Althouse: "Another unqualified Trumper who had no business in the White House. She had zero experience in government; but she had the 'right look' for Trump's reality show."

March 1, 2018

"Another unqualified Trumper who had no business in the White House. She had zero experience in government; but she had the 'right look' for Trump's reality show."

"She is following her boyfriend Rob Porter out the door and probably considering what her lawyer bills will be now that she has admitted to telling "white" lies for Donnie Trump. She is complicit in all of the sleaze and crimes of this administration. A true Trumper; she joins a whole line of luminaries who have helped to degrade our democracy and our standing in the world. Glad to see the girl (and I do mean 'girl') go."

That's the top-rated comment (by Trishspirit33 Los Angeles) on Maggie Haberman's "Hope Hicks to Leave Post as White House Communications Director" in the NYT.

I'm not surprised to see that kind of sexism, but I'm tempted to affect surprise and call this an amazing display of sexism: When a woman gets a great job, she got it because of her looks. When a woman makes a career decision, she's doing it for a man. And just go ahead and call her a "girl" and underscore that you mean to disparage her in a specifically gendered manner.

As for the "white lies" — who in politics doesn't tell white lies? If they say they don't, they're telling a white lie. I'd give Hicks honesty points for admitting that she tells white lies, though not too many points, because it's so obvious that white lies must be told that it's like admitting you're not perfect.

Does any politician claim never to have lied?

I know some have spoken in the future tense. Jimmy Carter famously said: "I will never lie to you."

And Donald Trump released his inner Jimmy in 2016: "In this journey, I will never lie to you. I will never tell you something I do not believe."

Did they ever say — in the past tense — they never lied? Will anyone sit them down at a hearing and confront them with the question have you ever lied? No. But if they did, they might think — don't say this out loud! — it depends on what the meaning of "lie" is. And then they might decide they could say no. Or they could be decently honest and admit to telling "white lies."

132 comments:

J. Farmer said...: I wonder what the difference between a white lie and a black lie are. Is it one of those know-it-when-I-see-it kind of situations?; 3/1/18, 9:35 AM
Gahrie said...: Close.

When a Republican or Conservative woman gets a great job, she got it because of her looks. When a Republican or Conservative woman makes a career decision, she's doing it for a man. And just go ahead and call her a "girl" and underscore that you mean to disparage her in a specifically gendered manner.

FTFY; 3/1/18, 9:36 AM
Gahrie said...: I wonder what the difference between a white lie and a black lie are. Is it one of those know-it-when-I-see-it kind of situations?

A White lie is meant to be polite, a Black lie is meant to deceive.; 3/1/18, 9:36 AM
Lexington Green said...: The hate is unremitting. It is the new normal. It is going to be permanently mutual. Sad!; 3/1/18, 9:37 AM
Unknown said...: Wait, a leftist being a sexist against a Republican woman? Gosh, I've never ever heard that before! Right, Ms. Palin and Ms. Rice?

Just like the most racist remarks are made by leftists against black Republicans. Justice Thomas springs to mind.

It's like if you asked Heinrich Himmler if he was a mass murderer for killing all those Jews... of course not! Jews aren't human, after all, so whatever you do to them is ok!

And for the left, and people like Chuck, Conservatives are not humans at all, so there's no problem being racist, sexist, etc against them. Just like they won't have any problem killing us all once they get the chance.

--Vance; 3/1/18, 9:38 AM
Matt said...: As opposed to the frat boys who got jobs writing speeches for Obama, I guess.

Remember back before Trump when no one unqualified EVER got high-power government jobs? Good times, man. Good times.; 3/1/18, 9:40 AM
Henry said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/1/18, 9:42 AM
Henry said...: Here's my review of that comment:

"Notice how there is a strong female character at the center but everything is paranoid, violent, and sexual."

* * *

Here's U.S. Grant using the present perfect progressive tense, followed by the simple present tense:

Mistakes have been made, as all can see.... It is impossible, where so many trusts are to be allotted, that the right parties should be chosen in every instance.

* * *

That from Grant's farewell address to Congress in 1876. He throws a bone to all past and future Presidents:

It is not necessarily evidence of blunder on the part of the Executive because there are these differences of views.; 3/1/18, 9:43 AM
WisRich said...: White lies in D.C. are called Political Spin.; 3/1/18, 9:43 AM
rhhardin said...: Miss Sloane (2016) was good, for a savvy woman in political lobbying.

If you're going to avoid job-for-looks analysis you have to be really good so that that's what people notice. Hope ain't that.

Job-for-looks doesn't apply to men because who cares how they look.; 3/1/18, 9:44 AM
Henry said...: An unqualified luminary. Is that correct? Someone needs help with their insults.; 3/1/18, 9:44 AM
Fernandinande said...: "an amazing display of sexism: When a woman gets a great job, she got it because of her looks."

I'd like to be amazed but I can't seem to find that display of sexism; it's not in the referenced comment.; 3/1/18, 9:46 AM
rhhardin said...: I never noticed Hope in any case, nor did I recognize the name, assuming she wasn't a women's soccer player.; 3/1/18, 9:48 AM
Original Mike said...: Hicks is denigrated for looking good, Sanders is denigrated for not. What do they want?

That’s a rhetorical question. I know what they want. They get off on their own hatred.; 3/1/18, 9:49 AM
Fernandinande said...: Oh, the "right look" in the title. Everyone in politics has the "right look". This is the wrong look.; 3/1/18, 9:50 AM
rhhardin said...: The crowd around Trump doesn't have Trump's facility with sand-in-the-gears leftist fixing.

Trump against a Stephen Potter (gamesmanship, lifesmanship) would be interesting.; 3/1/18, 9:51 AM
rhhardin said...: There's a lot of stuff about women in jobs that you know in advance, that doesn't overlap much with what you know about men in jobs.

