« Identity, inside or out: A post for National Coming Out Day | Main | The unwanted guests »

October 18, 2018

Comments

Consider making room.

Never is a problem. I haven't raised a single complaint ever about celebrating other holidays. Those complaints are a one way street.

Interestingly to me, I was just visiting the Pantheon in Rome. 700 years after Christ, Christians removed all of the religious items of other gods (the pan part of pantheon), and replaced them with their own, and it has been a christian church since. They even made all the American tourists take off their hats.

So I guess the intolerance for other religious displays is not new the the church. I guess not surprising given the 1st and 2nd commandments.

Though the images of Mary and Martyrs seem like graven images of worship to me, but what do I know.

Or accommodating Christianity, fish sticks could have been served on Tuesday, got saved for Friday. Some of those songs are beautiful. Never knew anyone punished for not singing them.


Misread that as Marty and the Matyrs, jrudkis.

Fine name for a band.

And yet, they were required by law to attend a public school, paid for by taxes...

There's your problem. :)

I'm not understanding the animosity towards Avenatti. He's by no means my first choice as a Presidential candidate

I have none towards him, as an advocate. He seems rather good at it.
And his heart seems in the right place, though his political judgment is questionable.
As a candidate, I think he’d be a disaster.

Isn't the fish thing on Friday only Catholic? That is closer to an establishment of a specific sect of Christianity (and in my baptist youth, would not have been considered christian at all).

fish on Friday - no it was religious. my town was heavily Catholic. the church school thing was Catholic, too.

"In fact, nothing in the current litany of complaints begins to rise to the level of the outright bans on Christmas celebrations that marked the colonial period, or the official discouragement of the holiday that prevailed in parts of the country much later. Nor do modern spats over the holiday begin to compare to the sectarian violence that once marked Christmas celebrations. When was the last time that somebody was fined or clubbed for enjoying the holiday in public, let alone on private property?"
There is a War on Christmas—In the History Books: The holiday has been surprisingly strife-torn since America's beginning. But today's controversies don't begin to compare to the colonial-era ban.

Trump: 'Anybody who votes for a Democrat now is crazy'
"Let’s get these people out of there," Trump said on Friday of elected Democrats. "There’s something wrong. They’re cuckoo."

It's really classic (definitely not to be confused with classy!) Trump: take your own flaws and accuse others of them.

I missed this...
https://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2018/09/285861.htm

In his own way, Pompeo is almost as big a liar about Saudi Arabia as Trump.

As a candidate, I think he’d be a disaster.

Maybe. Not willing to predict who would be best able to win in 2020 though, so I'm trying to withhold negative judgments until then. A lot rests on how we do in two weeks.

Thanks for answering my question, Marty.
I have to say that if that’s all your evidence for a ‘War on Chistmas’, it’s pretty weak sauce.

Trump - Saudi story is ‘credible’.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/412354-trump-calls-saudi-explanation-for-journalists-death-credible-arrests

An apologist for murderers.

Meanwhile, out in the wider world, this

The Saudi government acknowledged early Saturday that journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, saying he died during a fistfight
That would be the same Saudi government which earlier insisted that he left the embassy. Interesting that they seem to be saying that they mostly can't get a straight story out of their own embassy personnel -- because a fist fight with fatality could hardly have escaped -- notice. (Or maybe they just figure nobody's memory runs back more than 24 hours.)

Trump seems determined to just give them a pass. But it looks increasingly like he won't get his wish on this. Even from congressional Republicans.

Dang! Nigel beat me to it. :(

This
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/saudi-claims-that-khashoggi-died-in-a-brawl-draw-immediate-skepticism/2018/10/19/e10d4186-d3ef-11e8-83d6-291fcead2ab1_story.html

a Trump adviser said “Trump’s inclination is not to ruin the relationship”.

But the adviser said that officials such Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) have warned Trump and his advisers that if they don’t react, the Saudis will see it as weakness.

“If they respected you, they wouldn’t do this and think they could get away with it,” the adviser said, reflecting a conversation with the president.

Well, that's playing Trump properly. Make him worry that he'll look weak. Maybe even better than flattery for getting him to do something.

, saying he died during a fistfight

Well, when you bring your fist to a knife fight...

It's ok Nigel, without going back I dont remember the question. But a Christian in the US, particularly a nonpolitical one, can experience lots of little insults in the course of daily life. Not uniquely. So there isn't an answer that points to one big thing.

a Christian in the US, particularly a nonpolitical one, can experience lots of little insults in the course of daily life

Forgive me for asking, but where in the US have you experienced this? I ask because here in northern California, a quite liberal and secular region, I haven't seen anything like that.

Not that there are no bigots, on behalf of a variety of religions, philosophies, etc. Because of course there are. But insults in the normal course of daily life? Not so's you would notice. Leading me to wonder where you've experienced this.

cleek,

I sympathize like you wouldn't believe, if you'll pardon the expression.

My particular annoyance is not with Americans but with Greeks, and not with Christmas but with Easter. In a really Christian country like Greece, Easter is a much bigger deal. Anybody can get himself born; it's getting himself resurrected that's the real trick, theologically speaking. So, around the spring equinox, in Greece itself and in the Greek diaspora, everybody goes around greeting you with "Christos anesti" ("Christ is risen") and you are expected to respond "Alithos anesti" ("Truly risen") because, you know, tradition!

