THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 3, 2018 at 9:35 pm
Paul Plante says :
And getting back on topic in here, after taking a few moments to acknowledge the admitted greatness of the Very Honorable Dianne D’Amico, who people not only in Cape Charles, but in the world, as well, thanks to the Cape Charles Mirror, know to be on the Planning Commission, the Harbor Area Review Board, the Main Street Design Committee that just presented the Strawberry Plaza design, and the Main Street Promotions Committee currently working on Festive Fridays, and who also spent several years on the Board of Zoning Appeals before being appointed to the Planning Commission, because there is NO GLASS CEILING in Cape Charles, Virginia where a woman is held back and discriminated against because she is a woman as happens in so many other places in America and the world, who is doing her utmost to make Cape Charles great again, which efforts the candid world is very supportive of, Dianne, so keep up the good work, the failing New York Times had an opinion piece on the subject of the culture gap in America entitled “The Retrenchment Election – Nobody is moving, just settling into place.” by David Brooks, Opinion Columnist, on Nov. 1, 2018, wherein he stated as follows on the subject, to wit:
One of the pleasures and challenges of this job is you do a lot of traveling.
I’ve been in 23 states over the last three months.
The general impression I get is that I’m not covering a midterm election campaign.
I’m covering two separate electorates.
end quotes
When I read that about two electorates in America, it came to me that he sounds like he has been asleep at the switch for the last 14 years or more, and like Rip Van Winkle, is just now starting to wake up and realize that yes, there indeed are real people who actually live outside of New York City, and so, do not think like people in NYC, or even like the way people in NYC think.
As a conscientious American citizen who likes to know the history of the nation he is a citizen of, I have read all of the Federalist Papers, plus writings from other founders, these circa 1787 and 1788, and from reading these historical documents, which are as readily accessible, one would think, to the New York Times as they are to me, if only they would avail themselves to actually read them, it is quite obvious that right at the beginning, we were at least two different electorates, if not more, but at least two.
So what is David Brooks so surprised about is my first thought.
And there certainly was not agreement at the time of this nation’s beginnings, for if there had been, there would have been no need whatsoever for the Federalist Papers to have been written.
They were written because there were then, as now, people with their own “facts,” and the purpose of the Federalist Papers was to challenge those “facts” with other facts.
So I don’t see where anything has really changed in the intervening 230 years, or so.
We were at least two electorates, each with its own set of facts during WWI, and again in WWII, and again during the Korean war, and again in VEET NAM, and so, right on up to today.
The only time we might have been considered one people is during the Era of Good Feelings during the administration of James Monroe, when there were not political parties to divide people and hand them the facts they are to believe in if they want to be good party members, which takes us back to the David Brooks opinion piece, as follows:
The biggest difference is atmospheric.
In urban and suburban America, Donald Trump’s outrage du jour is on everybody’s lips: Did you see what he tweeted now?
Did you see his racist ad?
Where will the Mueller investigation go?
In rural America, by contrast, all that stuff is like a thunderstorm in Inner Mongolia.
It’s something happening very far away with no particular relevance here, and so no one’s paying much attention.
end quotes
Here is the culture gap in America well-stated.
I am a poor, old, white man living out in the wilds of rural America, eking out a subsistence living like so many other people are doing in this country, and indeed much of this stuff that is taken so seriously by people is pure bull**** to us.
Winter is coming!
That takes precedence over what Donald’ Trump’s latest TWEET might have been, especially as we rural people aren’t on TWITTER in the first place to even see it.
But my goodness, among the well-to-do subdivision people in the area, for them, with their indignation at pretty much everything, including the existence of old, white men like myself, those TWEETS are a harbinger of the coming of the end of the world, and I suppose they could be, so, oh well, it had to come some time, didn’t it, so why not now?
Getting back to David Brooks:
In urban America people talk about Trump constantly.
In rural America people generally avoid the subject.
Even if 80 percent of the locals support Trump, you never know how somebody will react if you mention his name — they might call you a racist — so it’s not a safe topic of conversation.
end quotes
In rural America, people don’t avoid the subject – they really don’t bother to waste time on it, when there is so much else of more immediate importance than what Trump just TWEETED.
We simply don’t have the leisure time to be as concerned about this stuff as do our social betters in suburban America.
And back to David Brooks we go, as follows:
The other big impression I get is that grand canyons now separate different sectors of American society and these canyons are harder and harder to cross.
end quotes
How can anyone in America anywhere today doubt, after being exposed to the lifestyles of the rich and famous, people like Hillary Clinton, for example, or the cloistered elite society in the upscale communities such as very affluent and powerful McLean, VA just outside of Washington DC, or Bethesda, Maryland, surrounding the pestilential swamp of Washington, D.C., a place where men and women out in the countryside outside of Washington DC, see all the vices of princely courts: ambition with idleness, baseness with pride, the thirst of riches without labor, flattery, treason, perfidy, but above all the perpetual ridicule of virtue, that there are indeed grand canyons that now separate different sectors of American society and these canyons are harder and harder to cross, to the point of it now being impossible?
Consider the New York Times story above here, “Where Has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich” by Amy Chozick and Jonathan Martin on 3 September 2016, for example, where we have as follows:
At a private fund-raiser Tuesday night at a waterfront Hamptons estate, Hillary Clinton danced alongside Jimmy Buffett, Jon Bon Jovi and Paul McCartney, and joined in a singalong finale to Hey Jude.
I stand between you and the apocalypse, a confident Mrs. Clinton declared to laughs, exhibiting a flash of self-awareness and humor to a crowd that included Calvin Klein and Harvey Weinstein and for whom the prospect of a Donald J. Trump presidency is dire.
end quotes
“I stand between you and the apocalypse,” a confident Mrs. Clinton declared to Harvey Weinstein, who was just the subject of a CNN article entitled “16-year-old added to list of Harvey Weinstein’s accusers” by Eliott C. McLaughlin, CNN, updated November 1, 2018, where we were told as follows:
Amid a report that the case against disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein may be unraveling, lawyers have added a woman to a class-action lawsuit who alleges the producer sexually assaulted her when she was 16.
Weinstein allegedly then went on to harass the woman for the next nine years, promising her movie roles and other opportunities that never materialized after she rebuffed his advances, according to the suit, which was updated Wednesday.
Identified only as Jane Doe, a onetime model and aspiring actor, she joins a class of named women who say they suffered similar treatment during what they thought were professional meetings with Weinstein.
The women allege they were assaulted or that they refused his demands for sexual favors, and afterward, promises for roles or picture deals were never kept, says the lawsuit, which also targets heavy hitters in the entertainment industry who the suit alleges abetted Weinstein’s behavior.
“This claim is preposterous,” Weinstein attorney Ben Brafman said.
“Like so many other women in this case who have already been exposed as liars, this latest completely uncorroborated allegation that is almost 20 years old will also be shown to be patently false.”
end quotes
There, people, is the apocalypse a confident Mrs. Clinton declared she could shield Harvey Weinstein from back in 2016, so how do those of us who really don’t like either Harvey Weinstein or Hillary Clinton bridge that gap, when we are told in a Daily Mail article entitled “Harvey Weinstein may have targeted nearly 1,000 women, says lawyer leading class action suit against the disgraced movie mogul” by Megan Sheets For Dailymail.com updated 3 November 2018, as follows:
• Elizabeth Fegan said 150 women have already come forward with allegations.
• She added that she thinks the actual number of Weinstein victims is much higher.
• Fegan told Sky News: ‘This was every day behavior.”
“He was a bully and he was a predator.”
• He also faces five criminal charges related to rape and predatory assault.
end quotes
There is more of the apocalypse a confident Mrs. Clinton declared she could shield Harvey Weinstein from back in 2016, which makes that grand canyon even wider, while at the same time making this recently concluded Blasey Ford circus even more bizarre and surreal, where the Democrats were going after Brett Kavanaugh for conduct they were tolerating in Harvey Weinstein, which is rank hypocrisy on their part.
And it wasn’t just Hillary who was tight with accused sex molester Harvey Weinstein, the Obamas were as well, as we see from this USA TODAY article “Malia Obama is a video star, makes her debut in indie band’s music video” by Maria Puente on 29 September 2018, as follows:
Malia Obama, the elder daughter of the former president, is supposed to be interested in a Hollywood career once she leaves Harvard, but now she’s made a slight detour: She’s appearing in a music video.
Malia has been entertainment-world oriented for some time, despite attempting to stay out of its spotlight since she left high school.
During her gap year after high school and before Harvard, where both her parents attended law school, she worked as an intern on HBO’s “Girls,” and at movie mogul Harvey Weinstein’s film company (now closed, bankrupt and sold in the wake of sex-crime charges against him).
end quotes
This is like an American version of that BBC program, “Upstairs, Downstairs,” except this version isn’t fiction made for TV, which takes us back to the take of David Brooks on the cultural divide, as follows:
College-educated suburban women really don’t like Republicans.
end quotes
So, okay!
But why then would they like Democrats who have been shielding accused sex offender Harvey Weinstein from the apocalypse?
What sense does that make, I wonder, which takes us back to more revelations from David Brooks, as follows:
The one word that the two electorates have in common is “unraveling.”
Both groups have a sense that America is unraveling.