Knowing stuff is sexism, when it comes to gender.; 3/1/18, 9:53 AM
Sebastian said...: "I'm not surprised to see that kind of sexism, but I'm tempted to affect surprise and call this an amazing display of sexism:"

Thanks for avoiding the faux questions and just calling BS on this. Data point #2099 confirming that progs don't believe anything they say. Sexism, racism--it's all tools to them, to be used, or not, as needed.

"And Donald Trump released his inner Jimmy in 2016: "In this journey, I will never lie to you. I will never tell you something I do not believe."" See, he's the master bullshitter. See Frankfurt, Harry. But Jimmy was different: a proud, self-righteous, better-than-thou prick.; 3/1/18, 9:54 AM
Nonapod said...: Wow, you can almost feel the hot hatred emanating from that comment. If you could somehow harness all the Trump hate being generated and repurpose it as source of infinitely renewable energy we could power the world.; 3/1/18, 9:54 AM
Michael K said...: She has been treated shamefully but that is expected for anyone who serves with Trump.

She ran his golf tournaments when he asked her join the campaign.

I wonder if she will end up in his business offices ? They go back a long way.; 3/1/18, 9:55 AM
Fernandinande said...: rhhardin said...
I never noticed Hope in any case, nor did I recognize the name, assuming she wasn't a women's soccer player.

AFAIK I never heard of her, tho I don't keep track of that kinda stuff. It seems the MSM decided that she was an important person when she quit.; 3/1/18, 9:57 AM
ga6 said...: Senator to Al: Have you ever lied on the stand?

Al to Senator: No more than Chuck Schumer has during his career. And I would like to add that should Senator Schumer sue me I will greatly enjoy sitting in at his deposition.; 3/1/18, 9:58 AM
rhhardin said...: Google is your friend. Hope Solo, famous for taking her top off.

It would have worked in the white house position.; 3/1/18, 10:01 AM
buwaya said...: Imagine speaking to this person (or one similar) one-on-one, in person. Can't?
Mainly thats because they won't, even if you mildly quibble around the edges (with an air of neutrality perhaps).
Believe me, I have been in this position constantly for a couple of decades. Consider the post-2016 election flap about the prospects of the stock market.
I recall one wanted to sell out of stocks in her 401K as a result of the election that week, citing the collapse of the British market post-Brexit. I noted that hadn't happened, and cited the FTSE trend - all that got was a flash of anger.; 3/1/18, 10:02 AM
Bad Lieutenant said...: So, English is not your first language then?; 3/1/18, 10:07 AM
Gahrie said...: Google is your friend. Hope Solo, famous for taking her top off.

Hope Solo was the goalie with a troubled life outside of soccer. Brandy Chastain became famous for taking her shirt off.; 3/1/18, 10:07 AM
rhhardin said...: Ah. I've gotten a bad google.; 3/1/18, 10:11 AM
WA-mom said...: I will miss Hope Hicks. She wore a tuxedo to a state dinner. There are never many cool kids in a Republican administration.; 3/1/18, 10:15 AM
buwaya said...: Scott Adams is entirely correct about the utility of rational argument, or evidence, or anything approaching these, as far as political persuasion. Tribalism is far more influential.
Belonging matters more than facts.
Look at US academia - corrupted entirely by tribalism, they can no longer even relate facts anywhere but in mathematics, engineering and science, and that is breaking down too. Every last thing is tribal and political. They can't even teach Latin and stick to the subject.
The only way to shift political preferences is to get a tribe to recognize facts internally, and that only happens when they concretely and personally feel the cost of the failure. In some ways it is easier to get political reason in the third world, as everything is closer to the bone, and the costs of failure emerge more quickly. In such a well-padded society as the US haut-bourgeoise they may never feel the cost, and can sustain ever-more bizarre collective fantasies.; 3/1/18, 10:16 AM
bagoh20 said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/1/18, 10:16 AM
TrespassersW said...: Fernandistein said:
"Everyone in politics has the "right look"."

Even Waxman?; 3/1/18, 10:17 AM
bagoh20 said...: "She had zero experience in government." He's saying her lying was sub-par due to inexperience. Probably true from his perspective.; 3/1/18, 10:18 AM
Henry said...: I'm not sure about U.S. Politicians, but in musicals, corrupt first ladies know how to speak the truth:

Have I said too much?
There's nothing more I can think of to say to you.
But all you have to do is look at me to know
That every word is true; 3/1/18, 10:18 AM
Paul Snively said...: From my perspective as a man, head and shoulders the most bizarre aspect of female intrasexual competition is the common, and readily-expressed, belief that an attractive woman can't also be competent. I almost never see that opinion offered by men.

So I also don't find the reflexive sexism surprising, given that it's coming from a woman.; 3/1/18, 10:19 AM
buwaya said...: My first language is Spanish in fact, to a degree in parallel with Tagalog, but we also learned English. We learned to read in English first, as my mother insisted on that.
Our childhood patois would probably have seemed very unusual to the unaccustomed.; 3/1/18, 10:20 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "Hicks is denigrated for looking good, Sanders is denigrated for not. What do they want?"

You're doing feminism now, Original Mike.

With sexists, women can never get it right. There is hate for looking good and for not looking good. The common factor is that this is a woman and so she exists to be looked at, and when she is looked at, she is seen to be a woman, and that's always inherently wrong (unless she's securely tucked away in a domestic, care-giving role, under the aegis of a father or husband).; 3/1/18, 10:21 AM
readering said...: I'd rather see post on POTUS calling his 71 year old cabinet officer Mr Magoo than nyt poster calling 29 year old top WH aide a girl.; 3/1/18, 10:21 AM
Bay Area Guy said...: The Left is perpetually in a state of "war". So they take weird satisfaction from the ouster of 1 corporal (a very attractive female) from the enemy side.; 3/1/18, 10:22 AM
readering said...: Indicted campaign aide older than Hicks dismissed internally as coffee boy.; 3/1/18, 10:25 AM
buwaya said...: Of course, Sessions really does look like Mr. Magoo.; 3/1/18, 10:25 AM
rhhardin said...: Women in the workplace are seen as women.