I doubt Marty is Greek Orthodox. I suspect he's one of those schismatics and heretics who call themselves Catholic or Protestant. Protestants, especially, tend to come from northern climes -- where the winter solstice seems more dramatic and thus more significant than Easter. Still, I wonder how long before the War on Easter becomes a thing with his ilk.

--TP

can experience lots of little insults in the course of daily life.

Like those microaggressions marginalized groups talk about, and conservatives get all bent out of shape that someone complains about it?

wj. I spend a lot of my time in Massachusetts and it is absolutely socially acceptable to joke about how stupid Christians are, depending on the company sometimes more subtly implied. When I'm in Florida it is less often or open.

I spend a lot of my time in Massachusetts and it is absolutely socially acceptable to joke about how stupid Christians are

I live in MA, and have done so for about 40 years of my life.

MA is not the south. Religious faith and practice is, basically, a private matter in MA. People don't talk all that much about their church attendance, or their personal religious beliefs. There is no assumption that anyone attends church, or any religious observance, at all, or that one even has any particular religious affiliation at all.

It's your private business.

It is common for people in MA to disparage the kind of evangelical Christian practice that is common in other parts of the country, and less so here. Publicly, and with a kind of assumption that whoever they are talking to is likely to share their negative opinion of that style of Christian worship.

Because that style of Christian worship is, by and large, out of step with cultural norms in MA, and in a lot of New England.

By the standards of this region, your religious affiliation is basically your private business, and it's seen as kind of unseemly to go on about it publicly.

I'm sure if you come here from other parts of the country that can seem hostile. Just like, if I go to other parts of the country, people like me are, commonly and publicly, disparaged in ways that I could receive as hostile.

But when I do that, I don't receive it as hostile, I just figure it's people blabbing away in a sort of unreflective way, and in the process exposing their personal petty prejudices and predispositions.

I don't take it personally, because I don't have a thin skin.

Like those microaggressions marginalized groups talk about, and conservatives get all bent out of shape that someone complains about it?

Q.E.D.

a Trump adviser said “Trump’s inclination is not to ruin the relationship”.

this is the brave, bold, leadership we've come to expect.

truly, Trump is a man of deep principles. laudable. the best, really. tremendous.

To Nigel's point, way way way upthread, yes, I recognize what the author of the Atlantic piece is saying.

But I don't really need suggestions to "think long and hard about this". If people are confused about whether to call someone Jewish, or a Jew, or whether to call someone black, or Afro-American, to the point where they are going to *change who they vote for* because the confusion is just too much for them, I am really and truly at a loss as to what I, personally, or anyone with my social values is going to do to change that.

I suspect that people's choices of who to vote for is not really going to turn on things like that. To the degree that folks say they are, I suspect they are being less than candid.

People own their own decisions.

Thanks for the link, though.

Kashoggi lost a fistfight.

With a guy who was carrying a bone saw.

I wonder how long before the War on Easter becomes a thing with his ilk.

FoxNews is trying!

http://insider.foxnews.com/tag/war-easter

I couldn't get russell's link way upthread, even when re-posted by lj, and now I've just got the same message again when I try to click cleek's link: Your Connection is not Private! with a Back to Safety button. You IT types might know what to do in a case like that, but I don't. I hope this isn't something that's going to keep happening!

try it without the https

http://insider.foxnews.com/tag/war-easter

A bit late as usual but I find this cartoon a classic on the topic:
https://pics.me.me/organized-ichool-intended-dont-think-out-of-handung-the-goat-18522011.png

Concerning Friday fish: Over here in Germany most cantinas (school, university, companies, public agencies etc.) have a fish option on Friday. Most people do not even know that it had a religious connotation once.
What has caused an uproar some time ago was a proposal to have a mandatory day a week without a meat option in cantinas (and this proposal came not from organized vegans or Eastern religionists but from a Green Party politician).

"this proposal came not from organized vegans or Eastern religionists but from a Green Party politician"

My son and several of the people he knows dont et meat simply to lower their carbon footprint. So that makes sense.

try it without the https

Thanks, cleek, that worked. Now you mentioned it, I remembered that when I first got my new computer I couldn't easily get onto ObWi, and Michael Cain (I think) advised to drop the final s of https, which I did, and which worked. But that explained why, ever since then, ObWi has appeared as Not Secure in the address bar. But once I remembered that now, I just reinstated the s, and hey presto! ObWi is secure again, and I think I now know how to look at links (I'm going back up to find the russell one).

OK wow, being able to look at the first draft of that NYT piece on the Khashoggi murder was a real eye-opener. Thanks russell. (Also, I knew really that you had no established religion, but it was important to be reminded).

I spend a lot of my time in Massachusetts and it is absolutely socially acceptable to joke about how stupid Christians are,

I don't know, sometimes it would seem that the jokes write themselves.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/10/pat-robertson-khashoggi.html

The Baptist version of the 5th commandment is "Thou shalt not kill unless the murderer has a big arms deal in the pipeline"

Happy Easter!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8TSvMx2wPI

A lady friend and I visited a Halloween Haunted House of the Dead last week. It was less creepy and haunting, which is my preferred scare, and more just human carnage in an abattoir ... the actors, missing body parts, jumping out at you and grring and chasing you down smoky hallways into the arms of a guy wielding a screaming chainsaw, that sort of thing.