In rural America basic values like hard work, clear gender roles and the social fabric are dissolving before people’s eyes.
end quotes
I would say as a rural person that there, David Brooks is right on the money, which takes us back to his article as follows:
If anything, the blue sense of unraveling is more comprehensive.
Democratic ideology is increasingly dominated by the educated upper-middle class.
As polls show, those Democrats are losing faith in capitalism itself, in the American dream itself.
White liberals describe racism as a bigger problem precluding black advancement than do African-Americans.
As Emma Green noted in The Atlantic, for many, progressivism isn’t just a set of political beliefs; it’s a set of liturgies, rituals and moral doctrines for the secular unchurched.
Politics is no longer mainly about disagreeing on issues.
It’s about being in entirely separate conversations.
The Venn diagram is dead.
There’s no overlapping area.
end quotes
And there we have it, people, another view of the cultural gap that now divides America.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-88623
Just musings, is all
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 4, 2018 at 7:12 pm
Paul Plante says :
And staying with this David Brooks essay from the failing New York Times on the culture gap in America for the moment, as someone who has lived in rural America for most of his life, as opposed to a city boy like David Brooks, who has heard that there is such a thing as rural America, although he would not know himself where to find it, I would like to address this sentence from that essay, to wit:
In rural America basic values like hard work, clear gender roles and the social fabric are dissolving before people’s eyes.
end quotes
Having been around strong women all my life who were quite comfortable in their own skins with being women, I am unsure of what he is saying when he says “(I)n rural America basic values like clear gender roles are dissolving before people’s eyes,” and I strongly suspect he too does not have a real clue as to what he is saying there.
What, David Brooks, is a “clear gender role?”
Who determines that?
People in New York City?
We have women up here who are quite accomplished at doing “men stuff,” like operating a back-hoe, for example, so is that a case of a basic value like clear gender roles dissolving before people’s eyes?
Personally, knowing some of those women, who don’t sit around waiting for a man to tell them about what a woman is supposed to be, I think not.
But to a New York City liberal, many of whom are carpet-bagging their way up to here, to buy up rural land for a song to turn it in to multi-million dollar McMansion-villes for other New York City liberals, I suppose they could see a woman working a back-hoe, or driving a tractor as a case of a basic value like clear gender roles dissolving before people’s eyes.
As to his statement that in rural America basic values like hard work and the social fabric are dissolving before people’s eyes, that is right on the money.
Hard work today for the younger, privileged, well-to-do generation that is permeating into rural America, as the subdivisions for the elite keep spreading further and further into what was once rural America, is for fools.
If you ask older people up here if they know some young person who likes to work and wants to work, as was the case when I was young, and hard work was a way out of poverty, along with military service, the universal answer is no.
As to the social fabric dissolving, yes, it is, and that thanks to many causes to include poor parenting, especially among the well-to-do, who don’t so much have families as drop litters, no values taught in the schools, an atmosphere of permissiveness and drugs.
Yes, we now have the same drug problems out here in rural America as do the suburbs and the city.
The main road near where I live is known as the Heroin Highway, because it is a supply route for that drug.
So that is a glimpse of life in rural America as I know it to be, anyway.
Would I have it be the way it was when I was young?
Damn right I would.
But that is a pipe dream now, because those days when life in rural America was predictable, safe and revolved around the seasons are now long gone.
The culture gap has swallowed those times up.
The new world order beckons, and from my perspective, it is not pretty.
But that is just me, and so it goes.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-89008
Paul Plante says :
And staying with this David Brooks essay from the failing New York Times on the culture gap in America for the moment, as someone who has lived in rural America for most of his life, as opposed to a city boy like David Brooks, who has heard that there is such a thing as rural America, although he would not know himself where to find it, I would like to address this sentence from that essay, to wit:
In rural America basic values like hard work, clear gender roles and the social fabric are dissolving before people’s eyes.
end quotes
Having been around strong women all my life who were quite comfortable in their own skins with being women, I am unsure of what he is saying when he says “(I)n rural America basic values like clear gender roles are dissolving before people’s eyes,” and I strongly suspect he too does not have a real clue as to what he is saying there.
What, David Brooks, is a “clear gender role?”
Who determines that?
People in New York City?
We have women up here who are quite accomplished at doing “men stuff,” like operating a back-hoe, for example, so is that a case of a basic value like clear gender roles dissolving before people’s eyes?
Personally, knowing some of those women, who don’t sit around waiting for a man to tell them about what a woman is supposed to be, I think not.
But to a New York City liberal, many of whom are carpet-bagging their way up to here, to buy up rural land for a song to turn it in to multi-million dollar McMansion-villes for other New York City liberals, I suppose they could see a woman working a back-hoe, or driving a tractor as a case of a basic value like clear gender roles dissolving before people’s eyes.
As to his statement that in rural America basic values like hard work and the social fabric are dissolving before people’s eyes, that is right on the money.
Hard work today for the younger, privileged, well-to-do generation that is permeating into rural America, as the subdivisions for the elite keep spreading further and further into what was once rural America, is for fools.
If you ask older people up here if they know some young person who likes to work and wants to work, as was the case when I was young, and hard work was a way out of poverty, along with military service, the universal answer is no.
As to the social fabric dissolving, yes, it is, and that thanks to many causes to include poor parenting, especially among the well-to-do, who don’t so much have families as drop litters, no values taught in the schools, an atmosphere of permissiveness and drugs.
Yes, we now have the same drug problems out here in rural America as do the suburbs and the city.
The main road near where I live is known as the Heroin Highway, because it is a supply route for that drug.
So that is a glimpse of life in rural America as I know it to be, anyway.
Would I have it be the way it was when I was young?
Damn right I would.
But that is a pipe dream now, because those days when life in rural America was predictable, safe and revolved around the seasons are now long gone.
The culture gap has swallowed those times up.
The new world order beckons, and from my perspective, it is not pretty.
But that is just me, and so it goes.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-89008
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 6, 2018 at 11:54 am
Paul Plante says :
Good morning, Monica Vitti, and let me first say that I hope you have a grand and glorious day out ahead of you.
As to reading a little about liberal ideology, I personally have been attempting to do that now since 2004, and you know what?
In all that time, I have found essentially nothing of substance on the topic outside of it meaning “liberated from traditional sources of authority and 'tentatively' committed to the common good,” which sounds very much like anarchy to me, anyway, and let me state here that I self-identify as a human being who is an American citizen with American values as spelled out in the Federalist Papers series, so I don’t believe bullsh*t right-wing propaganda anymore than I believe bullsh*t left-wing propaganda.
And as an aside, Monica Vitti, to reach for knowledge is to look beyond propaganda, n’est-ce-pas?
Propaganda is for those unwilling or unable to think for themselves, which is approximately 60% of the voting age people in America.
So perhaps instead of sending Ray Otton and the rest of us who truly do reach for knowledge instead of bullsh*t left-wing propaganda and bullsh*t right-wing propaganda off on a wild goose chase looking for something meaningful on what liberal ideology might mean beyond “liberated from traditional sources of authority and 'tentatively” committed to the common good,' perhaps you could deign to do us all a favor and perhaps submit a paper on the subject to the Cape Charles Mirror.
I am sure that if you did so, it would be widely read.
And thank you from a grateful nation, Monica Vitti, for your patriotism and for taking the time to stand up in here and express your feelings on that important topic.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/w ... ment-89875
Paul Plante says :
Good morning, Monica Vitti, and let me first say that I hope you have a grand and glorious day out ahead of you.
As to reading a little about liberal ideology, I personally have been attempting to do that now since 2004, and you know what?
In all that time, I have found essentially nothing of substance on the topic outside of it meaning “liberated from traditional sources of authority and 'tentatively' committed to the common good,” which sounds very much like anarchy to me, anyway, and let me state here that I self-identify as a human being who is an American citizen with American values as spelled out in the Federalist Papers series, so I don’t believe bullsh*t right-wing propaganda anymore than I believe bullsh*t left-wing propaganda.
And as an aside, Monica Vitti, to reach for knowledge is to look beyond propaganda, n’est-ce-pas?
Propaganda is for those unwilling or unable to think for themselves, which is approximately 60% of the voting age people in America.
So perhaps instead of sending Ray Otton and the rest of us who truly do reach for knowledge instead of bullsh*t left-wing propaganda and bullsh*t right-wing propaganda off on a wild goose chase looking for something meaningful on what liberal ideology might mean beyond “liberated from traditional sources of authority and 'tentatively” committed to the common good,' perhaps you could deign to do us all a favor and perhaps submit a paper on the subject to the Cape Charles Mirror.
I am sure that if you did so, it would be widely read.
And thank you from a grateful nation, Monica Vitti, for your patriotism and for taking the time to stand up in here and express your feelings on that important topic.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/w ... ment-89875
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 5, 2018 at 10:01 pm
Paul Plante says :
As to this more generic “Angry White Male” meme, I have been doing some research to try and pin down who coined it, which I think is Barack Obama.
