there will be technology, or technological development after that will be a moot point as far as humanity is concerned. Whether the machines, or whatever they are by then, can make a go of it, onward and upward, is uncertain. Can machines create ?
Science Fiction lays out options.
Trump sort of fell into it and had the help of folks like Bannon and Miller. Someone will have to pick up the banner once Trump is out of office.
I fear that Trump might be a unique political figure because he did not need donors and did not have to tailor his message to suit those donors, whose agenda is probably not what Trump voters want.
People like Gillespie have been around DC so long they do not know what the "Country Class" wants.
Codevilla has some more reflections on the present political stalemate.
Far from idiots or zealous amateurs working from Afghan caves, the men who planned and ran the 9/11 attack forged passports, and used the international banking system, sophisticated intelligence, and logistics. With the sole exception of Mohammed Atta, they did not expose themselves to danger. So good was their security that, to this day, we do not know who most of the hijackers were: The names on the passports they used to board did not match the security camera photos and, whereas Atta sent the remainder of the money from the plot to an account linked to Bin Laden—openly—the world’s banking sleuths have been unable to determine from which accounts the money had come.
I rely on him more than Trump to explain what is going on.
National Review and The Weekly Standard are funded by the same donors, although most GOPe politicians are not as obvious as Bill Kristol about their desires.
Odds are the technology curve ends right about where it hits Kurzweil's "Singuarity". Because there will be no humans.
Or as ordinary people call it, "the Tautology."
[Chivers] spoke about helping women bring their subjective sense of lust into agreement with their genital arousal as an approach to aiding those who complain that desire eludes them.
Or that the human mind, especially of women, developed to filter errant physiological signals. This capacity may be missing or elusive in other forms of life and immature (e.g. adolescent) human beings.
J. Farmer:
Gender identity refers to one's experience of their gender.
Gender identity (i.e. perception), yes. Gender, no.
Gender refers to masculine and feminine mental and physical characteristics that correspond to the male and female sex, respectively.
Homosexuals, bisexuals, transvestites, and crossovers are all disorders on the transgender spectrum. That is a significant deviation of mental (e.g. sexual orientation) and/or physical characteristics that correspond to the binary human male and female sexes. Whereas a normal man or woman exhibits a sexual preference for a woman or man, respectively, homosexuals exhibit a sexual preference for others of the same sex. Otherwise, homosexual males and females exhibit mental and physiological gender characteristics that correspond to their sex.
a transgender woman.
Ok I'm a little confused
Is it a woman pretending to be a man or a man pretending to be a woman
@n.n:
Homosexuals, bisexuals, transvestites, and crossovers are all disorders on the transgender spectrum.
No, they are not. Sexual orientation and gender identity are discreet phenomena. Transgender refers to a very specific phenomenon. That is, someone who experiences conflict between their gender and their biological sex. Now if you want to redefine the word in a way that it is has never been used, that's a different story. There are numerous models of sexual identity, including Fassinger's model of gay and lesbian identity development contains four stages at the individual and group level: (1) awareness, (2) exploration, (3) deepening/commitment, and (4) internalization/synthesis.[19]
Some models of sexual identity development do not use discrete, ordered stages, but instead conceptualize identity development as consisting of independent identity processes. For example, D'Augelli's, Marcias ego-identity model, Cass identity model, and the Unifying Model of Sexual Identity Development. None are formulated in the way you suggest. What is the empirical data to support your position?
J-Farm, allow me to advise you as a kindness, you would be wasting your time trying to debate or interact with n.n. He is one of these amusing types who is strictly one-way screeds. But maybe your experience will be different.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा