Via "‘Some guy wearing a dress’: Bloomberg reference to transgender people in 2019 video prompts outcry" (WaPo).
The "he, she, or it" is especially bad.
But if you like the kind of blunt speech we've been getting from Trump, you might welcome a Democratic candidate who does the same thing.
But it's inconsistent with Mike's presentation of himself as the one who speaks in a "presidential" style, as he does in this ad, which the Slate author who ranked all the Bloomberg ads put at #1. Here's the ad — sorry I can't find a version with embed code) — "Bring 'Presidential' Back."
That ad, hilariously, features LBJ (along with JFK) as the model of "presidential" speech. The most uplifting LBJ/JFK snippets are intercut with Trump's crudest lines (including the grab-them-by-their-pussy line that wasn't even part of a public presentation). But LBJ was notorious for very crude speech.
The Bloomberg ad shows LBJ's "We shall overcome," but (from MSNBC (censored by me)):
Lyndon Johnson said the word “n*gger” a lot.
In Senate cloakrooms and staff meetings, Johnson was practically a connoisseur of the word. According to Johnson biographer Robert Caro, Johnson would calibrate his pronunciations by region, using “nigra” with some southern legislators and “negra” with others. Discussing civil rights legislation with men like Mississippi Democrat James Eastland, who committed most of his life to defending white supremacy, he’d simply call it “the n*gger bill.”...
[LJB biographer Robert A.] Caro recalls, Johnson spent the late 1940s railing against the “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves” in East Asia. Buying into the stereotype that blacks were afraid of snakes (who isn’t afraid of snakes?) he’d drive to gas stations with one in his trunk and try to trick black attendants into opening it....
In Flawed Giant, Johnson biographer Robert Dallek writes that Johnson explained his decision to nominate Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court rather than a less famous black judge by saying, “when I appoint a n*gger to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a n*gger.”
According to Caro, Robert Parker, Johnson’s sometime chauffer [sic], described in his memoir Capitol Hill in Black and White a moment when Johnson asked Parker whether he’d prefer to be referred to by his name rather than “boy,” “ni*gger” or “chief.” When Parker said he would, Johnson grew angry and said, “As long as you are black, and you’re gonna be black till the day you die, no one’s gonna call you by your goddamn name. So no matter what you are called, n*gger, you just let it roll off your back like water, and you’ll make it. Just pretend you’re a goddamn piece of furniture.”...
192 comments:
"If your conversation during a presidential election is about some guy wearing a dress and whether he, she or it can go to the locker room with their daughter, that’s not a winning formula for most people."
I hate this guy so much, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with that statement. It is correct.
Additionally, there is a massive problem with a 'he' in the womens' restroom or locker room with 'my daughter' - though she doesn't exist yet - and it would require a 'response' from me if it happened. It is really fucked up that such a thing even needs to be said. That is the real shame.
What would LBJ have called Bloomberg? Mini Mike is pretty mild.
Sure glad you censored that word because the real thing would have really screwed up my mind.
Just kidding, I don't really give a poopoo.
Can't wait to hear the pretzel logic the dems will use to all rally behind either Bloomie or Bernie.
I'm sure "more presidential" will hilariously be part of the rallying cry.
Funny- I was just mentioning to some friends the other day that if they think Trump is crude, they should have got a load of LBJ. The Great Society author was a threatening and a foul-mouthed bully. He was also incredibly effective getting what he wanted. Unfortunately for him, the Viet Cong and NVA did not report to him.
I have to say that this constant drip drip drip of revealed past statements that Bloomberg now has to walk back or clarify or mitigate is extremely entertaining. It's funny, these are statements that simultaneously may appeal to an unwinnable audience and drive away the audience that he needs to win.
LBJ examing Gump's wound
I hate this guy so much, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with that statement. It is correct.
#metoo.
The "he, she, or it" is especially bad.
It's horrible! He didn't use the correct Newspeak term for "it", which is "xe". Purty sure, anyway.
The one good thing to this Bloomberg campaign is that people are being confronted by the reality that Trump isn’t that unusual. ALL these super-rich white guys are jerks, freaks, racists, and sexists by SJW standards because they’re rich enough to not have to care what SJWs think. It’ll also be useful to watch Bloomberg demonstrate that he and the rest of the oligarch class really aren’t that smart. There are a lot of qualities that contribute to being ridiculously wealthy but a super-genius intellect isn’t one of them.
Mike
"but there is absolutely nothing wrong with that statement. It is correct." Naw, as Ann said, the "he, she, or it" is nasty.
Limited blogger said...
Can't wait to hear the pretzel logic the dems will use to all rally behind either Bloomie or Bernie.
It's going to be one of the Pretzel Sticks (short, and straight)
Bloomie (or Bernie) is in favor of Protecting Women's Health Care*
That's all it will take to bring the demos in line
Protecting Women's Health Care* ie vacuuming up little babies
The things the Woke want me to object to about Bloomberg are the things I like about him. The “he, she, or it” is a dispassionate bit of irony that says “we can talk about that issue later” while he makes his main point. That he does calmly, analytically, and realistically. If this is objectionable then any discussion of issues is objectionable. If his willingness to look at it the way the other side does and understand their point of view is objectionable then debate and discussion themselves are objectionable.
This isn’t even remotely like Trump's trash talk or provocative style. This reminds me, in a good way, or philosophy seminars in college.
as Ann said, the "he, she, or it" is nasty.
"he, she, or they"? That would have been just fine though? Right?
i mean, RIGHT?
Black people are extremely fragile so you have to censor even mention (let alone use) of the horror word. It's black DNA. It short circuits their minds and they get tremors and frothing at the mouth.
Or you could treat blacks as adults, at most pretending to be offended when everybody else pretends to be offended.
These vignettes will only help Bloomberg.
Althouse's proof-texting “he, she or it” is pretty bad in someone who presents herself as detached and analytical.
>>Roughcoat said...
Hey, wait. Does n*gger mean "nigger". Yikes. Who knew?<<
If not, "ni*gger" certainly does. She gave us that one to help the slower ones amongst us. Or, a Freudian slip. Heh.
If Bloomberg were to take on the transgender madness head on, I might consider voting for him.
Children being given puberty blockers? Men competing in women's sports? Boys going into girl's locker rooms? Battered women's shelters being forced to take men who identify as women? This is completely insane. A large majority in this country probably think it's gone too far, but keep silent to avoid being labelled a bigot. If a politician confronted all this while enduring the backlash, it would gain them tremendous favor with a grateful electorate. How many suburban women want their daughters showering with boys, or losing their races and competitions to transgender athletes?