In any event, and this not surprisingly, Obama, who has done more to divide us than any other president in my living memory is out there peddling the meme to his followers and lickspittles and those who cling to his every word as the voice of their messiah speaking, when all Obama is, is a classic demagogue, albeit a master one, as we see in the Washington Examiner article “Obama harassed by hecklers in Florida” by Pete Kasperowicz on November 02, 2018, as follows:
Former President Barack Obama on Friday was heckled several times in a Florida appearance to help Democrats, and said the heckling shows Republicans are already angry about losing ground in next week’s midterm elections.
end quotes
All the heckling really did show, and by the way, I am an independent voter with no allegiance to or faith in the Republican party or any Republican, was that there was a heckler in the audience, unless Obama had some kind of proof that the hecklers were disgruntled Republicans instead of paid shills, but then, Obama doesn’t need the truth or facts, because he is a prime example of something we have not seen since Lyndon Baines Johnson, which is a politician who is just blatantly, repeatedly, baldly, shamelessly, lying, all the time, as he is doing there, making out people to be angry when he has no proof that they are.
Afterall, as Obama says in the Washington Examiner:
We’re OK, we’re OK,” Obama said after the first heckler interrupted his remarks in Miami.
“This is what I look forward to, is to have a few hecklers to get me back in the mood,” he said to cheers.
“It’s like I enjoy that.”
“You always got to have a few in order to know that you’re on the campaign trail.”
end quotes
So they get some shills to act as hecklers for Obama, and the show goes on.
And that is another case of Obama just making stuff up, which is what got him into office in the first place – telling more outrageous lies about what he was going to do as president than Hillary Clinton was, to which I reply, hey, Barack, dude, when words stop meaning anything, when truth doesn’t matter, when people like you can just lie with abandon, democracy can’t work!
Which takes us back to that Washington Examiner article as follows:
“Why is it that the folks that won the last election are so mad all the time?” Obama asked.
end quotes
To which I respond, how do you know who is angry in America, Barack, have you taken a poll of each and every one of them?
And if you did, how many told you that they are angry, because of people like you who are out there talking **** with the intent to divide us as a people, which takes us to a Washington Post article “Obama rips hecklers: Why are the people who won the last election ‘so mad all the time?’” by Cleve R. Wootson Jr. on November 3, 2018 at 12:15 PM, where Obama was quoted as follows:
“Why is it that the folks that won the last election are so mad all the time?” Obama asked a crowd of 4,000 as the fifth interrupting protester was escorted out of a Miami rally on Friday.
“It’s an interesting question,” he continued, turning around to address the people behind him.
“I mean . . . when I won the presidency, at least my side felt pretty good.”
end quotes
Look at that arrogant horse**** – “my” side felt pretty good.
Do tell, Barack.
That is how Obama sees the world here in America – there are those who are on his side, because he has to have it be about “taking sides,” and the rest are trash – a “BASKET OF DEPLORABLES.”
As Obama says, the “character of our country is on the ballot,” and if we should choose his side, what a sad day for this once-proud nation it will be, at least if one happens to be an old, white male, which takes us to a Marketwatch article entitled “CNN’s Don Lemon slammed for calling white men the ‘biggest terror threat’” by Shawn Langlois published Oct. 31, 2018, where Obama’s surrogate Don Lemon from the Cuomo News Network can be seen demonizing white people in this country and calling for violence against them, as follows:
“‘We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them.”
The comments, which initially didn’t make much of a splash across social media, were made by Lemon on CNN Monday night during a conversation he was having with Chris Cuomo about the shooting at the Pittsburgh synagogue, as well as the recent murder of two black men in Kentucky.
“There is no travel ban on them,” Lemon said during the handoff between shows.
“There is no ban on — you know, they had the Muslim ban.”
“There is no ‘white guy ban.’”
“So what do we do about that?”
end quotes
Indeed, what do we do about the “white problem” in this country?
Genocide, perhaps?
Or maybe work camps to segregate the whites and get them away from the more decent people in America who watch Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo on CNN.
And that brings us to this post from a board out there called Political Jack http://www.politicaljack.com/threads/de ... eme.43946/ where this topic was posted, as follows:
Dems need to abandon the “angry white man” meme
Discussion in ‘Latest Political News and Current Events’ started by BobbyT, Nov 24, 2012.
BobbyT
It’s not that the “angry white man” meme is necessarily untrue – a quick gander at any large Republican gathering will demonstrate that the party primarily comprises white people.
It is, rather, that by continuing to refer to Republicans dismissively as “angry white men,” the Democrats are creating an atmosphere of exclusiveness.
If we, rather, characterize dispirited Republicans as those to whom lies were told, and people who should understandably be upset with mendacious propagandists, then perhaps we could encourage at least some of them to work with us rather than entrenching themselves further.
Let the Republicans be the party that divides people up like football fans; we should be the party that waits with open arms for anyone, of any color – even white, who wants to ensure this country continues to be great.
BobbyT, Nov 24, 2012
end quotes
2012 was a long time ago, and obviously, which can be seen from reading that thread, and listening to the voices of Barack Obama and Don Lemon today, the voice of BobbyT was ignored, and the “angry white man” meme lives on.
Welcome to America, 2018 – the land of the divided, into those on the side of Barack Obama who are the righteous among us, and then the rest of us.
And welcome to the New World Order – All Hail Don Lemon is in the room.
So who the **** is Don Lemon, then?
Does anyone know?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-89555
Paul Plante says :
As to this more generic “Angry White Male” meme, I have been doing some research to try and pin down who coined it, which I think is Barack Obama.
In any event, and this not surprisingly, Obama, who has done more to divide us than any other president in my living memory is out there peddling the meme to his followers and lickspittles and those who cling to his every word as the voice of their messiah speaking, when all Obama is, is a classic demagogue, albeit a master one, as we see in the Washington Examiner article “Obama harassed by hecklers in Florida” by Pete Kasperowicz on November 02, 2018, as follows:
Former President Barack Obama on Friday was heckled several times in a Florida appearance to help Democrats, and said the heckling shows Republicans are already angry about losing ground in next week’s midterm elections.
end quotes
All the heckling really did show, and by the way, I am an independent voter with no allegiance to or faith in the Republican party or any Republican, was that there was a heckler in the audience, unless Obama had some kind of proof that the hecklers were disgruntled Republicans instead of paid shills, but then, Obama doesn’t need the truth or facts, because he is a prime example of something we have not seen since Lyndon Baines Johnson, which is a politician who is just blatantly, repeatedly, baldly, shamelessly, lying, all the time, as he is doing there, making out people to be angry when he has no proof that they are.
Afterall, as Obama says in the Washington Examiner:
We’re OK, we’re OK,” Obama said after the first heckler interrupted his remarks in Miami.
“This is what I look forward to, is to have a few hecklers to get me back in the mood,” he said to cheers.
“It’s like I enjoy that.”
“You always got to have a few in order to know that you’re on the campaign trail.”
end quotes
So they get some shills to act as hecklers for Obama, and the show goes on.
And that is another case of Obama just making stuff up, which is what got him into office in the first place – telling more outrageous lies about what he was going to do as president than Hillary Clinton was, to which I reply, hey, Barack, dude, when words stop meaning anything, when truth doesn’t matter, when people like you can just lie with abandon, democracy can’t work!
Which takes us back to that Washington Examiner article as follows:
“Why is it that the folks that won the last election are so mad all the time?” Obama asked.
end quotes
To which I respond, how do you know who is angry in America, Barack, have you taken a poll of each and every one of them?
And if you did, how many told you that they are angry, because of people like you who are out there talking **** with the intent to divide us as a people, which takes us to a Washington Post article “Obama rips hecklers: Why are the people who won the last election ‘so mad all the time?’” by Cleve R. Wootson Jr. on November 3, 2018 at 12:15 PM, where Obama was quoted as follows:
“Why is it that the folks that won the last election are so mad all the time?” Obama asked a crowd of 4,000 as the fifth interrupting protester was escorted out of a Miami rally on Friday.
“It’s an interesting question,” he continued, turning around to address the people behind him.
“I mean . . . when I won the presidency, at least my side felt pretty good.”
end quotes
Look at that arrogant horse**** – “my” side felt pretty good.
Do tell, Barack.
That is how Obama sees the world here in America – there are those who are on his side, because he has to have it be about “taking sides,” and the rest are trash – a “BASKET OF DEPLORABLES.”
As Obama says, the “character of our country is on the ballot,” and if we should choose his side, what a sad day for this once-proud nation it will be, at least if one happens to be an old, white male, which takes us to a Marketwatch article entitled “CNN’s Don Lemon slammed for calling white men the ‘biggest terror threat’” by Shawn Langlois published Oct. 31, 2018, where Obama’s surrogate Don Lemon from the Cuomo News Network can be seen demonizing white people in this country and calling for violence against them, as follows:
“‘We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them.”
The comments, which initially didn’t make much of a splash across social media, were made by Lemon on CNN Monday night during a conversation he was having with Chris Cuomo about the shooting at the Pittsburgh synagogue, as well as the recent murder of two black men in Kentucky.
“There is no travel ban on them,” Lemon said during the handoff between shows.
“There is no ban on — you know, they had the Muslim ban.”
“There is no ‘white guy ban.’”
“So what do we do about that?”
end quotes
Indeed, what do we do about the “white problem” in this country?
Genocide, perhaps?
Or maybe work camps to segregate the whites and get them away from the more decent people in America who watch Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo on CNN.