Reproduction by cell division would fix it, otherwise it will continue.; 3/1/18, 10:26 AM
Ficta said...: This administration frequently reminds me of the Woody Allen play Don't Drink the Water where an ambassador's son causes diplomatic chaos by stating obvious truths out loud.

Actually this administration reminds me of a lot of things:

FDR's fireside chats.
Truman's campaign. Actually a lot of things about Truman.
Eisenhower's managerial style.
Kennedy's....wife?
Johnson's crudity
Nixon's loathing of the elites.
Carter, thankfully nothing comes to mind
Reagan's optimism
Bush 1, nope nothing
Clinton's...horndoggery
Bush 2's integrity where it counts
Obama, again, thankfully nothing I can think of; 3/1/18, 10:26 AM
stevew said...: MW definition of white lie: a lie about a small or unimportant matter that someone tells to avoid hurting another person.

Small stuff in the universe of lies. Assuming the comment is from a female "Trish" someone or other, the rest of the screed is just typical female on female, dare I say, cattiness.

-sw; 3/1/18, 10:27 AM
rhhardin said...: When two corporations merge, do they not do it by an exchange of women?

It's built in.; 3/1/18, 10:27 AM
rhhardin said...: Merging corporations do not exchange HR women, however. That would be a hostile act.; 3/1/18, 10:28 AM
Comanche Voter said...: Ah it's guerilla war and sniping from the bushes, laying perjury snares for the unwaryk, and maybe even shooting at Hillary when the got off the plane in Bosnia--oops, wrong war, wrong side.

Washington is a place where good people go to get their reputations damaged. And the current crop of scumsucking lying weasels on the Democrat side of the House Intelligence Committee is just the crew to do the job.; 3/1/18, 10:29 AM
rhhardin said...: It's a mistake to think it's women's looks that gives them their status; it's a womanish point of view that is introduced here and there, to prevent wall to wall guyness.; 3/1/18, 10:31 AM
traditionalguy said...: The Lie Detector (Polygraph )Tests depends on the operator's interpretations of what his instruments measure when you respond to questions. The first thing always done is to calibrate YOU. This is done by asking you questions about your name and address that have known true answers.

Then they ask you, "have you ever told a lie." A yes demonstrates your truth response, but a no demonstrates your untruth response.

Then they can test the known you.; 3/1/18, 10:32 AM
rhhardin said...: snares for the unwaryk

performance art.; 3/1/18, 10:32 AM
Sebastian said...: "Hope Solo, famous for taking her top off.

It would have worked in the white house position."

I didn't know about that position. Can you explain?

Apart from the fact that it wasn't Solo who took her top off, and that the Solo position is perhaps not the most appealing label anyway.; 3/1/18, 10:33 AM
YoungHegelian said...: There's nothing the left hates worse than homophobia, either, until Andrew Sullivan wandered off the reservation during the Bush II Iraq War. Then, he suddenly became an AIDS demented, nasty little f****t according to his comments & email.

There's a nastiness on the Left that seems so bitter because, unlike the Right, the folks who practice it seem to put all their considerable intelligence & talent into it. The Right has its hateful nutjobs, but they live in trailer parks in the outback. The Left's nutjobs inhabit endowed chairs at major universities.; 3/1/18, 10:33 AM
rhhardin said...: The way to find out the way to the village is to ask the liar or truthteller if he knows that they're giving out free beer in the village and follow him.; 3/1/18, 10:34 AM
readering said...: Hicks resignation did not make NYT front page.; 3/1/18, 10:40 AM
mockturtle said...: I could list some great tu quoque responses but I won't.; 3/1/18, 10:40 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: What kind of experience do you need to work in govt?; 3/1/18, 10:41 AM
Jess said...: I don't know if there's a transcript of her testimony, but even if there is, I doubt many read the transcript, and are using media headlines to push their agenda of bringing down Trump. Anyone in the administration requires character assassination.

As far as white lies, staff members probably tell white lies all the time, such as "He's not available until after noon today", instead of "He has really bad diarrhea, and will probably stay on the pot all morning." That's typical of most everyone that has some expectation of preserving someone's dignity.

If such a thing is used to prosecute, or leverage someone to admit lying to a federal agency so they can be controlled, there are some serious problems with how our government is operating. Obvious problems with national security, illegal lapses in preserving classified information, and ignoring confessions of illegal activities are more important.

Attractive women will always be accused of arriving at success by their looks, or by unscrupulous activities. It's part of the territory, and those with self-confidence don't worry about what people think.; 3/1/18, 10:43 AM
Chuck said...: And for the left, and people like Chuck, Conservatives are not humans at all, so there's no problem being racist, sexist, etc against them. Just like they won't have any problem killing us all once they get the chance.

--Vance

You ignorant, lying sack of shit. Name a conservative whom I have denigrated. Trump doesn't count. I'm talking about real conservatives.

And don't foul this off, with any claim that Trump is a conservative. If you want to do that (I won't accept it), the next question is, "Alright, asshole; is Trump the ONLY 'conservative' that I have criticized? Like, ever? How does that support the allegation that I don't even regard Conservatives as 'human'?"