Trump tried with the military. He should continue pressing the issue. But Bloomberg should stand by his sentiments, and it might be a breakthrough moment for him.
@MikeR
I'm glad that I said it.
"Let me put it this way: I am a single, straight billionaire in Manhattan. What do you think? It's a wet dream." Unbelievable that someone thinks this is the right guy to go against Donald Trump.
Probably Trump is president because he has so many flaws. Let's see if we can find someone to match them.
Yet it is the perfect time for a Madison teachers union to let adult men in dresses use the little girls room in elementary schools.
"These vignettes will only help Bloomberg.”
Normal people might see it that way, but we are talking about the Democrat primary.
Andrew
In the larger clip from that conference you will find Bloomberg is not on the side you think he is. That is what makes Althouse's proof texting Twitter size quote so bad.
The lefties have a meme they love "Speaking truth to power". Well the electorate is not all that powerful since these bozos tend to do just what they want when they get into office.
And yet it's the electorate who (but for various fiddling and fraud in the election booths of the nation) decide who wins.
And Mini Mike is correct in saying what he said about "he she or it" in young girl's locker rooms. It's not a winning message with the electorate. He is speaking truth to power.
And for those who object and say it is not "Presidential" (whether done by Trump, Mini Mike or Bernie Sanders) I'll repeat a phrase from LBJ. "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's rain."
That misunderstands why trump won in spite of his faults.
Thanks, Ken B. I only read the quote (which I've seen in the news elsewhere) so didn't realize that. How depressing.
What do you expect, he was a Republican
In Brazil, they have a derogatory phrase for mtf trans. Fracassahomo. It's a Portuguese play on words - Fracassao Homens - a/k/a failed men. It is genuinely descriptive of the phenomenon.
Trans people are failed men or women. They sucked at being what they were born as and they decided to give the other gender a go, only to fuck up massively doing that too. They are fuck ups. Plain and simple.
I'm sick to death tip-toeing around the tulips with this issue. They. Are. Fuck ups. Bloomberg secretly I'm sure believes this as most people do, but can't come right out and say it. I'm all for saying it. Trump should say it. It is time to kick this less than 1% of the global population to the curb, figuratively and literally.
That kind of talk will get him more votes, than lose votes. A lot of America feels the same way.
A lot of people seem to think that the recent highlighting of comments by mini mike about crime and frisking and now the transgender thing are to hurt him. I am thinking they are more about helping him get the middle lane in the primary. If there really is a middle lane in D primary voters. I hope there still is.
"he, she, or they"? That would have been just fine though? Right?
i mean, RIGHT?
Well, yeah. The problem with "it" is that it reduces someone to a inhuman thing. Now, I'm not saying that I don't agree with the overall sentiment here (that "trans rights" aren't near the top of most regular voters list of concerns) but the way Bloomberg phrases things is rather inelegant. But worse, it belies a certain callousness and insensitivity, features which don't align well with the modern Democrat party.
Mr. Bloomberg: This anonymous clan of slack-jawed troglodytes has cost me the election, and yet if I were to have them killed, I would be the one to go to jail. That's democracy for you.
Smithers: You are noble and poetic in defeat, sir.
We are deep in the weeds here. No one could be more cynical about LBJ than someone who has read a lot about him, but it was a different time, and Johnson was nothing if not demotic. The real point is that we have come so far from that time.
The people who have their underwear in a twist about Trump also disdained the Bushes, Romney, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Ike, Dewey, Wilkie, Landon, Hoover, Coolidge, and Harding, not to mention Goldwater and Palin. They liked Rockefeller and Teddy Roosevelt and McCain unless he was running against Obama. They probably saw Lincoln as “low” and were confident that Andrew Jackson was a crude scoundrel.
At last, shouldn’t we at least question their judgment?
There is a real debate to be had about some of Trump’s ideas, but his critics are unable to mount a reasoned critique.
Sad.
mockturtle said...
These vignettes will only help Bloomberg.
No
They would help Bloomberg, if he had the balls not to walk them back. But he lacks that fortitude.
And, before you say "aw, but he doesn't mean it", do recall that the people Democrat President Bloomberg would be appointing to positions of power DO mean it, and they will destroy your life if you ever say something like the things Bloomberg is now hastily disavowing.
This won't hurt him at all. The tranny thing was Obama's poison pill for Hillary. Any fool could see it.
Question: do Howard, Chuck, Inga, ARM, etc. ever post comments at Powerline or NewNeo or Instapundit or PJ Media? Do Jeff Darling or Paul Dueftort ever post comments here?
I smell a rat.
"But if you like the kind of blunt speech we've been getting from Trump, you might welcome a Democratic candidate who does the same thing."
Nothing wrong with blunt speech. But you said Biden was disqualified by repeating the lie about "people on both sides...". They have to cut context, mind read or lie to identify Trump as a hater.
If these words of Mike B's were from Trump every newspaper every talking head would go into spasms trying to out bid each other in describing the bigotry and hate that he epitomizes.
It's different because....
Smithers: You are noble and poetic in defeat, sir.
My nagger punctiliously reminds me that the Simpsons are "not real" whenever I expound upon their humorous yet edumacational exploits.
"Remember when Marge made that 'No eating off the floor' embroidery? We need one of those for Andres."
"No and stop talking like that."
True story! 'Cept the name! Then I did my chimp walk, right out of the room.
Watching CNN to get prepped for the debate tonight.
In one reporter's description of Sanders attacking Bloomberg she said it was a "Trump style attack"
So Trump is now an adjective for the dems
These people suck
Amadeus 48: There is a real debate to be had about some of Trump’s ideas, but his critics are unable to mount a reasoned critique.
Sad.
You're 100% correct. This is why I believe Trump will win unless the dims deside to pull their head out of their collective anal orifi
Kennedy put 15,000 or so “military advisors” in Vietnam because Eisenhower said not to. Johnson followed along because Kennedy’s Harvard whiz kids said to. 58,000 young Americans later they sounded presidential? If the two of them and their admins were out on the Capitol Mall soaked in gasoline and on fire I’d be one of the cheering multitudes.
I comment on insta pussy once in awhile. They are so easily triggered there it's hardly sporting.
Althouse is the highest quality deplorable blog on the internet.
Now a pundit on CNN said the key to defeating Trump is not to be obsessed by him.
Yeah, right.
gilbar said...
Limited blogger said...
Can't wait to hear the pretzel logic the dems will use to all rally behind either Bloomie or Bernie.
It's going to be one of the Pretzel Sticks (short, and straight)
Bloomie (or Bernie) is in favor of Protecting Women's Health Care*
That's all it will take to bring the demos in line
Protecting Women's Health Care* ie vacuuming up little babies
Exactly. Y'all remember the wimmins who were ready to line up wearing kneepads to give Billy Jeff blowjobs because he had the "right" views on abortion?
Abortion uber alles. Moloch smiles.
@Howard
"Althouse is the highest quality deplorable blog on the internet."
You misspelled DailyKos, which incidentally is so filled with snowflakes, they have to pre-approve commenters.
FIFY.
The left have a choice between a pack of socialists or an American oligarch with a criminal running mate.
Good point lucid. I went to daily Kos back in the day a couple times. That site makes me want to puke. What I meant was that for deplorables you guys here are the best to banter with.
Fernandistein said... You don't make friends with salad!
Not all plutocrats are created equal. Mini-Mike's biggest problem is he has a corn cob up his ass and is a humorless prig. Doing a Mary Poppins skit doesn't really count. Its great he can say normal things and his liberal base gets the vapors but thats not enough to win against Trump.
"If your conversation during a presidential election is about some guy wearing a dress and whether he, she or it can go to the locker room with their daughter, that’s not a winning formula for most people."
I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with that statement. Is it just the word "it?" Not polite, but then those who want to force young women to accept men in their female-only spaces are far beyond impolite, they are utterly depraved. And to the political point: shall we take the opposite position? Yes, it is a winning formula to side with those who want men in women's locker rooms. Feel free to embrace that winning position. As Trump would say, So Much Winning.
"for deplorables you guys here are the best to banter with"
Most of my friends are lefties, like I used to be. I like the ones who can give and take. I tire of the ones who are triggered too easily and never get beyond the Party's daily talking points.
Howard--thanks. I believe you.
I think Bloomberg speaks a lot of truth in these recently exposed snippets. It's inconvenient truth now days, espcially for someone wanting Democrat votes, but much of it is just the kind of truth that is not welcome, yet very important to really solving problems.
I hate the guy as a politician though, and fear him a lot, becuase although I think he sees the problems more honestly than most, his tyrannical nature will step on us and our Constitution with the solutions he would choose and force on all of us. He just thinks of the rest of us as things to manage, like animals in a zoo.
What is a male transvestite or cross-gender if not "a guy in a dress"? That's precisely what he is. He doesn't want to be called "he" and he's not really a "she", so "it" seems at least an attempt at honest compromise. Are we really suppose to just accept people forcing the rest of us to use dishonest speech like good comrades saying precisely what is permitted in the public square when they know the truth, but can only speak it in private? What is this newfound love of fascism with the modern humans?
A young man in England was just sentenced to 12 weeks of house arrest and hundreds of dollars in fines for asking a transgender police office if he was a boy or girl? First, if a cop can't handle that gentle taunt, then how can they deal with hardened criminals or bullets? Second, what is really the bigger assault on human right, that taunt or the illegality of saying it, not to mention the sentence the only real victim here must now endure?
"That ad, hilariously, features LBJ"
They lie about everything, don't they?
Except that Bloomberg occasionally speaks the truth -- about minority crime in NYC, about running a campaign on transgenderism, and so on.
It would help in the general, it should be fatal among Dem voters in the primaries.
These vignettes will only help Bloomberg.
I agree.
Democrats are going to vote for Bloomberg because Trump threatens their rice bowl. When Bloomberg says something sensible, but non-PC, he draws in Independents who are not all that sure about Trump.
I'm not the first to point it out, but Bloomberg is precisely the guy the left has dishonestly been telling us Trump is. They are drastically different men.
What does it say about Democrats and our popular culture that Bloomberg is at his most sensible and rational when he's saying the thing he is apologizing for saying?
Nonapod said...
"I have to say that this constant drip drip drip of revealed past statements that Bloomberg now has to walk back or clarify or mitigate is extremely entertaining."
What respect I have for Bloomberg will disappear if he walks back that statement.
This is why Progressives hope to destroy history.
Tim m
Yup. That’s why the debate will be a character test for BBerg. Will he disavow his 95% etc? If he does I will lose a lot of my interest in him. If he stands firm then he is worth considering.
I expect apologies and grovelling. But maybe, just maybe, he is smart enough to know that loses.
bagoh20 said...
I'm not the first to point it out, but Bloomberg is precisely the guy the left has dishonestly been telling us Trump is. They are drastically different men.
There's no shortage of proof that Bloomberg has far more autocratic tendencies than Trump supposedly has. It's pretty obvious that he has a very low opinion of regular people, the lumpenprole. His record as mayor and most of the positions he has advocated over the years strongly indicate a person who believes that people need to be carefully guided and sheparded by a benevolent autocrat.
If I were to engage in mind reading, I imagine that he finds most people silly and foolish. They can't be trusted with firearms. They can't be trusted to make their own dietary decisions. And the more troubled groups need to be stopped and frisked for their own good.
"Johnson spent the late 1940s railing against the “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves” in East Asia. "
To be fair, so did most Filipino politicians of the 40's-50's, one of the main political issues of the time being the illegal immigration of Chinese and the ensuing corruption of local bureaucrats and politicians.
A somewhat similar opinion was typical in much of the rest of East Asia.
It's a funny ad, that actually makes me like Trump even more.
Yes, I love the other presidents and their fine words.
But, cherry-picking the WORST of Trump and juxtaposing it to the BEST of Reagan or JFK is bushleague -- and anyone with a brain can see this.
If you compare the BEST of Trump snippets with the BEST of his predecessors, he comes out just fine.
Here's a short "silly bastard" phone call by a pissed-off Prez Kennedy, lambasting the Air Force about a WaPo article.
Why is "it" bad? It is the English language's non-gendered pronoun, the magic word that everyone has been looking for. Everyone knows it. In the past we've used "it" to refer to things, not people, but in the past we also referred to single people using singular pronouns. Using it would end the confusion. Humanize it!
Cool story, Howard. Do you share your insights on Nitschke and craft gems like "were actually trying to convince you people to change you people's minds" while you're toying with your inferiors at Instapundit? Or does that crowd laugh at what a sad, cranky old loser you are like everyone here does?
Oh, Lord, is the nation going to spend the whole election cycle in a fit of the vapors because New Yorkers are behaving in a lewd, rude, & crude manner?
What a bunch of manufactured hoooey! Of course, Trump, Bloomberg & all that ilk are bombastic. They're New Yorkers! That's what they do & what they are.
If the media & the powers that be are serious about a return to gentility on the national stage then go elect the daughter of a preacher from the South or sumthin'! But, Neu Yawkers!! Fuggitabouttit!
Wonder if Bloomberg was able to get any of his supporters seats for tonight's debate?
If not, I'm sure he scalped tickets on StubHUb
Would not be good if audible 'boos' are heard after any of his pronouncements.
“the "he, she, or it" is nasty.“
No. “Nasty” is fucking with pronouns and restrooms, and imposing it on the rest of us while calling it “tolerance.”
LBJ was a terrible president -- and a corrupt man. He was the first to enrich himself by placing ownership in buildings,ranches, radio stations in his wife's name. Sneaky little weasel.
According to Roger Stone, LBJ also had a hand in the JFK murder. Maybe, that's why they threw the book at Stone -- not only is he a GOP henchman, not only did he orchestrate the WikiLeaks leak of the DNC emails to sink Hillary in 2016, not only did he lie to Congress, but he's also a conspiracy theorist!
They're running out of Jack at the jerk store
Nonapod said...
But worse, it belies a certain callousness and insensitivity, features which don't align well with the modern Democrat party.
You left out an important clause:
"But worse, it belies a certain callousness and insensitivity towards one of their preferred voting blocs, features which don't align well with the modern Democrat party."
Callousness and insensitivity towards others aligns perfectly with the modern Democrat party. "Flyover Country." "Bitter Clinger." "Deplorable."
There are places in the enlightened west where calling a man in a dress a "man in a dress" will get you arrested.
"he, she, or it" is pretty bad but there's an important point buried there. We have been told to "get beyond the binary" but then are told to get right back in again. Someone who is born with a male body and grows up with lots of male hormones (all the while thinking something is wrong) and at 16 starts to publicly identify as female is different from someone who was born with a female body and grew up with a female hormone mix. Saying that the first person is a woman, JUST LIKE OTHER WOMEN, oversimplifies a complex reality. It is empirically wrong.
Treat the person with respect and dignity but don't let her on the high school track team or into the girls locker room. Try to come to reasonable accommodations, e.g., unisex one-at-a-time bathrooms.
Mike near Seattle said...
Why is "it" bad? It is the English language's non-gendered pronoun, the magic word that everyone has been looking for. Everyone knows it. In the past we've used "it" to refer to things, not people, but in the past we also referred to single people using singular pronouns. Using it would end the confusion. Humanize it!
We don't need to make "it" refer to humans. English has a singular, neuter pronoun, though its use has fallen out of fashion. If one thinks about it, one might remember seeing it used before.
Trans/neo, maybe. Trans-social, certainly. The transgender spectrum is piecewise politically congruent ("=").
LBJ?! Bloomberg is indeed as out of touch as people claim he is.
Howard, I heard you're doing an audio version of Nitschke's book Thus Spoke Zapatista and they're recording it in Doubly.
Yeah, like I said before, Bloomberg leaking this stuff himself in order to win over some of us deplorables. Not going to lose any lefty votes because of it because they are all in on "anybody but Trump".
Bloomberg has a BSEE so he is a smart guy, He has built an enormous empire of IT systems.
But, he will walk back most of the sensible things he has said to get the Democrats to accept him. I doubt he will be successful.
He is an engineer and like many engineers, he lacks social skills. He is arrogant, which he has a right to be unless he is trying to get elected.
Trump has a way of appearing self deprecating and has a sense of humor, both of which Bloomberg lacks.
Personally, I think Bernie will be the nominee and even Howard will end up voting for Trump.
These vignettes would probably aid Bloomberg in the general election by putting him squarely in the middle of the electorate. His problem, though, is already visible- he is walking this back each time it comes up, which isn't widely noticeable yet because he hasn't really been on the campaign trail or on a debate stage answering questions.
I predict the moderators don't bring any of these issues up- the candidates themselves will have to find the openings to question Bloomberg. Will they?
Lewis Wetzel said...There are places in the enlightened west where calling a man in a dress a "man in a dress" will get you arrested.
Pity the poor drag queen, who just wants to wear women's clothing in peace.
LBJ, like Dick Cheney and George Bush, adhered to the norms for political speech, keeping his obscenities and vulgarities for the locker room.
Trump thrills his supporters by breaking the norms for political speech.
"Personally, I think Bernie will be the nominee and even Howard will end up voting for Trump."
Interesting. We should ask Howard this.
Howard, if the election comes down to Bernie v. Trump, who do you vote for?
Same question, if Bloomer v. Trump.
If LBJ had been a more consistent racist we could have avoided the whole VN debacle--but he was a very small, cowardly, and vindictive man (and was making good money!) His dumping of that debacle into everyone else's lap and shuffling offstage in 1968 was the act of a loser avoiding responsibility for his fuckup.
It has come to the point that when Dem/lefty friends and family talk about decency and civility in politics I just laugh outright.
When I was coming up, African-Americans were "colored" or "nigra" to older white folks on their best behavior--except I never heard my German-born and reared Oma use either term. She said "black vun(s)." In Jewish pawnshops on Beale Street, you could hear talk about the "Schwarzen" if you had an ear.
Narr
I used to hear of one "Martian Lucifer Coon"
I'm a solid never Trumper
That's pretty funny Jack
AA Said...The "he, she, or it" is especially bad.
Is it? For whom?
"What I meant was that for deplorables you guys here are the best to banter with."
Thanks, buddy.
The constant moving of the goal posts in our culture is a direct result of the feminizing of it. One of the main power plays for women is to be constantly unsatisfied, and to refuse to tell anyone exactly what would satisfy you. It forces others, usually spouses or boyfriends to always be in a condition of insufficiency and needing to do more. You never know exactly what would be the key, becuase if you gave that, the woman would lose all power and have to submit that you have satisfied her, and are therefore in good standing. I'm not talking about sex. That's the one place where they give up the most of this control and give temporary approval, becuase otherwise the sex goes away.