And that brings us to this post from a board out there called Political Jack http://www.politicaljack.com/threads/de ... eme.43946/ where this topic was posted, as follows:
Dems need to abandon the “angry white man” meme
Discussion in ‘Latest Political News and Current Events’ started by BobbyT, Nov 24, 2012.
BobbyT
It’s not that the “angry white man” meme is necessarily untrue – a quick gander at any large Republican gathering will demonstrate that the party primarily comprises white people.
It is, rather, that by continuing to refer to Republicans dismissively as “angry white men,” the Democrats are creating an atmosphere of exclusiveness.
If we, rather, characterize dispirited Republicans as those to whom lies were told, and people who should understandably be upset with mendacious propagandists, then perhaps we could encourage at least some of them to work with us rather than entrenching themselves further.
Let the Republicans be the party that divides people up like football fans; we should be the party that waits with open arms for anyone, of any color – even white, who wants to ensure this country continues to be great.
BobbyT, Nov 24, 2012
end quotes
2012 was a long time ago, and obviously, which can be seen from reading that thread, and listening to the voices of Barack Obama and Don Lemon today, the voice of BobbyT was ignored, and the “angry white man” meme lives on.
Welcome to America, 2018 – the land of the divided, into those on the side of Barack Obama who are the righteous among us, and then the rest of us.
And welcome to the New World Order – All Hail Don Lemon is in the room.
So who the **** is Don Lemon, then?
Does anyone know?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-89555
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 6, 2018 at 6:25 pm
Paul Plante says :
That being said as today, we see in the Washington Examiner an article entitled “Hillary Clinton on Election Day 2018: ‘Today, we say enough’” by Caitlin Yilek on 6 November 2018 wherein the Nation’s Scold, the Queen Mum herself, Miss Perfect In All The Ways It Is Possible To Be Perfect, Hillary Rodham Clinton getting all puffed up and high and mighty in her power and glory, as she takes on the mantle of being the SAVIOR OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, as follows:
Hillary Clinton tweeted that it will “take all of us” to save democracy.
end quotes
Ah, okay, Hillary – so, when are you going to start being democratic then?
When are you going to climb down from that high horse you have yourself mounted on to start actually being democratic?
Getting back to the Washington Examiner and the arrogant and quite supercilious Hillary Clinton (supercilious being defined as “behaving as though one thinks one is superior to others, with such synonyms as arrogant, haughty, conceited, overbearing, pompous, condescending, superior, patronizing, imperious, snobbish, snobby, smug, scornful, and sneering), we have:
Clinton painted the 2018 midterms as a vote to save the country, as well as against “radicalism, bigotry, and corruption.”
end quotes
Dear Hillary, EVERY election in America, no matter how trivial it might seem to you, is a vote against “radicalism, bigotry, and corruption,” and dear Hillary, that is why you are not in the White House.
As bad as Trump might be, and I certainly am not a cheering fan of his, when it came to a vote in the 2016 presidential election to save the country, as well as against “radicalism, bigotry, and corruption,” people chose Trump over you, Hillary, because you were a known quantity and he wasn’t.
And then our dear Hillary says this:
“For the past two years, we’ve watched this administration attack and undermine our democratic institutions and values.”
end quotes
Oh, really, Hillary, and what about the eight years we watched the Barack Obama administration attack and undermine our democratic institutions and values?
And what about the eight years we watched you attack and undermine our democratic institutions and values as United States Senator from New York between 2001 and 2009?
The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama set the template for what an American president can do and can be, regardless of any prior constitutional limitations, and now Hillary is whining because Trump is merely copying Obama, who was using the Oval Office to divide us into those who were his toadies (“a person who behaves obsequiously to someone important,” synonyms: sycophant, brown-noser, lickspittle, flatterer, flunky, lackey, trained seal, doormat, stooge, cringer), and those of us who were not, with those of us who were not one of his toadies being quite a bit less equal in America than those who were.
(For a 567-page file of news stories concerning Obama https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/the_liv ... a-t52.html )
The truth is that Donald Trump is a creation of Barack Obama as president and Hillary Clinton as his bungling secretary of state.
Without Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, there would not be a Donald Trump in the White House today.
Trump is the backlash from 8 years of Obama.
So, Memo to Hillary: if you’re going to put yourself out there, Hillary, as being perfect in every way, then you had better be a whole lot closer to it than you are.
(138-page file on Hillary Clinton https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/the_liv ... y-t53.html )
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/w ... 28#respond
Paul Plante says :
That being said as today, we see in the Washington Examiner an article entitled “Hillary Clinton on Election Day 2018: ‘Today, we say enough’” by Caitlin Yilek on 6 November 2018 wherein the Nation’s Scold, the Queen Mum herself, Miss Perfect In All The Ways It Is Possible To Be Perfect, Hillary Rodham Clinton getting all puffed up and high and mighty in her power and glory, as she takes on the mantle of being the SAVIOR OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, as follows:
Hillary Clinton tweeted that it will “take all of us” to save democracy.
end quotes
Ah, okay, Hillary – so, when are you going to start being democratic then?
When are you going to climb down from that high horse you have yourself mounted on to start actually being democratic?
Getting back to the Washington Examiner and the arrogant and quite supercilious Hillary Clinton (supercilious being defined as “behaving as though one thinks one is superior to others, with such synonyms as arrogant, haughty, conceited, overbearing, pompous, condescending, superior, patronizing, imperious, snobbish, snobby, smug, scornful, and sneering), we have:
Clinton painted the 2018 midterms as a vote to save the country, as well as against “radicalism, bigotry, and corruption.”
end quotes
Dear Hillary, EVERY election in America, no matter how trivial it might seem to you, is a vote against “radicalism, bigotry, and corruption,” and dear Hillary, that is why you are not in the White House.
As bad as Trump might be, and I certainly am not a cheering fan of his, when it came to a vote in the 2016 presidential election to save the country, as well as against “radicalism, bigotry, and corruption,” people chose Trump over you, Hillary, because you were a known quantity and he wasn’t.
And then our dear Hillary says this:
“For the past two years, we’ve watched this administration attack and undermine our democratic institutions and values.”
end quotes
Oh, really, Hillary, and what about the eight years we watched the Barack Obama administration attack and undermine our democratic institutions and values?
And what about the eight years we watched you attack and undermine our democratic institutions and values as United States Senator from New York between 2001 and 2009?
The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama set the template for what an American president can do and can be, regardless of any prior constitutional limitations, and now Hillary is whining because Trump is merely copying Obama, who was using the Oval Office to divide us into those who were his toadies (“a person who behaves obsequiously to someone important,” synonyms: sycophant, brown-noser, lickspittle, flatterer, flunky, lackey, trained seal, doormat, stooge, cringer), and those of us who were not, with those of us who were not one of his toadies being quite a bit less equal in America than those who were.
(For a 567-page file of news stories concerning Obama https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/the_liv ... a-t52.html )
The truth is that Donald Trump is a creation of Barack Obama as president and Hillary Clinton as his bungling secretary of state.
Without Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, there would not be a Donald Trump in the White House today.
Trump is the backlash from 8 years of Obama.
So, Memo to Hillary: if you’re going to put yourself out there, Hillary, as being perfect in every way, then you had better be a whole lot closer to it than you are.
(138-page file on Hillary Clinton https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/the_liv ... y-t53.html )
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/w ... 28#respond
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 10, 2018 at 8:48 pm
Paul Plante says:
Speaking of the culture gap in America that is swirling all about us as I write these words, especially in regard to this recent media circus in the Senate Judiciary Committee, where the Senate Democrats, starting with California’s Dianne Feinstein, made a veritable freak show out of poor Dr. Christine Blasey Ford who suffers some permanent emotional damage as a result of her upbringing in the boozy culture of Montgomery County, Maryland in a vain effort to cause serious damage to the reputation of federal judge Brett Kavanaugh, it is on full display in the Albany, New York Times Union article “Former NY attorney general won’t face abuse charges” by Michael Balsamo and Michael R. Sisak, Associated Press, updated Friday, November 9, 2018, as follows:
NEW YORK (AP) — The special prosecutor investigating former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said Thursday that she couldn’t bring criminal charges over allegations he physically abused women he dated, in part, because current state law doesn’t explicitly outlaw such behavior.
In closing the six-month investigation, Nassau County District Attorney Madeline Singas implored lawmakers to pass legislation to criminalize slapping, shoving and other violence committed for sexual gratification.
end quotes
For the record, for whatever it is worth, Nassau County District Attorney Madeline Singas is a good card-carrying Democrat, as is disgraced former New York Attorney General Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman.
And according to this good card-carrying Democrat, at least in the case of former Democrat political superstar Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman, under current New York law, a slap, shove, or kick that doesn’t cause physical injury can be charged as a non-criminal violation, but only if the offender’s intent is to “alarm, harass, or annoy” the victim, and here is the kicker, literally: charges can’t be brought against someone important like Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman if the offender’s intent is sexual arousal or gratification, in this case, his own, unless the victim proves the violence caused substantial pain or injuries that go beyond bumps, bruises and cuts.
And not a peep about it from any Democrat, starting with Dianne Feinstein, to protest the injustice of an important and powerful Democrat like Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman getting to beat the crap out of women for his sexual gratification, this after them pillorying Brett Kavanaugh for allegedly laying on top of then-Chrissy Blasey when he was 17 and drunk at an unsupervised house party down in that ritzy area where he and Chrissy Blasey lived in cloistered, country club society.