I AM a conservative. I liked Jeff Sessions as AG, from the start. I liked Betsy DeVos at Education, from the start. I loved the Gorsuch nomination. I adored Scalia. I've defended Mitt Romney, the Bushes, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan. I'm a Wall Street Journal subscriber, a Weekly Standard reader, a National Review devotee since my college days. I'm an RNLA volunteer. (Or was, pre-Trump.)

Where do you step off, telling people that I don't even regard Conservatives as human?; 3/1/18, 10:43 AM
Etienne said...: White lies, when black lives matter.

General Kelly is just marking his score card. He's in a race to get rid of all the people that Trump has no use for in the first place.

Kelly knows he needs real live swampers to get anything done in Trumps last two years.; 3/1/18, 10:52 AM
MD Greene said...: The Times commentariat is blind to its own provincialism and bigotry. This is why recently announced efforts to make the opinion pages more interesting -- thoughtful, original, discussive, whatever -- are doomed.

It's a chorus that will accept only one kind of preacher.; 3/1/18, 10:53 AM
J. Farmer said...: @Gahrie:

A White lie is meant to be polite, a Black lie is meant to deceive.

Oh, I agree totally with that sentiment. But I'm just not sure if what she calls "white lies" is what I would call a "white lie." Without any examples of what she considers "white lies," it's hard to judge if her description is apt.

That said, it would be hard to describe Hicks as "unqualified" for her position, since the position was invented for her.; 3/1/18, 10:53 AM
Bay Area Guy said...: Hey Guys --did you know there is chaos in the White House? No really, there is chaos in the White House. I mean a LOT of chaos that happens to be in the White House. So, what I'm saying is that, you know the White House? That nice house where Trump lives? Yeah, that place. Well, there's chaos there. All sorts of chaos . A dark cloud of chaos , everywhere you look. And, like, the chaos really shouldn't be there, but there it is. Big clouds of chaos .; 3/1/18, 10:54 AM
Drago said...: LLR Chuck: "If you want to do that (I won't accept it),"

LOL

If you want LLR Chuck to "accept" something, you have to make sure you present yourself as a lefty dem or a lefty MSM talking head.

You'll find that if you do, LLR Chuck is much, MUCH, more amenable to whatever you have to say.

He might even call you "brilliant".

And he sure the heck won't go spreading rumors about any of your young children.

If you are a republican or conservative however, well, all bets are off.; 3/1/18, 10:55 AM
Michael K said...: Chuck being chuck.

Hope Hicks had no interest in politics and agreed to get involved to help out when the campaign was about six people.

She ended up in a more senior job because she was competent.

She'll do fine but the stink of the Democrats will be there for a while.; 3/1/18, 10:56 AM
Jaq said...: This will be the thing that makes people resentful of the extra money in their paychecks and the low unemployment rates! Keep hope alive!; 3/1/18, 10:56 AM
Drago said...: "She'll do fine but the stink of the Democrats will be there for a while."

The stink of the Democrats and their LLR allies.; 3/1/18, 10:57 AM
Drago said...: Tim in Vermont: "This will be the thing that makes people resentful of the extra money in their paychecks and the low unemployment rates!"

Uh oh.

You brought up the very popular republican tax cuts.

Chuck is not going to like that. Not one bit.; 3/1/18, 10:58 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: Bay Area Guy - can you do a replace all the "chaos" with "chaos and lies" in your post, please?; 3/1/18, 10:58 AM
Etienne said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/1/18, 11:01 AM
Bay Area Guy said...: Our friend, Chuck recites his bona fides (with a capital AM):

I AM a conservative. I liked Jeff Sessions as AG, from the start. I liked Betsy DeVos at Education, from the start. I loved the Gorsuch nomination. I adored Scalia. I've defended Mitt Romney, the Bushes, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan. I'm a Wall Street Journal subscriber, a Weekly Standard reader, a National Review devotee since my college days.

Our friend, Chuck, suggests that President Trump is not a real conservative.

Name a conservative whom I have denigrated. Trump doesn't count. I'm talking about real conservatives.

Well, there is a fairly conservative organization, called "The Heritage Foundation."

And, here's what The Heritage Foundation says not about Trump, but about what Trump has achieved. Heritage Foundation: 64% of Trump's agenda already done, faster than Reagan

Here are some of the money grafs:

With unprecedented speed, the Trump administration has already implemented nearly two-thirds of the 334 agenda items called for by the Heritage Foundation, a pace faster than former President Reagan who embraced the conservative think tank’s legendary “Mandate for Leadership” blueprint.

Thomas Binion, director of congressional and executive branch relations at Heritage, said that Trump has implemented 64 percent of the “unique policy recommendations” from the group.

At this stage of his presidency, Reagan had completed 49 percent of the Heritage policy recommendations.

“We’re blown away,” Binion said in an interview. Trump, he said, “is very active, very conservative, and very effective.”

Here are some of the "conservative" stuff Trump has done:

-Leaving the Paris Climate Accord: In August 2017, Trump announced the U.S. was ending its funding and membership in the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.

-Repealing Net Neutrality: In December 2017, Trump’s Federal Communications Commission chairman proposed ending the 2015 network neutrality rules.

-Reshaping National Monuments: Heritage’s recommendation to prohibit Land Acquisition (Cap and Reduce the Size of the Federal Estate) was adopted by Trump when he issued two executive orders effectively shrinking the size of national monuments in Utah.

-Reinstating the Mexico City Policy: This executive order prevents taxpayer money from funding international groups involved in abortion and ending funding to the United Nations Population fund. On Jan. 23, 2017, in his first pro-life action, Trump signed an executive order today reinstating the Mexico City Policy.

-Increasing Military Spending: Trump’s budget calls for a $54 billion increase in military spending to improve capacity, capability, and readiness of America’s armed forces.

-Reforming Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program (TANF): The Trump administration adopted and is in favor of strengthening existing work requirements in order to receive benefits.