The same power play is constantly at work with SJW and other victim-hood cults. You can never do things perfect for them or even good enough, becuase then they lose all power over you, so they constantly move the goals, change the correct answers, and expect you to comply even if you don't know exactly how under the new rules. That's entirely by design, even if it is subconscious.
Blogger Howard said...
I'm a solid never Trumper
I would never expect you to admit it. What would the neighbors say ?
@Howard,
"I'm a solid never Trumper"
You're gonna vote for Bernie the aging hippie over Trump?!!?
Where is SGT. Hartman to smack some sense into you:)
Dick Cheney and George Bush, adhered to the norms for political speech
And, they were still hated by the left and the MSM.
“Question: do Howard, Chuck, Inga, ARM, etc. ever post comments at Powerline or NewNeo or Instapundit or PJ Media? Do Jeff Darling or Paul Dueftort ever post comments here?
I smell a rat.”
No, not I.
Blogger Nonapod said...
...
If I were to engage in mind reading, I imagine that he finds most people silly and foolish. They can't be trusted with firearms. They can't be trusted to make their own dietary decisions. And the more troubled groups need to be stopped and frisked for their own good.
2/19/20, 10:45 AM
In short, Bloomberg requires everything to be approved by government. If the government doesn't say so, you can't do it.
he's not the wurst
Thanks, Howard. I'm always trying to impress my intellectual superiors such as yourself. If I work at it I too
may be able to quote the great philosophers and call people retards.
Francisco D said...
When Bloomberg says something sensible, but non-PC, he draws in Independents who are not all that sure about Trump.
2/19/20, 10:30 AM
After all this time, there are none of those left. Any "independents that are not all that sure about Trump" are actually quite sure and they are voting for the whatever commie, socialist, and/or fascist that the Democrats wind up running cause "orangemanbad".
It is really that simple. Trump has done NOTHING in his current service as President to cause any sane and honest person to not vote for him. You don't need to love him or to even like him to see all that he has accomplished for America DESPITE the unjust 24/7 attacks on him by the Democrats/media (one and the same).
At this point, I would crawl over broken glass to vote him 4 more years.
@mikeski, you are correct of course. I should have worded it better.
Me too, Todd @ 11:55 am.....Me too!!
I wonder how much of this is going on?
It is tempting, no doubt. It seems like free money. I wonder what one has to do or be to qualify.
From the WSJ, which is paywalled -
Bloomberg Bankrolls a Social-Media Army to Push Message
Campaign is hiring workers for $2,500 per month to promote Bloomberg to all their contacts
.....
"A California staffer and the documents reviewed by the Journal describe a multimillion-dollar-a-month effort aimed at helping Mr. Bloomberg attract support after having entered the race long after other candidates had built their ground campaigns. The documents also say the campaign is adopting a strategy, which it credits the Trump campaign with using to great effect, to try to influence potential voters through people they know and trust rather than strangers.
To staff the effort, the campaign is hiring more than 500 “deputy digital organizers” to work 20 to 30 hours a week and receive $2,500 a month, the documents show. In exchange, those workers are expected to promote Mr. Bloomberg to everyone in their phones’ contacts by text each week and make social-media posts supporting him daily, the documents show.
“The Fight for Equal Rights Has Been One of the Great Fights of Mike’s Life,” reads one such suggested prompt regarding Mr. Bloomberg’s early support for same-sex marriage.
Publicly available job applications for those positions require applicants to provide their social-media handles"
So, Bloomberg is PC, but not PC. He has the f vote, lost the F vote, and the Tg vote, and the Ts vote, the D vote, and probably the HD vote, too. The first rule of social liberal club... On the other hand, privacy is a fickle thing, a double-edged scalpel, once wielded by Js, Ds, Ps, etc. with a skilled hand.
"Trump thrills his supporters by breaking the norms for political speech."
Thereby pulling back what remains of the curtain of illusion over the realities of a filthy system. There are no honorable, high minded, cultured gentlemen and scholars here. Just gangs of barbaric schemers.
I understand the ego-protective instinct, but it is silly. He and you are concerned with repairing sewers. You all need to get over yourselves and dive into the muck.
I wonder what one has to do or be to qualify.
If they're spending $2500 a month I assume they wouldn't want to waste money on someone who didn't already have a fairly significant Social Media presence. People would probably need numbers of friends and/or followers that exceed Dunbar's number and that are clearly not "bots". A person may not quite need to be a Youtube/Twitch "influencer", but certainly hip, social butterflies that post a lot and often and get lots of likes.
There is a problem with self-awareness of course. It is normal to avoid looking into ones own soul too deeply, to avoid seeing that depraved, unscrupulous barbarian that will look back at you.
Which is one of the great values of the Catholic practice of confession. Not really done much anymore.
It is normal to avoid looking into ones own soul too deeply, to avoid seeing that depraved, unscrupulous barbarian that will look back at you.
Paradoxically part of being a mentally sane human means living in a constant state of denial. A person who is in constant fear of death is useless to himself and all others around him.
"Sure glad you censored that word because the real thing would have really screwed up my mind."
No. I just don't want to see it. Just like I change the station on my car radio if I hear it. I exclude it where I am in control.
Ritz Cr* ckers
" Lyndon Johnson’s use of words like “n*gger” and “boy” to hurt or intimidate was primarily an example of the way the lash that was his tongue sought out the most vulnerable spot in everyone, not just blacks: in using those words, Lyndon Johnson was guilty less of racism than of cruelty. At least once, in fact, dealing with an African-American employee, he used these epithets, and the pain they caused, in a different way, to teach the employee the lesson Johnson felt everyone had to learn, a lesson Johnson felt would lead to an improvement in the employee’s life: that it was necessary to accept reality, to face harsh facts and push beyond them, to be pragmatic, which in the employee’s case meant to accept that he would always be the target of these epithets, would always be the target of prejudice, and that he had to accept that fact—because only by accepting it could he move beyond prejudice and achieve his ambitions."
Caro, Robert A.. Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon Johnson III . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
ultimately this is their goal
I've said I don't want to see the word on this blog. If you can't respect me, you are a bad faith commenter. I will delete. Get your own blog.
I'll vote for Trump, but. among the Democrats, Bloomberg looks to be the most tolerable precisely because of his record of "intolerance".....His intolerant opinions just aren't that offensive...My advice to any young person seeking a career in public life: Never ever say anything about race or sex. Any opinion you express, no matter how innocuous, will seem offensive within a generation or two. If Abe Lincoln or Frederick Douglass can't escape the nit-pickers, what chance do you have.....I'd also recommend that they sign up for the National Guard. That's a sure vote magnet. Billionaires, by and large, have poor military records. Has anyone loooked into Bloomberg's draft record. He was eligible for the draft back then. Why didn't he sign up instead of making all those billions. That's what I did up. I signed up instead of making billions.
What do you expect, he was a Republican
But he's a Democrat NOW. And still fully expects to get away with anything he's said in the past. Because OrangeManBad, and nothing else matters.
because only by accepting it could he move beyond prejudice and achieve his ambitions
Well, that philosophy sure has gone out the window, hasn't it?
Mike Bloomberg is just the latest obstacle that Bernie Sanders has to overcome on his hero's journey to the White House. Bernie couldn't get over the Hillary Clinton obstacle like Barack Obama did, and Joe Biden wasn't enough of a challenge to make the journey heroic.
Yes, there is still time for Bernie to falter and one of the other contenders to become the hero. And we could end up with antihero v. antihero in the general.
To be fair and honest here -- there are VERY few people who adhere to the truth of the human person as being inherently male or female who then call those who are gender confused as "it."
Let's not try to smear everyone and poison the well.
Lyndon Johnson was guilty less of racism than of cruelty
In a way that's even worse than garden variety racism. At least with old fashioned racism there's usually an element of ignorance that makes it at least forgivable. But being sadistic in an attempt to (supposedly) teach some sort of lesson isn't as easily defensible or justifiable. In case anyone had reason to doubt that Lyndon Johnson wasn't a complete asshole, there's loads of stories like that.
No one is an "it." To refer to someone as an "it" is to add to the objectification of the human person, which is one of the errors of the trans ideology as well.
I've said I don't want to see the word on this blog.
I wasn't aware of this. Now I am. No bad faith involved.
Why must one fear death?
I don't see it, rationally, unless one has pending obligations.
Any remaining fear is the fear of pain, that is, of the process of death, and of instinct, the revulsion from pain.
Meanwhile, whatever one might think of the merits or demerits of Bloomberg's words on trans issues or race issues or women, I see absolutely ZERO reason for anyone conservative to come running to his defense by insisting that what he said or did isn't all that bad.
Let the Dems defend him.
LBJ aided in the obstruction of passage of the civil rights acts when they were first put forward in the 1950s.
Here's a conversation starter for Nanny State Mike, Grandpa Gulag and the rest of the clown car: "Listening to your speeches and ads, I notice that with all the verbiage, the word 'liberty' never comes up. Why is that, do you think?"
"Trans people are failed men or women. They sucked at being what they were born as and they decided to give the other gender a go, only to fuck up massively doing that too. They are fuck ups. Plain and simple."
Said by a stupid person. Plain and simple.
LBJ's misdeeds were much greater than saying some bad words.
buwaya said...
Why must one fear death?
I don't see it, rationally, unless one has pending obligations.
Any remaining fear is the fear of pain, that is, of the process of death, and of instinct, the revulsion from pain.
2/19/20, 1:24 PM
Don't discount the pain and fear of loss. Loss of future, loss of time, loss of doing...
I am often pained/fearful of all the things I will not get to do or experience due to "death". Death, I just don't have the time for it...
Btw, I don't think any of these non pc comments will hurt Mini-Mike. This really presumes liberals mean a word of what they say about political correctness. It's fens law writ large. They don't ever intend to follow the same rules they lay out for breeders and "the other"and this will all be quickly forgotten if it looks like Bloomberg can defeat Trump. The media will quickly throw all of their past pc proclamations down the memory hole. You can bank on it.
Mark
No one is a xe either.
But you are wrong in the first place. It is used to refer to infants routinely. And your rule is very English centric. German uses es for it, the neutral pronoun, and it is applied to persons commonly and grammatically.
If you want to change the rules of grammar then you should be less school marmish and haughty when you demand that *these* changes are required but *those* changes make you a bad person.
the argument clinic
It is used to refer to infants routinely.
"It" is wrong there too.
And your rule is very English centric.
Seeing as I am writing (and speaking) English, yeah, you're right. When using English, you should be English centric.
"What is a male transvestite or cross-gender if not 'a guy in a dress?' That's precisely what he is."
That depends on whether you're talking about a tranvestite or a transexual. Transvestites are just "men in dresses," and the majority of them are straight men who derive sexual and/or emotional satisfaction in wearing women's garments, (often only privately). (There are gay men, of course, who dress in drag, but often primarily for performance purposes.)
Transexuals are persons who suffer a critical disconnect between their physical bodies and their internal perceptions of themselves. That is, they are people in male or female bodies who internally see themselves as exactly the opposite, as if they were protagonists in a Twilight Zone episode who wake up and peer into a mirror only to see an completely unfamiliar and unrelated reflection staring back. Those who undergo surgery to remodel their bodies to fit their internal self-perceptions are just trying to remove the disjuncture they experience and bring their internal and external selves into harmony.
I can’t make an informed decision without seeing every candidate’s medical records. That’s the issue that matters most to me.
People should fear death because... well, it's death. It's the end. There's all sorts of reasons to welcome the end, but ultimately it's an end that coming to us all whether we welcome it or not. There are no exceptions.
"It is really that simple. Trump has done NOTHING in his current service as President to cause any sane and honest person to not vote for him."
Hahahaha!
"Publicly available job applications for those positions require applicants to provide their social-media handles"
Just on Monday I noticed the first Bloomberg ad in the form of a comment, then I found a dozen of them within an hour. They don't appear to have arrived at Althouse yet, but it is only a matter of time. I have seen over 50 of them just this morning on different blogs and comments sections. They are like locusts.
"Dick Cheney and George Bush, adhered to the norms for political speech
"And, they were still hated...."
Deservedly so.
Robert Cook said...
"It is really that simple. Trump has done NOTHING in his current service as President to cause any sane and honest person to not vote for him."
Hahahaha!
Says the communist who will not vote for him.
Robert Cook said...
Hahahaha!
2/19/20, 1:55 PM
Cook, your debate style is unassailable! Your arguments poignant and sublime! How can anyone stand against your rapier logic and surgical use of facts?!? Bravo young man, bravo!
"Transexuals are persons who suffer a critical disconnect between their physical bodies and their internal perceptions of themselves. That is, they are people in male or female bodies who internally see themselves as exactly the opposite..."
Yes, yes. That's the answer you must put if you want to pass the class, becuase that's the PC explanation, but is it true or sustainable logically or societally? Have you thought it through?
First of all, many transsexuals change their mind and regret the change. An unusually high number commit suicide after the change. Does that sound like the problem was just gender dysphoria that needed fixed and then everything would be right?
Second, where do you draw the line on accepting what a person simply feels they are as proof of what they are? Must we accept it if they think they are a tiger, or a lizard, or a Winnebago? If they feel they are a different race or a different age? Does objective physical reality have no say? If what you say you are is clearly false then who should be the one needing to explain themselves?
Todd, you're not too perceptive if you see my laughter as an attempt at "debate" or "argument." It was just my immediate response to a laughable comment.
" I have seen over 50 of them just this morning on different blogs and comments sections. They are like locusts."
I think that is going to backfire as soon as people know they are paid for. Then all support will be suspect, and all supporters tarred as sellouts.
Mark
Your ignorance is impressive. Not clear why it should serve as a yardstick though.
Robert Cook said...
Todd, you're not too perceptive if you see my laughter as an attempt at "debate" or "argument." It was just my immediate response to a laughable comment.
2/19/20, 2:08 PM
And the fact that you found that comment laughable is your tell. You are so "blinded" by what drives you that you can not evaluate the perfectly factual statements and formulate a cognoscente response. Instead, your brain locks up and you laugh.
The man has broken zero laws while President. Has revived the economy. Has balanced the courts. Has outed the media and Democrats for the self loathing scoundrels they are. Managed to flip every one of their attacks back on them and forced their various players to scramble for cover.
Your reaction is not a fact laced counter-argument but nervous laughter. Nough said.
No. “Nasty” is fucking with pronouns and restrooms, and imposing it on the rest of us while calling it “tolerance".
Exactly.
Am not myself ever going to use that word because, but if I'm not mistaken there are several rules in place on Althouse's blog and perhaps the wider readership would benefit from a 'Page of Rules'. Don't engage ABC in comments, don't... well, I can't think of any others at the moment so perhaps there aren't 'several rules' at all.
Bagoh20
Indeed. I can accept the distress is real without accepting the causal theory. There are lots of relevant precedents. Take “hysteria”. Many women in distressed were diagnosed as suffering from “hysteria” and would have told you that their wombs were afflicted. People us3d to believe themselves possessed by demons. We can deny all these underlying causal explanations and still understand the person is in distress and that needs to be dealt with.
Lyndon Baines Johnson; a real class act.
oops
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/483627-sanders-spokeswoman-i-misspoke-when-i-said-bloomberg-has-had-heart-attacks
LBJ would be a Republican today... Just sayin'
As long as people talk about this twaddle instead of how Bloomberg is in the pocket of the Chinese he is ahead of the game.
Just as the Clintons are ahead of the game when people talk about cigars and blue dresses instead of Juanita Broadderick.
Madness has its fashions.
Crazy people are as affected by the zeitgeist as anyone else.
There was a fad some years ago where disturbed young women starved themselves (anorexia nervosa) and when the internet came on the scene some even formed associations to egg each other on. You hear very little about that these days.
In the 19th century it was a trope for madmen to imagine themselves to be Napoleon Bonaparte, or Bonaparte-like. Emperor Norton of San Francisco was hardly alone.
When the French lost their heads for Napoleon
https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/when-the-french-lost-their-heads-for-napoleon
Your reaction is not a fact laced counter-argument but nervous laughter. Nough said.
Florida Man Cookie has to stay in character, you know. The New York transplant fashionable radical all dressed up like Ned Flanders' freaky beatnik parents.
One problem with Bloomberg vis entanglements with China is that he is hardly alone in this. Its going to be difficult to find a major business/financial figure without them.
buwaya said...
One problem with Bloomberg vis entanglements with China is that he is hardly alone in this. Its going to be difficult to find a major business/financial figure without them.
That's ok. none of them are qualified to hold political office
Just saw a Facebook post that Joe Biden has lent his support to Bloomberg's campaign. Will have to do some searching to see if it's true.
well that would be the death knell, of his campaign, but many figures in interwar germany from british as well as American industry were involved there,
Bloomberg's post is
here.
But then there's this in the NY Daily News:
Bloomberg trumpets Biden support in new ad but veep punches back harder: ‘I don’t endorse Republicans’
Pass the popcorn.
MadTownGuy said...
Bloomberg's post is
here.
But then there's this in the NY Daily News:
Bloomberg trumpets Biden support in new ad but veep punches back harder: ‘I don’t endorse Republicans’
Pass the popcorn.
2/19/20, 3:10 PM
Would Biden undergo a change of heart if Bloomberg promised to let Joe sniff his grand-kids' hair? Let the horse trading begin!
So, let me see, if i've Got This Straight?
The DEMOCRAT Presidential race, is down to two choices, neither one of which is a democrat?
You can choose from:
a Socialist Millionaire, who got kicked out of a commune for being too lazy;
OR
a Republican Billionaire, who sometimes runs as an independent
I mean; REALLY? Those are the choices?
Oh, I forgot to add; they're BOTH in their seventies, they're Both White, they're Both men...
Are From New York City, One the Upper East Side, the other suburban Vermont
They are both Jewish.
Lucid-Ideas & Fernandistein: Agreed. I am deeply unshocked by this. Deeply.
Hey, if a tranny isn't a guy in a dress, WTF is he?
I thought his jokes were pretty funny too, although I've only seen the 3 or 4 that have been in the MSM recently.
Anybody who knows anything about the "culture" of Wall Street is aware that extreme potty-mouth is where they start from, and that it goes down from there. What I've seen of Bloomberg's remarks is pretty small beer by Wall Street standards.
Howard: "LBJ would be a Republican today... Just sayin'"
He wouldn't be "LBJ" today, so he would likely be republican.
Of course, asking static analysis-types to not be too static analysis-y is asking too much.
Hey, if a tranny isn't a guy in a dress, WTF is he?
Trans/neos (i.e. state or transition) are either men or women with natural, simulated, corrupted physical and mental gender attributes divergent from their sex-correlated gender. They may be trans/homos or trans/bis. They may also be trans-socials (e.g. crossdressers).
https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2020/02/19/sanders-names-daughter-of-muslim-brotherhood-leader-as-virginia-campaign-co-chair/
They are both Jewish.