Sauce for the Republican goose, and a separate goose for the Democrat gander.
By way of review, on May 9, 2018, the Albany, New York Times Union had a story on the appointment of this Democrat special prosecutor entitled “Cuomo’s special prosecutor move in Schneiderman probe stirs debate among DAs – State prosecutors mull response to Cuomo’s intervention in former AG’s case” by Brendan J. Lyons, as follows:
ALBANY Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s appointment of a special prosecutor to probe allegations of physical abuse of four women by former Attorney General Eric Schneiderman stoked an internal debate Wednesday among the state’s district attorneys about whether to challenge or criticize the governor’s intervention.
end quotes
Yes, people, not just one woman here, but four, as we see from this CNN article entitled “New York AG Eric Schneiderman resigns over assault allegations” by Sophie Tatum on May 8, 2018, to wit:
Washington (CNN) New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has resigned, following a report on allegations of assault by multiple women in The New Yorker.
“It’s been my great honor and privilege to serve as Attorney General for the people of the State of New York.”
“In the last several hours, serious allegations, which I strongly contest, have been made against me,” Schneiderman said in a statement.
“While these allegations are unrelated to my professional conduct or the operations of the office, they will effectively prevent me from leading the office’s work at this critical time.”
“I therefore resign my office, effective at the close of business on May 8, 2018.”
end quotes
Truth of the matter was that Eric T’ “Teddy” Schneiderman was using his position as state attorney general to protect and defend public corruption in New York state, so it was no honor or privilege for us to have him in that position above us, and we hoped to see him have to do some time for beating up women, but in New York state, if you are an important and powerful Democrat like Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman in a Democrat-controlled state, that is just not to be.
Getting back to the CNN article:
Shortly after announcing his resignation, the Manhattan District Attorney’s office said they had opened an investigation into the allegations against Schneiderman, a spokesman told CNN.
Schneiderman’s swift resignation, which came just hours after The New Yorker published its report, is a shocking fall from grace for a once rising star in Democratic politics.
Schneiderman had cast himself as a fierce opponent and critic of President Donald Trump.
Schneiderman has also been a vocal proponent of the #MeToo movement, bringing legal action in New York against film producer Harvey Weinstein, who has been accused of sexually assaulting women.
end quotes
And interestingly, as this convoluted story that centers on poor emotionally-disturbed Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh continues to unfold, with a recent FOX News article entitled “Kavanaugh report’s biggest bombshells: Grassley probe reveals details behind mistaken identity claims, more” by Robert Gearty on 5 November 2018 throwing even more doubt on the emotionally-charged testimony of Dr. Ford, where we were informed that a 414-page document authored by the Republican majority and released over the weekend contained a number of key revelations to include a statement from a man who believes he may have been involved in an encounter with Christine Blasey Ford around the time of her claim of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh, as we are told in a TMZ article entitled “Harvey Weinstein: D.A. Suffers New Setback … Over Witness Credibility Concerns” on 11/2/2018, the case against Hillary Clinton BFF Harvey Weinstein is now falling apart, because one of his accusers was apparently caught in a lie, as follows:
The Manhattan D.A. is having more problems with the Harvey Weinstein case … the latest being prosecutors have decided NOT to call a critical witness to prove Weinstein had an M.O. of rape.
Sources connected to the case tell TMZ, prosecutors wanted to call Melissa Thompson to the stand.
She has claimed Weinstein raped her back in 2011 in an NYC hotel room.
Thompson has even filed her own lawsuit claiming she was raped.
We’ve learned the D.A. is now in possession of emails and a text message they believe call Thompson’s credibility into question.
An hour after the alleged rape, Thompson sent an email to Weinstein about a proposed business arrangement.
We’re told the D.A. feels a jury would find the email troublesome.
Then, on November 8, 2011, Thompson sent a text message to Weinstein, pitching herself as an executive producer on a show.
The text message read in part, “Harvey if I do this show can i be an EP?”
“I got 2/3 of the cast.”
We’re told the D.A. also has a writing from Thompson after the alleged rape, bragging about her relationship with Weinstein.
Thompson released this video of an interaction she had with Weinstein hours before the alleged rape.
This is the latest setback in the D.A.’s case against Weinstein.
The lead detective is under investigation for witness tampering and withholding evidence favorable to Weinstein.
The D.A. has dropped the case involving a woman who claims Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex, after she allegedly told a friend the oral sex was consensual and she did it because she was gunning for a movie job.
end quotes
Some crazy ****, is it not?
And people wonder if there is a culture gap in this country.
Seems so to me, anyway.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-92090
Paul Plante says:
Speaking of the culture gap in America that is swirling all about us as I write these words, especially in regard to this recent media circus in the Senate Judiciary Committee, where the Senate Democrats, starting with California’s Dianne Feinstein, made a veritable freak show out of poor Dr. Christine Blasey Ford who suffers some permanent emotional damage as a result of her upbringing in the boozy culture of Montgomery County, Maryland in a vain effort to cause serious damage to the reputation of federal judge Brett Kavanaugh, it is on full display in the Albany, New York Times Union article “Former NY attorney general won’t face abuse charges” by Michael Balsamo and Michael R. Sisak, Associated Press, updated Friday, November 9, 2018, as follows:
NEW YORK (AP) — The special prosecutor investigating former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said Thursday that she couldn’t bring criminal charges over allegations he physically abused women he dated, in part, because current state law doesn’t explicitly outlaw such behavior.
In closing the six-month investigation, Nassau County District Attorney Madeline Singas implored lawmakers to pass legislation to criminalize slapping, shoving and other violence committed for sexual gratification.
end quotes
For the record, for whatever it is worth, Nassau County District Attorney Madeline Singas is a good card-carrying Democrat, as is disgraced former New York Attorney General Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman.
And according to this good card-carrying Democrat, at least in the case of former Democrat political superstar Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman, under current New York law, a slap, shove, or kick that doesn’t cause physical injury can be charged as a non-criminal violation, but only if the offender’s intent is to “alarm, harass, or annoy” the victim, and here is the kicker, literally: charges can’t be brought against someone important like Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman if the offender’s intent is sexual arousal or gratification, in this case, his own, unless the victim proves the violence caused substantial pain or injuries that go beyond bumps, bruises and cuts.
And not a peep about it from any Democrat, starting with Dianne Feinstein, to protest the injustice of an important and powerful Democrat like Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman getting to beat the crap out of women for his sexual gratification, this after them pillorying Brett Kavanaugh for allegedly laying on top of then-Chrissy Blasey when he was 17 and drunk at an unsupervised house party down in that ritzy area where he and Chrissy Blasey lived in cloistered, country club society.
Sauce for the Republican goose, and a separate goose for the Democrat gander.
By way of review, on May 9, 2018, the Albany, New York Times Union had a story on the appointment of this Democrat special prosecutor entitled “Cuomo’s special prosecutor move in Schneiderman probe stirs debate among DAs – State prosecutors mull response to Cuomo’s intervention in former AG’s case” by Brendan J. Lyons, as follows:
ALBANY Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s appointment of a special prosecutor to probe allegations of physical abuse of four women by former Attorney General Eric Schneiderman stoked an internal debate Wednesday among the state’s district attorneys about whether to challenge or criticize the governor’s intervention.
end quotes
Yes, people, not just one woman here, but four, as we see from this CNN article entitled “New York AG Eric Schneiderman resigns over assault allegations” by Sophie Tatum on May 8, 2018, to wit:
Washington (CNN) New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has resigned, following a report on allegations of assault by multiple women in The New Yorker.
“It’s been my great honor and privilege to serve as Attorney General for the people of the State of New York.”
“In the last several hours, serious allegations, which I strongly contest, have been made against me,” Schneiderman said in a statement.
“While these allegations are unrelated to my professional conduct or the operations of the office, they will effectively prevent me from leading the office’s work at this critical time.”
“I therefore resign my office, effective at the close of business on May 8, 2018.”
end quotes
Truth of the matter was that Eric T’ “Teddy” Schneiderman was using his position as state attorney general to protect and defend public corruption in New York state, so it was no honor or privilege for us to have him in that position above us, and we hoped to see him have to do some time for beating up women, but in New York state, if you are an important and powerful Democrat like Eric T. “Teddy” Schneiderman in a Democrat-controlled state, that is just not to be.
Getting back to the CNN article:
Shortly after announcing his resignation, the Manhattan District Attorney’s office said they had opened an investigation into the allegations against Schneiderman, a spokesman told CNN.
Schneiderman’s swift resignation, which came just hours after The New Yorker published its report, is a shocking fall from grace for a once rising star in Democratic politics.
Schneiderman had cast himself as a fierce opponent and critic of President Donald Trump.