-Allowing Development of Natural Resources: The Trump administration opened off-shore drilling and on federal lands. Executive Order 13783 directed Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to commence federal land coal leasing activities.

-Reforming Government Agencies: Trump tasked each of his Cabinet secretaries to prepare detailed plans on how they propose to reduce the scope and size of their respective departments while streamlining services and ensuring each department runs more efficiently and handles tax dollars appropriately.

-Withdrawing from UNESCO: In October 2017, Trump announced he was putting an end to U.S. membership in the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

So, Heritage says, in effect, that Trump is doing Conservative things, while Chuck is saying Trump is not a real Conservative. (Sound suspiciously like the No True Scotsman fallacy.)

So, who am I to believe: Heritage or Chuck?; 3/1/18, 11:04 AM
Michael K said...: Neither Bush was conservative.

Hastert was a crook. The Congress was in GOP hands and nothing was done about reform. Now it is being done by the guy who chick thinks is not conservative.

Measuring how conservative someone is can be tricky.; 3/1/18, 11:07 AM
Jaq said...: WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) - The rate of layoffs as measured by U.S. jobless claims fell to the lowest level since 1969, reflecting the strongest labor market since the end of the dotcom boom nearly two decades ago. Initial U.S. jobless claims fell by 10,000 to 210,000 in the seven days ended Feb. 24. Economists surveyed by MarketWatch had forecast claims to total 226,000. New claims haven't been this low since December 1969. The more stable monthly average of claims declined by 5,000 to 220,500, the government said Thursday. That’s also the lowest level since 1969.

NINETEEN FUCKING SIXTY NINE!; 3/1/18, 11:08 AM
Sigivald said...: One wonders what "government experience" Trish thinks a communications director needs to have, and why?

(I mean, yes, obviously it's also horrible partisan spite, and as usual, feminism and its values only get applied to goodthinking women.

I am assuming, that is, that Trish wouldn't approve of such, well, plainly misogynist analysis applied to women who were on the Left; maybe she's consistent and just awful, sure.); 3/1/18, 11:12 AM
Gahrie said...: "Hicks is denigrated for looking good, Sanders is denigrated for not. What do they want?"

You're doing feminism now, Original Mike.

With sexists, women can never get it right. There is hate for looking good and for not looking good. The common factor is that this is a woman and so she exists to be looked at, and when she is looked at, she is seen to be a woman, and that's always inherently wrong (unless she's securely tucked away in a domestic, care-giving role, under the aegis of a father or husband).

Then why are the most vicious attacks against Conservative and Republican women committed by Leftwing feminist women?; 3/1/18, 11:14 AM
Michael said...: She is great looking, she is smart and she is very young. Hate on that, pink haired harridans. Also she just quit a job in the fucking White House working for the President of the United States. Think you'll be getting that gig?; 3/1/18, 11:17 AM
Henry said...: Chuck said... You ignorant, lying sack of shit. Name a conservative whom I have denigrated.

Well you just called Vance an ignorant lying sack of shit.; 3/1/18, 11:22 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Farmer you could have read any article on Hicks and seen the example she gave was saying, “Mr. Trump is not available” when it was someone he just didn’t want to speak with in the phone st that moment. Her other example (in the WSJ article) was “spinning” news, you know, the thing that every comms pro does in politics. Spin. Like the Dems aren’t doing that right now with her leaked testimony!; 3/1/18, 11:22 AM
Drago said...: BAG: "So, who am I to believe: Heritage or Chuck?"

LLR and Vichy Republican Chuck has already taken that into account.

Now that Heritage has made public note of the obvious and unavoidable: Trump is governing as the biggest conservative in our lifetimes, if not ever, LLR Chuck has decided it's time to move Heritage into the s***can.

See this from the other thread today:

"Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck: "Who says that Trump is "effective"? Sean Hannity? Heritage?"
3/1/18, 10:19 AM

Now, LLR Chuck hates, hates, hates Hannity. After all, he's not "brilliant" like Chuck's beloved and "brilliant" Maddow.

So, not that Heritage dares to point out the obvious, LLR and "New Heritage Foundation Hater" Chuck has decided it's time to trash them as well!!

Good old Chuck!

So very, very dependable....; 3/1/18, 11:23 AM
cubanbob said...: Having lived through eight years where we were told we will save $2,500 on our health insurance, we are going to spend a trillion on shovel ready jobs, the importance of spending cash-for-clunkers to name but a few then if Hicks merits firing for a few white lies, Obama and the Clinton's should have their necks stretched for their howlers.; 3/1/18, 11:24 AM
Drago said...: Tim in Vermont: "NINETEEN FUCKING SIXTY NINE!"

And LLR Chuck weeps for his dems chances in November.....; 3/1/18, 11:24 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Weird I always thought Hannity was conservative. Actually, Chuck has attacked every conservative on this blog at one time or another. There’s usually an insinuation that we just aren’t smart enough to see Trump the way he does, but fairly often he chucks in an expletive or two to try and be manly about his bitchiness. No matter what Trump actually does his soul will never be pure enough for the LLR from MI. And Chuck does esteem himself so much that he believes he can read Trump’s soul.; 3/1/18, 11:31 AM
5M - Eckstine said...: What time will you be home tonight? (8:30 as it turns out)
1. I don’t know
2. 8:00
3. Soon

All lies.; 3/1/18, 11:39 AM
FWBuff said...: "(and I do mean 'girl')"

I think the NYT commenter subconsciously exposed her true self here. She does "mean girl" very well.