But as we exited a pretty girl attendant looked at us with a 100-watt smile and said "Happy Halloween!!", and I resisted stopping and asking HER back what the hell was so "happy" about it, not that I care.

Not "merry" either".

Am I mistaken, or did Marty at least infer up thread that preventing observant Christians from their fasting is a thing now?

What, did they feel chastised when they didn't order dessert at a restaurant, or what?

By what means are these people prevented from fasting?

Is it forced feeding thru a funnel like our good Christian boys do to the Muslims at Guantanamo, or what?

I recently saw a picture of President Beelzebub flanked by photos of the devout Falwell Jr. to one side and Stormy Daniels to the other. The lady was wearing a Christian cross around her neck; there was no sign of Christianity in anything the vicious fuck Falwell was saying in the text, but I was impressed that His Honour, the Prez was at least wearing trousers, unlike some of the his dickless Supreme Court nominees.

I don't know if anyone can tell, ha ha, but I'm about as politically incorrect as a guy can get, so let me say that this nonsense republicans and conservatives spout about hurtful political correctness on the part of the Left, whatever that is, is rank pig shit.

Get over it.

When I was a kid in some corners of my family, not my parents, and with a few of my friends, if you didn't use the terms "nigger" and "Jewboy", you were considered "politically INcorrect".

Demonizing the Other by this country's dominant culture has been THE Politically Correct behavior since Day One.

Born a Protestant, in a Christian family, I had a high school girlfriend who was raised in a Catholic family, last time I looked a branch of Christianity, and I couldn't invite her to dinner at my grandparents because my paternal grandmother, a sweet woman in every other way, was basically Martin Luther (THERE was a politically correct guy, according to the Pope) in a shawl and a hairnet and would not have cared for the catholicity of the circumstance.

Good thing my girlfriend didn't make it to Christmas dinner, because my grandfather's habit while carving the turkey at the head of the table was to raise the serving fork on which was impaled the Pope's Nose, that delicious flap of flesh right above the poop chute on your common holiday bird and tell us he would arm wrestle the grandsons over who got the privilege of consuming the morsel.

Ya know who has been politically correct in America since Day One: EVERY CONSERVATIVE, which means all of the white Christian men, including me, who were created equal, all OTHERS to the back of the bus, according to the founding texts, which were so loaded with unintentional loopholes that the troublemakers could make some headway, glacially.

Exceptional politically INcorrect American individuals off the top of my head: Abigail Adams, Abe Lincoln, John Brown, Frederick Douglas, Jackie Robinson, Bayard Rustin (two ways), Emma Goldman, Walt Whitman, Russell Means, Philip Roth.

So don't try to turn this around, conservatives.

Don't try to kid a kidder.


A rabbi, a Hindu, and a Protestant walk into a bar carrying a canoe. The Irish Catholic proprietor slams down his bar towel and sez: ????

Happy Halloween!

And how many of those celebrating have a clue that All Hallows Eve (the uncorrupted name) is the evening before All Saints Day?

Christmas and Easter (aka Spring Break) aren't the only Christian holy days to get the religion bleached out. But Halloween is so far gone that even the folks who are determined to feel victimized don't know it happened.

Yes, I heard Robertson spew on NPR yesterday.

So many knowledgeable people in the country, and they shove a mic in front of that troublesome psychopath's lying gob?

Speaking of political correctness: it is politically INcorrect to "take a knee" during the national anthem. He, Trump and his lickspittles are all FOR political correctness on that score.

It is politically INcorrect to suggest that America's soldiers (the politically correct designation being "our troops") are always "fighting for our freedom" no matter what misbegotten mission they are assigned. The politically correct thing is to always say, to any armed civil servant, "Thank you for your service". No right-winger will ever complain about that bit of political correctness.

BTW, don't ever thank a civil servant for working in the IRS, or the CDC, or NOAA, or EPA, within earshot of a right-winger -- you'll be branded "politically correct" before you can spit.

And not to forget the private sector: the politically correct term for your boss is "job creator". Just ask any RWNJ anti-political-correctness snowflake.

--TP

Why are Chinese restaurants open on Christmas Day?

Why are Chinese restaurants open on Christmas Day?

Much the same reason as (moderately) orthodox Jews hiring a Christian (or at least not Jewish) driver for getting around on Saturdays. It can be handy, sometimes, to have someone of another religion available.

TP Hmmm, that may have something to do with the fact that their job descriptions, in general, dont involve being willing to die.

I've not really understood Marty's complaint. He wants no one to say anything to hurt the very sensitive feelings of oppressed Christians, and he wants the courts to stop enforcing the Establishment Clause. OK, noted. Now, what's he going to do to stop the disaster of Trump and his enablers?

I'm thinking this thread should be converted into jokes about Christians.

Why don't Baptists have sex standing up?
It's too much like dancing.

Took my dog to a Baptist preacher who also did dog training. When I got the dog back, I checked out the commands. I said sit, the dog sat. I said roll over, the dog rolled over. I said play dead, the dog dropped down and stuck his feet up in the air. But when I said heel, the dog jumped up, put both his paws on my forehead and started howling...

Pirates have three priests, a Dominican, a Franciscan and a Jesuit and they have them walk the plank as the sharks circle below. FIrst goes the Dominican and the sharks tear him apart. Then the Franciscan, same result. Then the Jesuit falls into the water and the sharks start circling around him. One of the pirates says 'It's a miracle'. Another pirate replies 'no, professional courtesy...'