Schneiderman has also been a vocal proponent of the #MeToo movement, bringing legal action in New York against film producer Harvey Weinstein, who has been accused of sexually assaulting women.
end quotes
And interestingly, as this convoluted story that centers on poor emotionally-disturbed Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh continues to unfold, with a recent FOX News article entitled “Kavanaugh report’s biggest bombshells: Grassley probe reveals details behind mistaken identity claims, more” by Robert Gearty on 5 November 2018 throwing even more doubt on the emotionally-charged testimony of Dr. Ford, where we were informed that a 414-page document authored by the Republican majority and released over the weekend contained a number of key revelations to include a statement from a man who believes he may have been involved in an encounter with Christine Blasey Ford around the time of her claim of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh, as we are told in a TMZ article entitled “Harvey Weinstein: D.A. Suffers New Setback … Over Witness Credibility Concerns” on 11/2/2018, the case against Hillary Clinton BFF Harvey Weinstein is now falling apart, because one of his accusers was apparently caught in a lie, as follows:
The Manhattan D.A. is having more problems with the Harvey Weinstein case … the latest being prosecutors have decided NOT to call a critical witness to prove Weinstein had an M.O. of rape.
Sources connected to the case tell TMZ, prosecutors wanted to call Melissa Thompson to the stand.
She has claimed Weinstein raped her back in 2011 in an NYC hotel room.
Thompson has even filed her own lawsuit claiming she was raped.
We’ve learned the D.A. is now in possession of emails and a text message they believe call Thompson’s credibility into question.
An hour after the alleged rape, Thompson sent an email to Weinstein about a proposed business arrangement.
We’re told the D.A. feels a jury would find the email troublesome.
Then, on November 8, 2011, Thompson sent a text message to Weinstein, pitching herself as an executive producer on a show.
The text message read in part, “Harvey if I do this show can i be an EP?”
“I got 2/3 of the cast.”
We’re told the D.A. also has a writing from Thompson after the alleged rape, bragging about her relationship with Weinstein.
Thompson released this video of an interaction she had with Weinstein hours before the alleged rape.
This is the latest setback in the D.A.’s case against Weinstein.
The lead detective is under investigation for witness tampering and withholding evidence favorable to Weinstein.
The D.A. has dropped the case involving a woman who claims Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex, after she allegedly told a friend the oral sex was consensual and she did it because she was gunning for a movie job.
end quotes
Some crazy ****, is it not?
And people wonder if there is a culture gap in this country.
Seems so to me, anyway.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-92090
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 11, 2018
Opinion: Making it Up as they Go
Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante
Should a nation, to be considered a nation, have a history that is common to all of its citizens, if they be that, or its subjects, if they not be citizens?
Or doesn’t it really matter anymore, as is the case in the United States of America today, where it seems that if you have ten people in a room, you might get twenty or more versions of what the history of the United States of America really is, and hack politicians like Barack Hussein Obama making it up as they go along?
Which thought takes me to a recent essay courtesy of Marketwatch by Joseph Eugene Stiglitz (born February 9, 1943), a.k.a. “Bad Boy Joe,” because he dared to question the World Bank and was fired by the World Bank for expressing dissent with its policies, entitled “Opinion: The fight to preserve democracy has come home to America” published Nov. 6, 2018, where “Bad Boy Joe,” who also is making it up as he goes, informs us as follows, to wit:
NEW YORK (Project Syndicate) — The United States has long held itself up as a bastion of democracy.
It has promoted democracy around the world.
It fought, at great cost, for democracy against fascism in Europe during World War II.
Now the fight has come home.
End quotes
Now, first let me remark that that is a refrain we have been hearing fairly constantly, chiefly from those who self-identify as Democrats, since the 2016 presidential election, and from this essay by Joe Stiglitz, it appears that the refrain is not going away anytime soon, especially since the Democrats are now in charge of the House of Representatives, so, hence this essay in reply to this fake news being put out by “Bad Boy Joe” Stiglitz in that Nov. 6, 2018 political essay on behalf of the Democrats.
But first of all, let us deal with this critical question of what is a nation?
According to one definition, a nation is a geographical entity with defined and recognized boundaries.
According to that definition, is the United States of America really a nation anymore, where the Democrats at least, the globalists among us, do not want national boundaries or borders for the United States of America?
Another definition states that there four characteristics of a nation, to wit:
POPULATION
Every state must be inhabited; it must have a population (people).
SOVEREIGNTY
The state has absolute power within its territory.
It can decide its own policies.
GOVERNMENT
The state makes and enforces its policies through a government.
TERRITORY
Every state must have land, with known and recognized borders.
End quotes
For the purposes of this essay, since I am on the other side of this debate from that taken by “Bad Boy Joe” Stiglitz in his Nov. 6, 2018 Marketwatch essay, I am going to stake my position in this debate as the United States of America is in fact a nation, and has been since the government under the U.S. Constitution, as spelled out in great detail in the Federalist Papers, began on March 4, 1789, and if that is going to cause me to be condemned in here as a “nationalist,” defined as “a person who advocates political independence for a country,” so be it, for I am, as a loyal American citizen.
And that takes us back to this political essay of Joseph Eugene Stiglitz, where he states as follows:
America’s credentials as a democracy were always slightly blemished.
The U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, but only a small fraction of its citizens — mostly white male property owners — were eligible to vote.
End quotes
Now, that statement by “Bad Boy Joe” Stiglitz that the U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, is pure horse****, because there, Joseph Eugene Stiglitz is as wrong as wrong can be when he says that the U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, and he would be the first to know that.
So why is he feeding us that horse**** then, as if we were all nothing more than ignorant fools who are putty to be formed and shaped in the hands of a political manipulator like Joe Stiglitz?
But let’s face it, people, with that political essay, Joe Stiglitz was not aiming for the truth, at all.
He was making it up as he goes, and he is hoping we are all too stupid and too in awe of him to know the difference, or to dare to question him.
And many will be in awe of him, and take his word as gospel, even though what he says is totally refuted by the Federalist Papers, which papers Joe Stiglitz has chosen to ignore, and treat as irrelevant to his political arguments of today, for tomorrow, where the Democrats clearly want our Republic, the Republic promised to us in the Federalist papers, dead and buried, and forgotten to the minds of men and women in America, so their democracy, which favors the Democrats as the party in charge of the lives of all Americans, can flourish.
I mean look who we are talking about here, people, as my opposite number in this debate.
While I am as common as common can be in America, Joe Stiglitz is quite famous as an American economist, public policy analyst, and a professor at Columbia University who was a former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank as well as a former member and chairman of the US president’s Council of Economic Advisers, known for his support of Georgist public finance theory and for his critical view of the management of globalization, of laissez-faire economists whom he calls “free market fundamentalists”, and of international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
According to his bio, in 2000, Stiglitz founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue (IPD), a think tank on international development based at Columbia University, where he has been a member of the Columbia faculty since 2001, receiving that university’s highest academic rank of university professor in 2003.
As an aside, knowing actual American history, as opposed to making it up as you go along as Joe Stiglitz did in his essay under discussion in here, does not seem to be a requirement to be a university professor at Columbia, nor does being factual appear to be, or Joe Stiglitz would be on the outside looking in based on this essay, anyway, where Joe Stiglitz has grossly distorted the early history of this nation with his bogus claim that the U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, when FEDERALIST No. 51, The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by Alexander Hamilton on Friday, February 8, 1788 makes clear we are a compound Republic, to wit:
There are, moreover, two considerations particularly applicable to the federal system of America, which place that system in a very interesting point of view.
First.
In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the administration of a single government; and the usurpations are guarded against by a division of the government into distinct and separate departments.
In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments.
Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people.
End quote
And that is for this pertinent reason, to wit:
It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part.
End quotes
I am old, and white, and non-gay, so I am in that weak and helpless segment of the society of America that wants to be guarded from the injustice of the Democrats now that they have taken power in the House of Representatives, but fears he won’t be, especially when the voices of famous Americans like Joe Stiglitz are being heard on behalf of the Democrats, while my voice except for in here is pretty much silent.
Getting back to Joe Stiglitz, he was also the founding chair of the university’s Committee on Global Thought, and he chairs the University of Manchester’s Brooks World Poverty Institute, and is also a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, and in 2011, Stiglitz was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world.
And now he appears to be using his considerable influence to lie to the American people for no other purpose than to deceive them on behalf of the Democrat party, whose shill he is.
As to being a formidable opponent in this debate, Stiglitz graduated from Amherst College in 1964, where he was a highly active member of the debate team and president of the student government, and during his senior year at Amherst College, he studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he later pursued graduate work.
He studied for his PhD from MIT from 1966 to 1967, during which time he also held an MIT assistant professorship.
In addition to making numerous influential contributions to macroeconomics, Stiglitz has played a number of policy roles.
He not only served in the Clinton administration as the chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers (1995–1997), but he is also a member of Collegium International, an organization of leaders with political, scientific, and ethical expertise whose goal is to provide new approaches in overcoming the obstacles in the way of a peaceful, socially just and an economically sustainable world, which Stiglitz World requires a United States of America with open borders, and beyond that, Stiglitz has advised American president Barack Obama.
So there are the sides taken, people, and the battle lines are now being drawn.
Which side will have the better argument as to what our American history really is?
Or doesn’t it really matter anymore, because in a democracy, you can have it be anything you want it to be, and nobody has the right to tell you that you are wrong?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... s-they-go/
Opinion: Making it Up as they Go
Special Opinion to the Mirror by Paul Plante
Should a nation, to be considered a nation, have a history that is common to all of its citizens, if they be that, or its subjects, if they not be citizens?