Prof. Althouse famously said that the NYT seems to be written for its main demographic, the middle-aged liberal white woman. That needs to be amended to be the middle-aged liberal white woman who is still stuck in junior high.; 3/1/18, 11:44 AM
Christy said...: In Mueller's America, if an FBI agent was in the room when Hicks told a white lie she could end up indicted and lose everything paying lawyer fees. Perhaps she's done with disfunctional government.; 3/1/18, 11:47 AM
Matt Sablan said...: "I'd like to be amazed but I can't seem to find that display of sexism; it's not in the referenced comment."

-- Is 'right look' not enough for us?; 3/1/18, 11:50 AM
Chuck said...: Bay Area Guy:

You have never, ever read one word from me criticizing those things that Heritage found as markers of Trump's successes.

And let's be really clear about the commenters here, who have drawn obscenities from me. I haven't gone after anyone, ever, simply for being a conservative. I have ONLY pushed back against commenters for making presumptions about me; accusing me of being a leftist, a Democrat, a sock-puppet, a troll, a paid internet stooge for left-wing interests.

Commenters here have attacked me personally, because I have criticized Trump. I have responded in kind. None of any of that has anything to do with Conservatism, apart from times that I have pointed out that Donald Trump has dubious credentials as a conservative.

And then there are the commenters here, who have rooted for the destruction of "the establishment GOP;" "the GOPe;" and who have attacked and ridiculed Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and other congressional Republicans. I don't consider any of you on my side. I don't consider you to be friends of the Republican Party.

You may feel differently, but no matter what, it has nothing to do with "Conservatism." None of you have any basis to question my conservatism, and I am certainly not criticizing any of you because you were too conservative or insufficiently conservative.

I have pushed back against you, because you personally attacked me. You attacked me personally, and without basis, only because I criticized Trump.; 3/1/18, 11:53 AM
bolivar di griz said...: If the FBI agent lied, like tom Rooney suggests whats the punishment, hr division; 3/1/18, 11:53 AM
bolivar di griz said...: I think she softpedaled it, look at the carp she's had to put up just in the last two months

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/01/kellyanne-conway-on-hope-hicks-resignation; 3/1/18, 11:58 AM
Bay Area Guy said...: @Chuck,

You're getting bogged down in the weeds. I'm not attacking you personally, nor questioning your conservatism. I normally don't attack people, I prefer attacking ideas.

I'm saying, "I think Trump is reasonably conservative"

You're saying, "I think Trump is not conservative"

I'm saying, "The really, really conservative Heritage Foundation says Trump has passed more conservative stuff than even Reagan."

What do you say in response?; 3/1/18, 12:07 PM
bolivar di griz said...: Had rob porter, beaten that pencil neck geek, wolf for slimming his girlfriend, how would things have turned out different?; 3/1/18, 12:11 PM
Unknown said...: Chuck, you think that the Wall Street Journal and the National Review are the epitome of "conservative." Wrong, wrong, wrong.

You remind me of our local prominent radio guy, who's been a lifelong republican as well. His biggest enemy? Mike Lee. The most wound up I ever heard him was when Democrats were blaming the right for some government shutdown.... and he was right there with them.

He always has his good friend on, the former head of the Democrat party in Utah. They get along great. But when the head of the Republican party is interviewed? Oh, it's like the Cold war. No "Hows the family?" banter.

This guy was one of the main sources of the Evan McMullin campaign. You'd love him; he's your kindred spirit. Friendly with the left and hostile to the right.

--Vance; 3/1/18, 12:12 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Isn't it crazy how many leaks about Republicans are wrong? There was the wrong date on the email about Wikileaks, for example.; 3/1/18, 12:16 PM
Bilwick said...: "Unqualified" or "Not qualified" = "Not statist enough."
--translated from the "Liberal" BS into
plain English; 3/1/18, 12:19 PM
Hagar said...: I think AA is jumping to concussions again.
There is nothing in that comment that identifies the sex of the writer - either specifically or just the language - other than the name "Trish" which is usually short for Patricia.

I think it was Mencken who defined "misogynist" as a man who hates women almost as much as they hate each other?

As for Hope Hicks competence, if she was successfully managing Trump's golf tournaments in her early to mid-twenties, she is herself presidential material. Except for another decade of age to meet the Constitutional requirement, of course.

As for "experience," it has long mystified me what the Democrats mean by this term other than a long enough period in public office to assure them of the individual's reliability as a trustworthy "Tammany Brave."; 3/1/18, 12:24 PM
Chuck said...: N E said...
What time will you be home tonight? (8:30 as it turns out)
1. I don’t know
2. 8:00
3. Soon

All lies.

That is all so inapposite, in the context of Trump's latest lies.

In the immigration meeting, Trump wasn't getting hectored by hostile reporters or political opponents asking him loaded "gotcha" questions. It was Trump, on his own, blathering aimlessly. Stream of consciousness.

In the subsequent meeting with Durbin and a roomful of Republicans, it wasn't Durbin arguing with the President, it was Durbin and Graham together trying to show Trump what was feasible politically. And Trump said "shithole countries," and then lied about it.

And yesterday, it was Trump again, just blowing off his random thoughts and channeling whatever he saw on tv; blustery talk about standing up to the NRA. It was Trump, on his own.

Completely different, from defending yourself from the questions of an angry wife, or a suspicious police officer, or a hostile reporter, or a political opponent, et cetera.; 3/1/18, 12:26 PM
Howard said...: Another "let's pick on the weakest fuck commenter and flay him open" post. What makes Trumpsters attracted to preverted verbal S&M psychic gang-rape of Mr. Magoo's last fan?

Time to clean the attic.; 3/1/18, 12:31 PM
Sebastian said...: "it was Durbin and Graham together trying to show Trump what was feasible politically"

That is a lie. It was Durbin and Graham together trying to screw him, loading up the "feasible" legislation with crap Trump hadn't agreed to. To which he responded with his strongly-worded epithet.