By heritage, yes. Bloomberg is unabashedly Pro-Choice. Perhaps a liberal (i.e. divergent) or progressive (e.g. fluid) Jew. Sanders is a left-wing ideologue who has faith in Marx et al, and studies communism, or socialism, not Judaism.
he let eric Rudolph get away for 6 years,
"The New York transplant fashionable radical all dressed up like Ned Flanders' freaky beatnik parents."
No,more like Ned Flanders. (I've never worn sandals in my life.)
sanders-names-daughter-of-muslim-brotherhood-leader-as-virginia-campaign-co-chair
Obama's legacy of fomenting wars between the Kingdoms. Egypt seems to have righted herself.
the father, was part of the beatify suleimani rallies as apelbaum notes,
Robert Cook said...
"Dick Cheney and George Bush, adhered to the norms for political speech
"And, they were still hated...."
Deservedly so.
You hate everyone, Bob! I can't remember the last person you praised.
Howard said...
They're running out of Jack at the jerk store
Who would know better than the proprietor?
I don't think so Howard. Not enough graft on the republican side.
Ironically Bloomberg really does take orders from a foreign power.
buttigeg, tries to speak Norwegian, fails terribly,
Why is "it" bad? It is the English language's non-gendered pronoun, the magic word that everyone has been looking for. Everyone knows it. In the past we've used "it" to refer to things, not people, but in the past we also referred to single people using singular pronouns. Using it would end the confusion. Humanize it!
The pronoun “they” has been consistently applicable to singular — people not thing — referents for over 700 years — yes, in this, our English language.
The highly regarded Language Log blog at UPenn.edu follows this issue of the singular “they”.
meanwhile two months later, we don't know if covid 19 will be just sars level or 'dogs and cats living together mass hysteria,
At least we have a new cool name for it.
The singular they is indeed of long standing. In SOME constructs. Not in all. Mostly indicating someone unknown or uncertain. There is no history of it as a simple blanket substitute for he or she. No “Rupert entered the room. They took of their coat, and said ‘My name is Rupert’.” That has no history in English.
Nobody on Earth thinks Bloomy is really an SJW. We all know he is just saying stuff to pander to the crazy Democrat base. Trump is probably more socially liberal in reality.
I didn't know that about LBJ - I thought he just said "nigra". Anyway, the idea that JFK was presidential is a laugh. He was "presidential" because the Press protected him. If the American public had known he and Bobby were banging Gangster Molls, Prostitutes, starlets, and Interns on a rotating basis, he would've been impeached.
BTW, my Mother always hated LBJ because he showed his surgery scar on TV, and help up his beagle by his ears. She thought he was too crude to be President, and supported RFK.
JFK was Press-idential!
Time for a lesson from Herr Professor Nietzsche:
Madness is something rare in individuals--but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule.
Narr
Simple truth
Howard said...
LBJ would be a Republican today... Just sayin'
I could see him sitting in between Mitt and Jeb and Marco nodding approvingly at George Will on the teevee.
Was LBJ the first neocon?
Trump would have had a nickname for Lyndon.
The singular they is indeed of long standing. In SOME constructs. Not in all. Mostly indicating someone unknown or uncertain. There is no history of it as a simple blanket substitute for he or she. No “Rupert entered the room. They took of their coat, and said ‘My name is Rupert’.” That has no history in English.
The extension from historical usage is small — nothing like trying to shoehorn “it” into suddenly comfortably applying in the minds of speakers across the English-speaking world to human persons.
Look at the closely similar phrase: “Someone entered the room. They then took off their coat, and spoke to the maid.”
Such usage is historic; but what you laid out about “Rupert” — so very close, really — is supposedly verboten by rigid pedantic usage? (What about if the sex of the speaker is unknown, and “their” name is not recognizably either masculine or feminine?)
Anyway, Language Log blog at least disagrees with your view — and so do I.
Yeah, Achilles, probable Jefe. LBJ would give Trump "The Treatment"
The Treatment could last ten minutes or four hours. It came, enveloping its target, at the Johnson Ranch swimming pool, in one of Johnson's offices, in the Senate cloakroom, on the floor of the Senate itself—wherever Johnson might find a fellow Senator within his reach.
Its tone could be supplication, accusation, cajolery, exuberance, scorn, tears, complaint and the hint of threat. It was all of these together. It ran the gamut of human emotions. Its velocity was breathtaking and it was all in one direction. Interjections from the target were rare. Johnson anticipated them before they could be spoken. He moved in close, his face a scant millimeter from his target, his eyes widening and narrowing, his eyebrows rising and falling. From his pockets poured clippings, memos, statistics. Mimicry, humor, and the genius of analogy made The Treatment an almost hypnotic experience and rendered the target stunned and helpless.
I read that the Old English word 'ihr' which evolved into our word 'her' was originally non-gendered. It referred to any subordinate creature, such as a female, child, slave, or animal. Let's revive it. It's easier to pronounce than those 'x' words.
Blogger Michael McNeil said...
The singular they is indeed of long standing. In SOME constructs. Not in all. Mostly indicating someone unknown or uncertain. There is no history of it as a simple blanket substitute for he or she. No “Rupert entered the room. They took of their coat, and said ‘My name is Rupert’.” That has no history in English.
The extension from historical usage is small — nothing like trying to shoehorn “it” into suddenly comfortably applying in the minds of speakers across the English-speaking world to human persons.
you know what works really well? He entered the room. She left the room.
Do you have a penis? you're a "he". Don't? you're a she?
Does this hurt your feelings? Tough shit. Having to play your fucked up language games hurts our feelings. There's more of us non fucked up people than there are of you.
So validate our feelings, and end the bullshit.
Robert Caro isn't correct that Johnson used racial slurs to impose some sort of lesson. Caro's Stockholm Syndrom got pretty bad. Johnson was an unusually prejudiced thug.
Johnson was also a violent sociopath. He forced secret service agents to run on foot behind his car with bottle of liquor which they were required to sprint to pour into a glassnhe held out his car window when he summoned them. He threatened to hit them as he drove on his ranch. He whipped out his penis at people. He was a mentally ill, sick nutcase. And JFK was a pervert who got so gorked on pills and drink that he was falling down all over Europe on one trip.
Elites protected each other back then, but they were way more out of control than anyone today.
LBJ was a diehard Democrat. And he typified Democrat politics. Those who say otherwise know nothing about history.
Try . . . reading before talking.
Post a Comment