Or doesn’t it really matter anymore, as is the case in the United States of America today, where it seems that if you have ten people in a room, you might get twenty or more versions of what the history of the United States of America really is, and hack politicians like Barack Hussein Obama making it up as they go along?
Which thought takes me to a recent essay courtesy of Marketwatch by Joseph Eugene Stiglitz (born February 9, 1943), a.k.a. “Bad Boy Joe,” because he dared to question the World Bank and was fired by the World Bank for expressing dissent with its policies, entitled “Opinion: The fight to preserve democracy has come home to America” published Nov. 6, 2018, where “Bad Boy Joe,” who also is making it up as he goes, informs us as follows, to wit:
NEW YORK (Project Syndicate) — The United States has long held itself up as a bastion of democracy.
It has promoted democracy around the world.
It fought, at great cost, for democracy against fascism in Europe during World War II.
Now the fight has come home.
End quotes
Now, first let me remark that that is a refrain we have been hearing fairly constantly, chiefly from those who self-identify as Democrats, since the 2016 presidential election, and from this essay by Joe Stiglitz, it appears that the refrain is not going away anytime soon, especially since the Democrats are now in charge of the House of Representatives, so, hence this essay in reply to this fake news being put out by “Bad Boy Joe” Stiglitz in that Nov. 6, 2018 political essay on behalf of the Democrats.
But first of all, let us deal with this critical question of what is a nation?
According to one definition, a nation is a geographical entity with defined and recognized boundaries.
According to that definition, is the United States of America really a nation anymore, where the Democrats at least, the globalists among us, do not want national boundaries or borders for the United States of America?
Another definition states that there four characteristics of a nation, to wit:
POPULATION
Every state must be inhabited; it must have a population (people).
SOVEREIGNTY
The state has absolute power within its territory.
It can decide its own policies.
GOVERNMENT
The state makes and enforces its policies through a government.
TERRITORY
Every state must have land, with known and recognized borders.
End quotes
For the purposes of this essay, since I am on the other side of this debate from that taken by “Bad Boy Joe” Stiglitz in his Nov. 6, 2018 Marketwatch essay, I am going to stake my position in this debate as the United States of America is in fact a nation, and has been since the government under the U.S. Constitution, as spelled out in great detail in the Federalist Papers, began on March 4, 1789, and if that is going to cause me to be condemned in here as a “nationalist,” defined as “a person who advocates political independence for a country,” so be it, for I am, as a loyal American citizen.
And that takes us back to this political essay of Joseph Eugene Stiglitz, where he states as follows:
America’s credentials as a democracy were always slightly blemished.
The U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, but only a small fraction of its citizens — mostly white male property owners — were eligible to vote.
End quotes
Now, that statement by “Bad Boy Joe” Stiglitz that the U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, is pure horse****, because there, Joseph Eugene Stiglitz is as wrong as wrong can be when he says that the U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, and he would be the first to know that.
So why is he feeding us that horse**** then, as if we were all nothing more than ignorant fools who are putty to be formed and shaped in the hands of a political manipulator like Joe Stiglitz?
But let’s face it, people, with that political essay, Joe Stiglitz was not aiming for the truth, at all.
He was making it up as he goes, and he is hoping we are all too stupid and too in awe of him to know the difference, or to dare to question him.
And many will be in awe of him, and take his word as gospel, even though what he says is totally refuted by the Federalist Papers, which papers Joe Stiglitz has chosen to ignore, and treat as irrelevant to his political arguments of today, for tomorrow, where the Democrats clearly want our Republic, the Republic promised to us in the Federalist papers, dead and buried, and forgotten to the minds of men and women in America, so their democracy, which favors the Democrats as the party in charge of the lives of all Americans, can flourish.
I mean look who we are talking about here, people, as my opposite number in this debate.
While I am as common as common can be in America, Joe Stiglitz is quite famous as an American economist, public policy analyst, and a professor at Columbia University who was a former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank as well as a former member and chairman of the US president’s Council of Economic Advisers, known for his support of Georgist public finance theory and for his critical view of the management of globalization, of laissez-faire economists whom he calls “free market fundamentalists”, and of international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
According to his bio, in 2000, Stiglitz founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue (IPD), a think tank on international development based at Columbia University, where he has been a member of the Columbia faculty since 2001, receiving that university’s highest academic rank of university professor in 2003.
As an aside, knowing actual American history, as opposed to making it up as you go along as Joe Stiglitz did in his essay under discussion in here, does not seem to be a requirement to be a university professor at Columbia, nor does being factual appear to be, or Joe Stiglitz would be on the outside looking in based on this essay, anyway, where Joe Stiglitz has grossly distorted the early history of this nation with his bogus claim that the U.S. was founded as a representative democracy, when FEDERALIST No. 51, The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by Alexander Hamilton on Friday, February 8, 1788 makes clear we are a compound Republic, to wit:
There are, moreover, two considerations particularly applicable to the federal system of America, which place that system in a very interesting point of view.
First.
In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the administration of a single government; and the usurpations are guarded against by a division of the government into distinct and separate departments.
In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments.
Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people.
End quote
And that is for this pertinent reason, to wit:
It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part.
End quotes
I am old, and white, and non-gay, so I am in that weak and helpless segment of the society of America that wants to be guarded from the injustice of the Democrats now that they have taken power in the House of Representatives, but fears he won’t be, especially when the voices of famous Americans like Joe Stiglitz are being heard on behalf of the Democrats, while my voice except for in here is pretty much silent.
Getting back to Joe Stiglitz, he was also the founding chair of the university’s Committee on Global Thought, and he chairs the University of Manchester’s Brooks World Poverty Institute, and is also a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, and in 2011, Stiglitz was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world.
And now he appears to be using his considerable influence to lie to the American people for no other purpose than to deceive them on behalf of the Democrat party, whose shill he is.
As to being a formidable opponent in this debate, Stiglitz graduated from Amherst College in 1964, where he was a highly active member of the debate team and president of the student government, and during his senior year at Amherst College, he studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he later pursued graduate work.
He studied for his PhD from MIT from 1966 to 1967, during which time he also held an MIT assistant professorship.
In addition to making numerous influential contributions to macroeconomics, Stiglitz has played a number of policy roles.
He not only served in the Clinton administration as the chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers (1995–1997), but he is also a member of Collegium International, an organization of leaders with political, scientific, and ethical expertise whose goal is to provide new approaches in overcoming the obstacles in the way of a peaceful, socially just and an economically sustainable world, which Stiglitz World requires a United States of America with open borders, and beyond that, Stiglitz has advised American president Barack Obama.
So there are the sides taken, people, and the battle lines are now being drawn.
Which side will have the better argument as to what our American history really is?
Or doesn’t it really matter anymore, because in a democracy, you can have it be anything you want it to be, and nobody has the right to tell you that you are wrong?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... s-they-go/
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 11, 2018 at 12:14 pm
Paul Plante says :
What I always wonder about is who brought these people up to believe that they have a right to threaten people and their families in their homes.
Who were the parents of these dangerous morons?
What school systems did they go to?
Who were their teachers?
Who was the school principal?
Who were the board of education members?
What kinds of communities did they come from?
And what ties do they have to the Democrat party in this country?
There is where the real problems in America are, with the ones who produced these domestic terrorists.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/i ... 29#respond
Paul Plante says :
What I always wonder about is who brought these people up to believe that they have a right to threaten people and their families in their homes.
Who were the parents of these dangerous morons?
What school systems did they go to?
Who were their teachers?
Who was the school principal?
Who were the board of education members?
What kinds of communities did they come from?
And what ties do they have to the Democrat party in this country?
There is where the real problems in America are, with the ones who produced these domestic terrorists.
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/i ... 29#respond
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 11, 2018 at 6:10 pm
Paul Plante says :
I guess my question more properly should have been what kind of society or environment or educational system or combination of the three produces these kinds of people who think they have been given any kind of right to trample on the rights of those they disagree with, and so, would have stifled, which is exactly what the Hitler Youth in Germany were doing back when.
This is America’s Gleichschaltung, perhaps, a repeat of the process of Nazification by which Nazi Germany successively established a system of totalitarian control and coordination over all aspects of society, “from the economy and trade associations to the media, culture and education.”
Let us face it, Ray Otton, as older people in here with working memories, if you want to take over a government, and a nation in the process, the successful models to choose from are the Nazis in Germany, the Bolsheviks in Russia or the Communists in China, and those in this country wishing power over us to impose their wills on us are well aware of those models, of which the Nazi Gleichschaltung is considered superior, which is why we are seeing these paramilitaries out there known as the ANTI-FA, who are themselves the real fascists.
As to Gleichschaltung, the Nazis used the word Gleichschaltung for the process of successively establishing a system of totalitarian control and coordination over all aspects of society, with it being variously “translated” as Nazification of state and society, synchronization, bringing into line, and co-ordination, but the German word is often left as a cultural term in English texts.
As to these terror tactics we are witnessing here in the United States today, the period from 1933 to 1937 in Germany was characterized by the systematic elimination of non-Nazi organizations that could potentially influence people, such as trade unions and political parties.
Those critical of Hitler’s agenda were suppressed, intimidated or murdered.