Kudos to Trump for calling BS, though he would have done better to leave the S out of it.; 3/1/18, 12:38 PM
Chuck said...: Bay Area Guy said...
@Chuck,

You're getting bogged down in the weeds. I'm not attacking you personally, nor questioning your conservatism. I normally don't attack people, I prefer attacking ideas.

I'm saying, "I think Trump is reasonably conservative"

You're saying, "I think Trump is not conservative"

I'm saying, "The really, really conservative Heritage Foundation says Trump has passed more conservative stuff than even Reagan."

What do you say in response?

First, note well how this backwater of a fight started. "Vance" accused me of thinking of Conservatives as sub-human. Okay? Got that? I'm not taking that. And it is all-too typical of what I get here.

Second; yes, you are not attacking me personally and as a result, you and I will have a different, more-productive, shorter and far less annoying interchange, than I could ever have with a relentless troll like a "Drago", or a "Vance."

Third; I think I have already addressed your List of Trump Achievements from Heritage. I didn't much disagree with the List, or the Achievements. I think it is a listing that overlooks an equally-long list of dubious Trump blunders and failures. Remember, you have seen a lot of emails from me about Trump's lies. You've never seen an email from me opposing Justice Gorsuch, or Secretary DeVos, or conservative regulatory reform, etc.

I have actually been a donor to Heritage. I get their emails every day, it seems, wanting more money. I definitely get The Daily Signal every morning.; 3/1/18, 12:39 PM
FleetUSA said...: An old story about Senator Russell Long (D-La): A man came to his office and said the Senator promised him before the election XYZ if he could help the Senator. The staffer told this to Senator Long who responded, "Tell him I lied".; 3/1/18, 12:39 PM
Chuck said...: Sebastian said...
"it was Durbin and Graham together trying to show Trump what was feasible politically"

That is a lie. It was Durbin and Graham together trying to screw him, loading up the "feasible" legislation with crap Trump hadn't agreed to. To which he responded with his strongly-worded epithet.

Kudos to Trump for calling BS, though he would have done better to leave the S out of it.

You are mixing things up. I am much closer to Tom Cotton on immigration, than Lindsey Graham.

I am not talking about the actual policy.

I am talking about the fact that Trump went on television before a bipartisan group of the key congressional leaders on immigration, and said to them without prompting that he would trust that wonderful group to come up with something and when they did, he'd sign it. And he wouldn't impose any of his own demands on a bill.

It was the biggest, starkest lie that anyone could imagine. No; it was beyond imagining. Nobody has ever seen a liar like that as President. Nobody could possibly imagine it.; 3/1/18, 12:44 PM
Francisco D said...: Sober up Chuck.

Trump will last 3 more years (if not 7) as POTUS.

Your liver should be so lucky.; 3/1/18, 12:45 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: Allright, fair enough, Chuck.

Last point - you write:

Third; I think I have already addressed your List of Trump Achievements from Heritage. I didn't much disagree with the List, or the Achievements. I think it is a listing that overlooks an equally-long list of dubious Trump blunders and failures. Remember, you have seen a lot of emails from me about Trump's lies. You've never seen an email from me opposing Justice Gorsuch, or Secretary DeVos, or conservative regulatory reform, etc.

Why do you minimize Trump's actual achievements while magnifying his supposed lies?

I have a handful of conservative never-Trumper friends, who are still resisting. I tell them to ignore Trump's tweets, but focus on what he is actually doing.; 3/1/18, 12:46 PM
Darrell said...: Very few of the people in the Obama Administration had any business holding the jobs they were appointed for. Being a good Leftist doesn't qualify you for any US government job. The Clintons appointed a guy that wore a chicken suit to goad George HW Bush into a debate to be their Chief of White House security. He's the guy that got all the raw FBI data files for Hillary.; 3/1/18, 12:50 PM
Darrell said...: The other day Chuck said he ha a girlfriend. No girl should have to put up with that.; 3/1/18, 12:54 PM
twhp said...: A good Vox article calling out the sexism in the treatment of HH.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/1/17066420/hope-hicks-white-house-communications-director-resigns-aide-donald-trump-child-model; 3/1/18, 1:07 PM
Sebastian said...: "much closer to Tom Cotton on immigration, than Lindsey Graham." Good. Glad to hear it.

"he would trust that wonderful group to come up with something and when they did, he'd sign it. And he wouldn't impose any of his own demands on a bill." Whether that's a "lie" depends on who's included in "that wonderful group." If that group included Senators who agreed with Trump, there would have been no need for him to "impose" his own demands--they naturally would have been part of the compromise. Trump could reasonably assume that "bi"partisan congressional compromise would include the items he wanted.

My own reading of the situation is that Trump did not agree to sign on to anything Durbin and Graham came up with--and in particular, the effort to snooker him into approving provisions even more generous to illegals and providing a kind of advance amnesty.; 3/1/18, 1:08 PM
Gahrie said...: It was the biggest, starkest lie that anyone could imagine. No; it was beyond imagining. Nobody has ever seen a liar like that as President. Nobody could possibly imagine it.

Read my lips....no new taxes!

I did not have sexual relations with that woman.; 3/1/18, 1:10 PM
J. Farmer said...: @Mike:

Farmer you could have read any article on Hicks and seen the example she gave was saying...

Fair enough. This is not a story I really have much interest in one way or the other. West wing personnel decisions are not something I can get much worked up over.; 3/1/18, 1:14 PM
n.n said...: The worst are bald-faced or barefaced lies, which build character, and develop a life of their own.; 3/1/18, 1:18 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: I am not talking about the actual policy.