Why are Christians grateful that Jesus was crucified instead of stoned to death?

--TP

So they didn't have to use up any of the rocks in their heads?

how many of those celebrating have a clue that All Hallows Eve (the uncorrupted name) is the evening before All Saints Day?

And the choice of date was a medieval re-purposing of pagan Samhain.

I'm thinking this thread should be converted into jokes about Christians.

A joke from Bible College days:

You know, at that other Bible College, they make boys and girls who are dating stay 6 inches away from each other.

And that only leaves me two good inches!

-- rimshot! --

The preachers' kids were the worst.

I disagree that "Halloween" is a corrupted name. "Een" is just as good a contraction of "Evening" as is "Eve",

Close, Count

Why are Christians grateful that Jesus was crucified instead of stoned to death?

Because they get to do this [cross yourself] instead of this [pummel head with fists] in church.

It works better as a sight gag.

Now, Marty, about unarmed civil servants: ... their job descriptions, in general, dont involve being willing to die.

A few things:
1) We train soldiers to kill, not to die. It's true that infantrymen in Iraq, Afghanistan, Niger and so on do put their lives in danger; we know that all too well around here. But the hero commanding a Predator drone from a desk in Omaha? the brave navigator on the USS Nimitz? the fearless supply sergeant at Camp Lejeune? Not so much.
2) "Defending our freedom" is patently not always and unquestionably the mission of even the foot-soldiers who risk their lives in far-flung places. "Support the troops" is how right-wingers say "put them in harm's way"; politically incorrect libruls would rather support "the troops" by NOT sending them off to be shot at.
3) The less said about cops whose instinct is to shoot at anyone they even imagine to be a threat to them and lie about it afterwards, the better.
4) Protecting We the People from government bankruptcy, contagious diseases, unforeseen storms, poisoned air and water, and various other potential constraints on our freedom is a thankless job; we should fix that.

And not for nothing: a crowd chanting "Lock her up!" is a mob; people demonstrating against separating kids from their parents, or against confirming a liar and lickspittle to the SCOTUS, are not. A POTUS who rails against "taking a knee" at a football game is a mob boss. But a mob boss who cuts your taxes is acceptable to some people, whether or not he sides with assholes who body-slam reporters, with criminals who butcher columnists, or with Putin and his kleptocrats.

I don't want Avenatti to run against He, Trump and his League of Deplorable Gentlemen. He's too soft-spoken.

--TP

that may have something to do with the fact that their job descriptions, in general, dont involve being willing to die.

If somebody's job doesn't put them at risk of death, it's inappropriate to thank them for their service?

Why are Chinese restaurants open on Christmas Day?

In case Bumpus's dogs get the turkey.

sonsabitchesBumpusses

russell, it's amazing to have this discussion. Every one of those other people gets paid a living wage to do a job, get up every morning, go to work, come home in the evening, with twenty years they have a retirement plan.

Trying to compare working a union job at the EPA and serving in the military is insulting and typical.

Yes, every job in the military is not in harm's way, but every person in the military could be assigned to a job that is.

Law enforcement, of course, also deserves our thanks and respect.

I went to a university in the deep South and a lot of people I went to school with went into the military, but I was too left wing for that. Which was totally my loss as a lot of them retired with full pensions at the age of 50, often picked up at least one and in some cases up to 4 graduate degrees and are now taking a second job and getting their pension. Of course, that was during Pax Americana, and there weren't a lot of stations where you were at the point of the spear (I graduated in 84). So when Marty seems to suggest that military people don't get a living wage, wake up every morning, come back home in the evening and have a retirement plan, I'm wondering what military he has in mind, cause the US military gets all those things. You do realize, Marty, that 'volunteer' doesn't meant that they don't paid, do you?

No one was ever forced to participate, what happened was Christians were forced to stop, a little at a time.

BS.

When I attended public school in the South the day started with a Bible reading and prayer, usually the Lord's Prayer. At one of the schools this was broadcast over the PA system.

Yeah. They were ultimately "forced to stop," as you put it, and a good thing it was, too, because what they were forced to stop doing was making everyone participate in a religious activity, whether they wanted to or not.

I often wondered why those who argued for school prayer on the grounds that it is a good way to start the day didn't just get their lazy asses out of bed a minute or two earlier and pray at home.

get up every morning, go to work, come home in the evening, with twenty years they have a retirement plan

that's what countless stateside military people do, even in times of war.

someone has to be on the sending side of the supply chain, after all.

I guess we just need to poll each member of the military as to where they served before we thank them.

might not be a bad idea.

i'd rather not thank people who worked in Abu Ghraib without getting some details first.

Trying to compare working a union job at the EPA and serving in the military is insulting and typical.

What you appear to be saying is that it's valid to thank people in the military, but not valid to thank people who work a "union job in the EPA".

I disagree with that.

You've never said "thanks" to your mailman, or a building inspector, or a school teacher?

It's not legitimate to say "thanks" to those people? Because they get paid?

And yeah, it is freaking amazing to have this discussion. And yes, it is both insulting and typical.

I thank people all the time, food servers, mail persons, etc.

Let's just pretend it's the same thing.