Today, those critical of the agenda of the political party that controls these ANTI-FA as their private army are suppressed and intimidated, as this thread details.
And this is relevant to our times in America today, to wit: organizations that the Nazi administration could not eliminate, such as the education system, came under its direct control, and the Gleichschaltung also included the formation of various organisations with compulsory membership for segments of the population, in particular the youth.
Boys first served as apprentices in the Pimpfen (cubs), beginning at the age of six, and at age ten, entered the Deutsches Jungvolk (Young German Boys) and served there until entering the Hitler Youth proper at age fourteen.
Boys remained there until age eighteen, at which time they entered into the Arbeitsdienst (Labor Service) and the armed forces.
Girls became part of the Jungmädel (Young Maidens) at age ten and at age fourteen were enrolled in the Bund Deutscher Mädel (League of German Maidens).
At eighteen, BDM members went generally to the eastern territory for their Pflichtdienst, or Landjahr, a year of labor on a farm.
In 1936 membership in the Hitler Youth numbered just under six million.
As to the model employed by Barack Hussein Obama in his attempt at a complete political takeover of government here in the United States of America, it comes from Joseph Goebbels, as follows: “The best propaganda is that which, as it were, works invisibly, penetrates the whole of life without the public having any knowledge of the propagandistic initiative.”
“It is a mistake to believe that the people cannot take the truth.”
“They can.”
“It is only a matter of presenting the truth to people in a way that they will be able to understand.”
end quotes
And that is what we see happening here – the truth was being presented to Tucker Carlson in a way the howling mob, the American Ochlocracy, government by mob or a mass of people, which is “mobocracy,” thinks Tucker Carlson will be able to understand.
Ancient Greek political thinkers regarded ochlocracy as one of the three “bad” forms of government (tyranny, oligarchy, and ochlocracy) and they distinguished “good” and “bad” according to whether the government form would act in the interest of the whole community (“good”) or in the exclusive interests of a group or individual at the expense of justice (“bad”).
That is something we do not do in this country – distinguish “good” from “bad” with respect to government in terms of whether the government form would act in the interest of the whole community (“good”) or in the exclusive interests of a group or individual at the expense of justice (“bad”), and in fact, our two-party system of government, which is really just one coin with the usual two sides, is always about the exclusive interests of a group or individual at the expense of justice.
Should we therefore be surprised at what we are reading in here today, Ray Otton?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/i ... 29#respond
Paul Plante says :
I guess my question more properly should have been what kind of society or environment or educational system or combination of the three produces these kinds of people who think they have been given any kind of right to trample on the rights of those they disagree with, and so, would have stifled, which is exactly what the Hitler Youth in Germany were doing back when.
This is America’s Gleichschaltung, perhaps, a repeat of the process of Nazification by which Nazi Germany successively established a system of totalitarian control and coordination over all aspects of society, “from the economy and trade associations to the media, culture and education.”
Let us face it, Ray Otton, as older people in here with working memories, if you want to take over a government, and a nation in the process, the successful models to choose from are the Nazis in Germany, the Bolsheviks in Russia or the Communists in China, and those in this country wishing power over us to impose their wills on us are well aware of those models, of which the Nazi Gleichschaltung is considered superior, which is why we are seeing these paramilitaries out there known as the ANTI-FA, who are themselves the real fascists.
As to Gleichschaltung, the Nazis used the word Gleichschaltung for the process of successively establishing a system of totalitarian control and coordination over all aspects of society, with it being variously “translated” as Nazification of state and society, synchronization, bringing into line, and co-ordination, but the German word is often left as a cultural term in English texts.
As to these terror tactics we are witnessing here in the United States today, the period from 1933 to 1937 in Germany was characterized by the systematic elimination of non-Nazi organizations that could potentially influence people, such as trade unions and political parties.
Those critical of Hitler’s agenda were suppressed, intimidated or murdered.
Today, those critical of the agenda of the political party that controls these ANTI-FA as their private army are suppressed and intimidated, as this thread details.
And this is relevant to our times in America today, to wit: organizations that the Nazi administration could not eliminate, such as the education system, came under its direct control, and the Gleichschaltung also included the formation of various organisations with compulsory membership for segments of the population, in particular the youth.
Boys first served as apprentices in the Pimpfen (cubs), beginning at the age of six, and at age ten, entered the Deutsches Jungvolk (Young German Boys) and served there until entering the Hitler Youth proper at age fourteen.
Boys remained there until age eighteen, at which time they entered into the Arbeitsdienst (Labor Service) and the armed forces.
Girls became part of the Jungmädel (Young Maidens) at age ten and at age fourteen were enrolled in the Bund Deutscher Mädel (League of German Maidens).
At eighteen, BDM members went generally to the eastern territory for their Pflichtdienst, or Landjahr, a year of labor on a farm.
In 1936 membership in the Hitler Youth numbered just under six million.
As to the model employed by Barack Hussein Obama in his attempt at a complete political takeover of government here in the United States of America, it comes from Joseph Goebbels, as follows: “The best propaganda is that which, as it were, works invisibly, penetrates the whole of life without the public having any knowledge of the propagandistic initiative.”
“It is a mistake to believe that the people cannot take the truth.”
“They can.”
“It is only a matter of presenting the truth to people in a way that they will be able to understand.”
end quotes
And that is what we see happening here – the truth was being presented to Tucker Carlson in a way the howling mob, the American Ochlocracy, government by mob or a mass of people, which is “mobocracy,” thinks Tucker Carlson will be able to understand.
Ancient Greek political thinkers regarded ochlocracy as one of the three “bad” forms of government (tyranny, oligarchy, and ochlocracy) and they distinguished “good” and “bad” according to whether the government form would act in the interest of the whole community (“good”) or in the exclusive interests of a group or individual at the expense of justice (“bad”).
That is something we do not do in this country – distinguish “good” from “bad” with respect to government in terms of whether the government form would act in the interest of the whole community (“good”) or in the exclusive interests of a group or individual at the expense of justice (“bad”), and in fact, our two-party system of government, which is really just one coin with the usual two sides, is always about the exclusive interests of a group or individual at the expense of justice.
Should we therefore be surprised at what we are reading in here today, Ray Otton?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/i ... 29#respond
Re: Just musings, is all
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR November 11, 2018 at 6:38 pm
Paul Plante says :
On the map of the United States, those who self-identify as “liberals,” whatever on earth that term is meant to mean, outside of someone with a foul mouth attached to a completely empty head, occupy not much territory, at all.
But where they are, on the east coast and on the west coast, places like New York City, for example, they are there in numbers, numbers that far outstrip the numbers in the rest of the state, and so, they have considerable political clout, putting into statewide and national office those who share their liberal values, and thus, their voices get heard, while the voices of those of us outside of these liberal bastions are generally not heard.
And so here we are in here, hearing a lot of liberal screeching in condemnation of white women in America who are not liberals, nor do they share liberal values, which they consider morally weak, as if these women were somehow selling out the liberal women in America, which charge the non-liberal women I know would call pure bull****.
It is a thing of a lack of respect, as I understand it.
Take this Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, for example.
I have found no woman up this way who considers little “party girl” Chrissy Blasey, who grew up into the emotionally-damaged Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who the Senate Democrats then turned into a freak show in the eyes of the world when they put her on display on national TV as an emotional basket case as a result of her loose moral upbringing in a failed effort to tarnish the reputation of Brett Kavanaugh, to be sympathetic.
“She brought it on herself,” they say, and they don’t care what these women who self-identify as liberal think about it, which is something these women who self-identify as liberal cannot understand.
They seem to believe that they are the acme of womanhood here in America with their liberal values, and any woman who does not wish to join them is beneath them.
And they are so wrong, it isn’t funny.
But in their arrogance, they will likely never know that, but really, who cares?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/a ... ment-92486
Paul Plante says :
On the map of the United States, those who self-identify as “liberals,” whatever on earth that term is meant to mean, outside of someone with a foul mouth attached to a completely empty head, occupy not much territory, at all.
But where they are, on the east coast and on the west coast, places like New York City, for example, they are there in numbers, numbers that far outstrip the numbers in the rest of the state, and so, they have considerable political clout, putting into statewide and national office those who share their liberal values, and thus, their voices get heard, while the voices of those of us outside of these liberal bastions are generally not heard.
And so here we are in here, hearing a lot of liberal screeching in condemnation of white women in America who are not liberals, nor do they share liberal values, which they consider morally weak, as if these women were somehow selling out the liberal women in America, which charge the non-liberal women I know would call pure bull****.
It is a thing of a lack of respect, as I understand it.
Take this Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, for example.
I have found no woman up this way who considers little “party girl” Chrissy Blasey, who grew up into the emotionally-damaged Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who the Senate Democrats then turned into a freak show in the eyes of the world when they put her on display on national TV as an emotional basket case as a result of her loose moral upbringing in a failed effort to tarnish the reputation of Brett Kavanaugh, to be sympathetic.
“She brought it on herself,” they say, and they don’t care what these women who self-identify as liberal think about it, which is something these women who self-identify as liberal cannot understand.
They seem to believe that they are the acme of womanhood here in America with their liberal values, and any woman who does not wish to join them is beneath them.
And they are so wrong, it isn’t funny.
But in their arrogance, they will likely never know that, but really, who cares?
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/a ... ment-92486