Of course not. When would you? That would mean admitting the effect so far of electing Trump has been good policy. Nope, what you are talking about is what Graham and Durbin claim they were trying to do. It would be difficult to find another bipartisan pair that have been so mendacious and underhanded when it comes to immigration. Why you would read their slime trail and declare that their version of a statement made in a PRIVATE MEETING was correct and ignore Tom Cotton and Hicks just polishes your known bona fides around here. Two of the lyingest members of the Gang of Eight (or whatever their number is nowadays) and you expect us to agree with you after relying on these greasy slugs?

Maybe you should stick to policy and quit trying to convince us Trump is the problem in the Swamp.; 3/1/18, 1:20 PM
Tom said...: White Lie: you’re butt looks great in those jeans.

Black Lie: if you like your doctor you can drone-bomb 28 countries, especially schools and wedding celebrations.; 3/1/18, 1:21 PM
Tom said...: And get a Nobel Peace Prize.; 3/1/18, 1:21 PM
Tom said...: Ugh, please add a edit buttons - I type too fast for grammar.; 3/1/18, 1:22 PM
roesch/voltaire said...: ✔
@kurteichenwald
White lies: when I asked hope Hicks about trumps use of amphetamine derivatives in 1982, she said he took them for a few days. When I said medical records I had showed he used them till 1990 - or 8 years when 25 days is max before addiction - she called me liberal & hung up.; 3/1/18, 1:35 PM
Chuck said...: Gahrie said...
"It was the biggest, starkest lie that anyone could imagine. No; it was beyond imagining. Nobody has ever seen a liar like that as President. Nobody could possibly imagine it."

Read my lips....no new taxes!

I did not have sexual relations with that woman.

I always thought that, "Read my lips... no new taxes" was the WORST example of presidential lying in American history. Bush 41 tried every way possible to do a budget with no new taxes. Democrats jammed it down his throat with a threat to shut down the government. When Clinton tangled with Bush, even Clinton said that there had been nothing wrong with breaking that promise; Clinton just said it was a promise that shouldn't hav been made.

Meanwhile, we've got the series of promises that Trump made on health care. To cover everybody; lower premiums; preserve Medicaid and Medicare with no cuts. Trump won't fulfill a single one of those promises, not even close.

And as for Clinton's "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky..." That really was a horrendous whopper. I think you are right to bring it up.

But we now have Trump saying "I did not have sexual relations with Stormy Daniels, or Miss December..."; 3/1/18, 1:36 PM
n.n said...: Illicit sexual relations including involuntary and superior exploitation are a primary societal concern. Otherwise, there may be a moral issue, with progressive consequences, that requires reconciliation or separation, and abstaining from normalization.; 3/1/18, 2:06 PM
Brian said...: I am talking about the fact that Trump went on television before a bipartisan group of the key congressional leaders on immigration, and said to them without prompting that he would trust that wonderful group to come up with something and when they did, he'd sign it. And he wouldn't impose any of his own demands on a bill.

It was the biggest, starkest lie that anyone could imagine.

And it worked! Effective!; 3/1/18, 2:42 PM
Francisco D said...: "West wing personnel decisions are not something I can get much worked up over."

Agreed.

Yet, in the age of Trump, any gossip that makes the new Hitler look bad is breaking news.

Breaking wind is news.

Obama never farted.; 3/1/18, 2:48 PM
buwaya said...: Her best move is to marry a very rich man, preferably one not in politics.; 3/1/18, 2:54 PM
Drago said...: LLR Chuck: "I am much closer to Tom Cotton on immigration,..."

LOL; 3/1/18, 3:03 PM
Drago said...: LLR Chuck: "It was the biggest, starkest lie that anyone could imagine."

LOL; 3/1/18, 3:06 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "White lies: when I asked hope Hicks about trumps use of amphetamine derivatives in 1982, she said he took them for a few days. When I said medical records I had showed he used them till 1990 - or 8 years when 25 days is max before addiction - she called me liberal & hung up."

-- ... How'd he get those medical records and who broke HIPPA?; 3/1/18, 3:18 PM
Bad Lieutenant said...: Obama, knowing how to drive your opponents crazy; 3/1/18, 3:25 PM
bolivar di griz said...: Kurt is just weaning himself off tentacle porn; 3/1/18, 3:30 PM
bolivar di griz said...: They went back to when she -7 years old shirley; 3/1/18, 3:38 PM
n.n said...: "When I said medical records I had showed he used them till 1990"

who broke HIPPA

Another unmasking, with, of course, no witnesses.; 3/1/18, 3:48 PM
exhelodrvr1 said...: "It was the biggest, starkest lie that anyone could imagine. No; it was beyond imagining. Nobody has ever seen a liar like that as President. Nobody could possibly imagine it."

At least you're not guilty of hyperbole.; 3/1/18, 4:55 PM
Bad Lieutenant said...: You'll be missed. Especially that wit! Mr Magoo something something wait wut?; 3/1/18, 4:56 PM
Jim at said...: A good Vox article...

Snort. There is no such thing.; 3/1/18, 6:18 PM
Bruce Gee said...: Buwaya at 10:16:
Great post, man. I copied and forwarded it to my oldest son, an ex pat in Ixtlan. He dropped out of a full ride phd classics program because he couldn’t stand the polluted, tortured interpretations he was expected to have on the texts.

I had to explain to him I had no idea what “Buwaya” was all about.; 3/1/18, 9:44 PM
tom said...: You're seriously going to the comment section to find something to criticize?; 3/1/18, 11:07 PM
Achilles said...: Women are judged by looks.

Men are judged by height.; 3/1/18, 11:22 PM
Mutaman said...: wife accuses her husband of punching her in face which she supports with a photograph and an Order of Protection:

Ann: "I don't trust people who tell a story that favors their side and runs down a person who's not there to defend himself."

Woman refers to another woman by the word "girl":

Ann: "I'm not surprised to see that kind of sexism ".; 3/2/18, 2:08 AM