"If somebody's job doesn't put them at risk of death, it's inappropriate to thank them for their service?"

The federal building my now ex-wife was working in, and that I worked in years earlier, was cased by Timothy McVeigh. It didn't have a preschool-nursery on the first floor, so he and his crew were off to Oklahoma City to say thank you.

Gingrich, who will be thanked for his public service in spades in due time, came by a few days later and could hardly contain his admiration at the extent of the carnage.

The ratfucker and his minion ratfuckers have had truckloads of fertilizer on back order ever since.

"Trying to compare working a union job at the EPA and serving in the military is insulting and typical."

30.9%, as of 2015, of civilian federal employees are military veterans.

Some percentage of the dead in Oklahoma City were military veterans.

Six active military recruiters in the Murrah Building were slaughtered.

That didn't stop conservative fuckers from denying the act as domestic terrorism:

https://www.newsweek.com/do-military-members-killed-oklahoma-city-bombing-deserve-purple-hearts-328636

True, none of them EXPECTED to be killed in American flyover country.

I expect to be killed in American flyover country.

Shove your fucking medals up your ass.

Last time I checked, military personnel have a generous retirement plan and health insurance.

On any normal day, 95% of them get up in the morning and come home to their families in the evening.

I drove past Fort Carson, Colorado not too long ago and observed many doing just that.

More on who worked at the Murrah Building:

"By the 1990s, the building contained regional offices for the Social Security Administration, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the United States Secret Service, the Department of Veterans Affairs vocational rehabilitation counseling center, the Drug Enforcement Administration (D.E.A.), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). It also contained recruiting offices for the US Military. It housed approximately 550 employees.[4] It also housed America's Kids, a children's day care center."

The husband of a great friend perished in the bombing.

"mail persons"??

The horrors of alien political correctness have wedged themselves deeply into the compromised American consciousness. ;)

You got yer male persons, ya got yer female persons.

Ya got yer innies and yer outties.

Let's stick to originalist conceptions, alrighty?

18% of U.S. Postal Service employees are veterans.

American dogs gagging at the end of their chains bark only at the other 82%.

It's an olfactory thing.

I thank people all the time, food servers, mail persons, etc.

Good for you.

Let's just pretend it's the same thing.

Who's making the equation?

I'm saying that people who work in public service deserve our thanks. Regardless of whether they are at risk of death or not.

You appear to object to that. Those folks are getting paid, so that somehow means they don't deserve to be thanked for their work. Not only do you object, you find it "insulting and typical" that I consider their work worthy of thanks.

Which seems, to me, both insulting and typical.

Among the things that people who work in public service - armed or not - have to put up with on a daily basis is people denigrating them for doing so.

People like you, apparently.

The American military has a militant union whose every demand is met.

It's called the Republican Party and it's sister union is called the Democratic Party.

Count, those are unions for the military, not the military personnel (below a certain level). Increasing the pay of the actual soldiers is regularly met with resistance. The money is for the expensive equipment, not the lowly scum zeroes..eh lovely common heroes still necessary to handle it.

I have no problem with people thanking military service people. I have worked with people in the armed services for probably a third of my career, and, not just in general but basically to a person, they are hard-working, mission-focused, dedicated individuals. I'm sure there are exceptions, those are the ones I've known and/or worked with.

My impression is that military people have mixed feelings about the whole "thank you for your service" thing, so in general I don't walk up to military people I don't know and out of the blue lay my unsolicited thanks on them. Everybody can make their own decisions about that.

It is completely common among conservatives to denigrate, often in the most insulting ways, the work that public servants who don't happen to carry a firearm do. Which is despicable.

People who work in public service could, quite often, make more money doing something else. And, put up with a lot less bullshit in doing so. Some of them are attracted to the stability that public service offers, some of them just like the idea of doing something constructive for the public good. Some folks are attracted to both. There is nothing wrong with either motivation.

People who work in public service quite often do have the advantage of a defined term before retirement, and sometimes a pension. Once upon a time, there was nothing remarkable about that, it was a completely normal part of professional employment, whether in the public or private sector. That has, unfortunately, disappeared as a norm, and so now has become something to hold against people who work in the very few sectors where it still exists. Most notably, public employees.

Somehow, the fact that they are able to retire before they are fucking dead, and perhaps receive a pension for their service, is evidence that they are exploiting everybody else.

What is evidence of, to me, is the way in which people who work for a living have come to be viewed as a fungible commodity, whose contribution to the world is a regrettable expense of doing business.

And, of course, if it's Our Tax Dollars that are footing the bill, all the worse.

I think that is fucked up. More than that, I think it is the number 1, stand-out, top of the list fucked up thing about the American political economy.

Pardon my language.

I do not respect people who do not respect others' work. Period.

I'd just like to point out that in this "thank you for your service" kerfuffle, Marty is squarely on the side of political correctness. As is his right, because IOKIYAR.

--TP

Good for you russell, there is nothing I said here that indicates I dont respect anyones work.

One of these things is not like the other though.

there is nothing I said here that indicates I dont respect anyones work.

So you say.

One of these things is not like the other though.

Nobody anywhere in this thread has claimed an equivalence between military service and non-military public service.

The statement that has been made is that conservatives consider public expressions of thanks to military service people and maybe cops and firemen to be Politically Correct.

And they consider expressions of thanks to non-military and otherwise non-armed public servants to be Politically Incorrect.

And you have demonstrated that point, vividly.

The relevance of all of this to the overall discussion is that it puts the lie to the claim that liberals are prone to "political correctness", while everybody else on the fucking planet are just regular folks who don't traffic in such nonsense.

To take it back to Nigel's comment that kicked all of this off, as someone who fits the stereotype of a "coastal upper middle class liberal" to a T, and with all respect to Nigel and all appreciation for his sharing the Atlantic piece, I DON'T NEED A FUCKING LECTURE ABOUT HOW I NEED TO TIPTOE AROUND THE TENDER FEELINGS OF TRUMP SUPPORTERS.

If you're confused because you don't know whether to call a black person "black" or "Afro-American", that's because either one is fine and most black people don't really give a crap. Just don't call them "nigger", or "boy", or "girl", and we'll all probably be fine.

If you claim that that confusion is causing you to support Trump, I say you are full of shit. You would support Trump no matter what the kids are calling black people these days.

If you support Trump, that's your choice. Fucking own it, and quit making it my job to talk you down off the ledge.

I hope that clarifies some things.

Political correctness on the ground:

https://www.balloon-juice.com/2018/10/21/stacey-abrams-vs-the-revanchist-racist/#more-247034

Steal the votes, Kemp. Please.

Hey, Kemp, eat an AR-15 from the bullets downwards.

Political correctness from subhuman all-american murderous vermin:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/despite-lies-trump-praises-very-good-control-of-saudi-crown-prince-mbs

Elections are an exercise in pussified republican political correctness

From Chapter 38, "Fear" Bob Woodward:

"Afghanistan continued to frustrate Trump. Months earlier, in late September, he
had hosted a reception at the United Nations annual meeting in New York.
Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev and his wife posed for a picture with the
Trumps. The Azerbaijan leader passed word that the Chinese were mining
substantial amounts of copper from Afghanistan.
Trump was furious. Here was the United States paying billions for the war,
and China was stealing copper!
Afghan president Ghani had dangled the possibility that the United States
would have exclusive access to vast mineral wealth, untouched in the Afghanistan
mountain ranges. His argument: There’s so much money to be made. Don’t walk
away. Rare earth minerals, including lithium, a main ingredient in the latest
batteries. Some exaggerated estimates held that all minerals in Afghanistan might
be worth as much as several trillion dollars.
Trump wanted the minerals. “They have offered us their minerals!” he said at one meeting. “Offered us everything. Why aren’t we there taking them? You guys
are sitting on your ass. The Chinese are raiding the place.”
“Sir,” said Gary Cohn, “it’s not like we just walk in there and take the minerals.
They have no legal system, no land rights.” It would cost billions of dollars to
build the mining infrastructure, he added.
“We need to get a company in there,” Trump said. “Put it out for bid.” This
was a giant opportunity, capitalism, building and development at its best. “Why
aren’t we in there taking it?
“Who’s we?” Cohn asked.
“We should just be in there taking it,” Trump said, as if there were a national
mining company to move into Afghanistan.
At a subsequent meeting in the Oval Office, Trump asked, “Why hasn’t this
been done?”
“We’re running it through the NSC process,” McMaster said.
“I don’t need it done through a fucking process!” Trump yelled. “I need you
guys to go in there and get this stuff. It’s free! Who wants to do this?” It was afreefor-all.
Who wanted this bonanza?
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross volunteered. “I’ll take care of it, sir. I’ll do
it,” he said as if it were a Commerce Department issue.
Trump approved.
Kelly didn’t say much but took McMaster, Ross and Cohn to his office.
McMaster was ripshit at Kelly for not intervening. “You just chopped my legs
out from me. You knew I was running a process.” He was going by the textbook
as usual, was working with the State and Defense Departments and any other
departments or agencies with an interest. “You hung me out to dry in front of the
president!”

There was little that appealed to Trump more than the idea of getting money
from others to pay for national security commitments made by previous U.S.
administrations—NATO, Afghanistan, Iraq. The only other appealing prospect
was making a good deal, and he thought this was one.
The State Department assessed the mineral rights. Analysts concluded this
would be a great propaganda boon to worldwide extremists: The United States is
coming to rape your land and steal your wealth from the ground. They sought
legal opinions in hopes of slowing it down.
On February 7, 2018, McMaster convened a small group of principals in the
Situation Room to hear Commerce Secretary Ross’s report. He had talked with
the acting minister of mining in Afghanistan that morning. “The Chinese are not
getting anything out. They have these big concessions, as they do worldwide, and
they sit on them. They’re in it for the long term. They don’t need to make
immediate money off it.
So there was nothing to worry about. Afghanistan did not have the
infrastructure or transportation, the regulatory or environmental controls, he said.
No private company would make an investment.
“It’s fake news,” Ross said, to mild laughter.
McMaster added that most of these minerals would be impossible to reach
because a lot of them were in Taliban-controlled areas. It was a war zone, and a
military perimeter defense would have to be established before mining. At best, he
said, it would take 10 years if everything went right.
Ross said he would follow up to explain this to the president.

Utterly unconscionable:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/transgender-rights-trump-administration-is-considering-new-rules-to-flat-out-deny-trans-identity.html

McMaster added that most of these minerals would be impossible to reach because a lot of them were in Taliban-controlled areas. It was a war zone, and a
military perimeter defense would have to be established before mining. At best, he said, it would take 10 years if everything went right.

What I seem to recall reading is that China is hiring the Taliban to provide security and paying for a lot of things that would have ancillary benefits for the locals. Eg, a dam generating hydro power for copper and aluminum smelting would be sized to also provide electricity for civilians in the area. The rail spur would be aligned to provide improved transportation to and from the tribal areas of Pakistan.

McMaster added that most of these minerals would be impossible to reach because a lot of them were in Taliban-controlled areas. It was a war zone, and a military perimeter defense would have to be established before mining. At best, he said, it would take 10 years if everything went right.

What I seem to recall reading is that China is hiring the Taliban to provide security and paying for a lot of things that would have ancillary benefits for the locals. Eg, a dam generating hydro power for copper and aluminum smelting would be sized to also provide electricity for civilians in the area. The rail spur would be aligned to provide improved transportation to and from the tribal areas of Pakistan.

China's got us all figured out.

Naturally, Dreher, whose entire life and bogus religion is devoted to denying rights to the LGBT, is all over the transgender rights rape by intrusive, regulatory government:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/transgenderism-trump-common-sense/

The Benedict Option apparently will include cup checks, blood tests, and crotch palpating at designated checkpoints.

Which is why all closeted Christian LGBTs who join the Benedictine faithful should carry military grade weaponry at all times and fucking use it when fucked with.

Philosophically, I haven't parsed out my position on men who go transgender and compete in female athletic events. Being biological male in the first place, I expect, would predispose them to cheating, via hormone replacement, in order to gain any advantage in competition, because, as with mp, winning is everything.

I WOULD like to see a fully trans man, born with female genitalia, beat the shit out of Ann Coulter in a cage match.

As I would be entertained by a fully trans woman, born with male genitalia, beat the crap out of, say Steve King (what the heck, let's make it a fair fight, let Limbaugh be his tag partner).

No referees.

https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2018/10/national-security-magical-thinking

mp learned all there is to know about nuclear weapons in 90 minutes, beating trained nuclear physicists by years, he's such a prodigy.

He is on record as asking why we can't use them. What's the point of having them if we can't use them, he pushed. Hanh?

I'm pretty sure he and Putin have an agreement, signed in urine and real estate babble, that Putin will hit only blue regions of the country after mp launches our arsenal.

Why be politically correct about it?

In the meantime, I hope China is negotiating with Mexico to position strategic nuclear weapons along the length of our southern Wall.

Ted Nugent has a sad.

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/ted-nugent-hall-of-fame/?fbclid=IwAR0Hrig3188xTLNTIl44qiAnPJBWfx_P0A6X2XpdX6QWsgglw7TJnaTMz-M

I like Trent Reznor's attitude better:

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/trent-reznor-rock-roll-hall-of-fame/

I think Nugent should be in the Hall of Fame, but instead of his pants and guitars displayed for all to see, I want him to donate his most deadly weaponry to the Hall for Fame-goers to use with live ammo in a de(a)dicated Ted Nugent shooting rage on the premises with likenesses of him as targets.

Obama and Clinton can kick off the dedication ceremony with 1000 rounds each.

Maybe Nugent could stop by annually for some live action.

From that article the Count links to:

I would not be surprised if the Trump administration, especially if it lasts two terms, resumes nuclear testing.
Which, if you think about it, makes a kind of sense. After all, pretty much all the places that we do nuclear weapons tests are in red states. And one of the constants of this administration is screwing over his base. Giving then renewed radiation hazards would be right in pattern.

Many people have been saying we need to test our nucular weapons in cities. Why would we bomb the desert? Nobody cares about the desert. So I have decided to bomb Oakland. Sad.

Utterly unconscionable

and utterly unsurprising.

our thoroughly bullshit electoral system installed the Genital Obsessed Party, after all.

i'm sure it was Obama's fault, somehow.

Plumbing is their middle name.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/gorbachev-trumps-nuke-treaty-withdrawal-not-the-work-of-a-great-mind

I'm not up on the time it takes these days for nuclear tipped missiles to travel to their targets.

I'm assuming the technology has progressed to the point that an assist from Slim Pickens won't be required.

All I'm thinking is that whether it's 20 minutes or 40 minutes, what is the most efficient way to fucking kill every conservative/republican I can get my hands in that amount of time as gravity's rainbow completes its arc for the crime of installing an animal who has incinerated my son.

If I come across some republican investment banker rube in that window of time who sez to me "Gersh, does this mean I don't have time to spend my tax cut?" ..

... Ill spare him, because the misery he has visited upon himself is more justice than I can provide.

Naturally, Dreher...

The Drehers of the world tell us that everyone should fall neatly into the binary, hetero-and-looks-and-acts-hetero categories they champion, because that's the natural order of things.

In Dreher's case, and in the case of his theistic companions, because god made people that way.

The question I have is:

Where did all of the other people - the people who don't fit in those boxes - come from?

Did nature somehow not produce the folks who aren't hetero cisgender exemplars?

If god is responsible, did some other deity sneak in the back door and crank out the less-typical types?

These guys seem to think they know more, and better, than the actors - natural or supernatural - that they claim to speak for.

People are just trying to be themselves. How about we leave them the hell alone.

I only wish that the biggest issue facing trans people was who won a bicycle race.

And here we have Moody's, renowned voice of the far left (/sarcasm), talking about how income/wealth inequality is bad for capitalism.
https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-Widening-income-inequality-will-weigh-on-US-credit-profile--PR_389062

Nugent:

is it or is it not vulgar, dishonest, and obscene that Grandmaster Flash, Patti Smith and ABBA are in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, but Ted fucking Nugent isn't?

If there is anyone on the planet who knows from vulgar, dishonest, and obscene, it is Ted Nugent.

Nugent was in the Amboy Dukes. They had a hit. One. It was "Journey To The Center Of The Mind". Nugent didn't write it.

Nugent subsequently had a solo career. He had a hit. One. It was "Cat Scratch Fever". He probably wrote it, although some of his band members disagree.

That's his fabulous rock career.

I can introduce you to about fifty guys who are better musicians, guitar players, song writers, and overall human beings, than Ted Nugent on his best day.

And his best day is long in the past.

Were it not for his assholish behavior on behalf of the NRA and related conservative insanities, he would be a footnote to a footnote.

Dear Ted: how can we miss you if you don't go away?

I didn't know that Nugent was actually somebody who we needed to know about. I thought Nugent was an ignorable.

Grounds for cautious optimism:
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/22/anti-muslim-campaigns-midterms-921475
According to the poll in the report, a survey of 1,000 voters, 18 percent of respondents said Muslims are good people. But 7 percent have a negative view of Muslims in general, while 5 percent believe they are good as long as they aren’t extremists. Two percent said their religion is false, 1 percent said Muslims are different, 1 percent said they are terrorists, and fewer than 0.5 percent said they should leave the country.

Seventy-one percent said it is inappropriate for candidates to speak negatively about Muslims during their campaigns. Fourteen percent said it is appropriate, and 14 percent were unsure or refused to say.

Only 8 percent, however, said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who speaks negatively about Muslims. Fifty-eight percent said they would be more likely to vote against that candidate, though it made no difference to 17 percent.

But I don't really need suggestions to "think long and hard about this". If people are confused about whether to call someone Jewish, or a Jew, or whether to call someone black, or Afro-American, to the point where they are going to *change who they vote for* because the confusion is just too much for them, I am really and truly at a loss as to what I, personally, or anyone with my social values is going to do to change that.

I suspect that people's choices of who to vote for is not really going to turn on things like that. To the degree that folks say they are, I suspect they are being less than candid.

When I said 'Democrats', I was rather more narrowly talking about candidates for election.
I don't have a problem with most of what falls into the rather fuzzy category of 'PC' - for the most part it seems to me like simple civility.
I do think a political campaign which gives the impression of telling others how they ought to speak is something else, though.

I'm likely not expressing myself particularly well, but I was struck by David Simon talking about Twitter, where his core point is that what matters is the substance of what is being said, rather than how it is being expressed:
https://slate.com/technology/2018/10/david-simon-twitter-ban-mike-godwin-interview.html

If I had possession over Judgment Day and the resources of Twitter, here is what I would do:

I would not throw open my review process to fretting about name-calling or comic hyperbole or even exchanges of abject contempt and disgust because, as we all know, there is plenty on the platform that deserves a hailstorm of contempt and disgust. Instead, I would use my limited resources to open the gates to complaints about intellectual frauds, libels, and disinformation campaigns. And I would empower Twitter users to be, if not the ultimate arbiters of these issues, to be a force, in a fundamental way, that begins to self-police the site.

How? Same way as users now report what they perceive to be “offensive” content, I would demand that they raise their game and raise the stakes to reporting that which can be empirically demonstrated to be false. There’s your disintermediation. The users themselves deliver complaints that go to the heart of Twitter’s fundamental weakness: This is a libel. That is a lie. Let them call it out and deliver the empirical proof. Let them be the police and then have Twitter—in conjunction with some in-house research equivalent of Snopes or some other fact-checking forum—be the court of jurisdiction for claims that originate with Twitter users themselves. That limits Twitter’s responsibility to only the fact-checking that is requested organically by users, not extending its responsibility over the whole of the content. It also makes it imperative for objecting users to bring intellectual and journalistic rigor to their complaints, further girding the process. And it creates a standard that makes it possible for Twitter to remove those who can be evidenced to be not merely in error about facts, but purposefully and repeatedly employing libel and disinformation....

Only 8 percent [of voters], however, said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who speaks negatively about Muslims. Fifty-eight percent said they would be more likely to vote against that candidate

Thanks, Nigel. Definitely grounds for optimism.

yeah, no. these are terrible people.

Nearly half of Republicans surveyed — 44 percent — believe the president should be able to shutter news outlets for "bad behavior," according to a new poll released Tuesday. [August, 7]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/08/07/trump-should-able-close-news-outlets-republicans-say-poll/925536002/?fbclid=IwAR35o9fA4HDWqpEFp5EYAW2A_V64lbw5Zs7BzinkLeFHaW8y245rhMpQcBM

Cautious optimism.

... unbolded, I hope.

Nearly half of Republicans surveyed — 44 percent — believe the president should be able to shutter news outlets for "bad behavior," according to a new poll released Tuesday.

Wonder if they would be so enthused if the question was phrased to make it clear that this could extend to a future President shuttering, say, Fox "News"? Or is that looking further into the future than they can manage?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad