New Forbes post – our last Jim Crow generation

It can be tough to make sense of calls to “Make America Great Again” unless you remember a time when all of the best that America had to offer was set aside just for you. For a new Forbes post I looked at some of Trump’s most committed supporters by age range, voters at age 70, and examined the world in which they were raised.

White voters born in the same year as Donald Trump would spend much of their lives in a world crafted to reinforce their sense of racial superiority. They came of age protected like a Soviet state-owned factory. Exposed suddenly to competition, some are not thriving. They are experiencing very real trauma as the world they once knew, a world dedicated to their protection, erodes away.

Explanations are not excuses, but history can at least shed light on their otherwise baffling behavior. For the last Jim Crow generation, making America great again has a special meaning. What was great for them was not quite so great for everyone else.

No offense to the many septuagenarians who light up our comments feed. Interested in your thoughts on it.

In other news, we are about two weeks from having a new blog/forum site ready. The GOPLifer is closing in on parole. Let’s hope I don’t get shivved before the release date rolls around. Almost there.

Chris Ladd is a Texan living in the Chicago area. He has been involved in grassroots Republican politics for most of his life. He was a Republican precinct committeeman in suburban Chicago until he resigned from the party and his position after the 2016 Republican Convention. He can be reached at gopliferchicago at gmail dot com.

Posted in Uncategorized
460 comments on “New Forbes post – our last Jim Crow generation
    • 1mime says:

      Those Clinton skills may be tested again as the India/Pakistani attacks intensify….They both have nuclear weapons.

    • Kenneth Devaney says:

      Wow, that is a bombshell. Here is another story of a personal hero of mine during the Cuban missile crisis

      Makes you wonder how many more close calls we had that we don’t know about.

      his name is Василий Александрович Архипов. He died in 1998 in the Russian Federation.

    • tuttabellamia says:

      Pseudo, welcome back to the internet. I presume you’re posting from your new, top secret location?

    • 1mime says:

      Netanyahu is an intelligent, diabolical version of Donald Trump. You and your family have my sympathy about Nets push to consolidate power. There can never be peace between Palestine and Israel as long as he is in power. I hope there are enough rational leaders left in Israel to block Netanyahu. Like the ascent of Trump, for people like themselves, there is never “enough” power.

      I will never forget the public snub by Netanyahu of President Obama, and I will never forgive him or the Republicans for this travesty.

  1. RobA says:

    Remember that time Trump was attracted to his friends 12 y/o daughter? But he deserves credit for not pursuing her, of course. He did watch her sex tape though.

    Good, moral, family values guy. And anyways, Hillary’s just as bad. He sexualization of a 12 y/o is just boys being boys. Nothing as disqualifying as using a private email server.

    • 1mime says:

      What kind of father says those things about his daughter? Even thinks those things? Sick.

      • Not to defend Trump, but we all think things from time to time that, through the proverbial lens of modern society, are absolutely abhorrent. What’s important, as I believe we can and should all agree, are our actions. In that respect, as with virtually everything else in his life, Trump craters like a screaming meteor to the bottom of the Marianas Trench.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Impure thoughts may occasionally cross our minds but they should be kept private and stay in our brains and not be put into actions OR words, especially not in public.

        Tell it like it is, indeed.

      • 1mime says:

        Sorry, Tutta, but the guys here who are fathers of daughters is going to have to convince me that commenting on your daugher’s body is appropriate and natural. I am more inclined to think that a father with a beautiful daughter would be thinking he’d knock the &H*% out of any young man who was disrespectful of her than he would make remarks like Trump did of Ivanka.

      • RobA says:

        I don’t think anybody would ever crap on someone for their thoughts.

        But talking on the radio about how beautiful you thought your friends 12 y/o was, as well as talking about your daughter’s body and how great it is, suggests a certain ‘je ne sai quois’ of sleaze. It’s not flat out outrageous….but it makes one feel a little queasy in the stomach, and does say something about the speakers character. It at least , their judgement.

      • 1mime says:

        And, about what they think is most important, Rob. I would be far more proud of a daughter who did something kind or smart or generous than simply her beauty or body, which is largely genetic whereas the other traits are acquired and practiced.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Mime, did I say it was okay for fathers to talk about their daughters that way? No, ma’am.

        I was only agreeing with Ryan that thoughts are not the same as words and actions.

      • 1mime says:

        No, just my opinion of Trump’s comments……

  2. flypusher says:

    So The GOPers in Congress are willing to investigate HRC’s e-mail server again and again and again, but they don’t want to touch this:

    Party before country. This is disgusting.

  3. Bobo Amerigo says:

    Via a three August 31 three-sentence court decision, Linda Greenhouse discusses the Supremes in an excellent article that:

    – suggests the death of Scalia saved democracy in North Carolina

    – discusses the role of used tires in a Missouri freedom of religion case might deadlock the court

    Not OT, I feel, because restricting the voting rights of minorities would make ol’ Jim Crow roar with pleasure.

    • Creigh says:

      Now there’s a good case – used tires and reigious freedom! Just the thing for courts to sink their teeth into. The state started a program to reimburse nonprofits for shredded tire playground surfacing. A church was denied reimbursement because the state constitution prohibits state sponsorship of churches. Is this discrimination against religion, which would be covered by “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (First Amendment)?

      • Creigh says:

        Scalia argued in Smith vs Employment Division that religious freedom shouldn’t trump laws of general applicability. Shouldn’t that imply that laws of general applicability should somehow override the religious nature of the applicant?

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        Yes, it’s an odd combination. I guess that’s why it’s headed to the Supremes.

      • 1mime says:

        I am not an attorney but I am a strong proponent of separation of church and state. The private school in this case wants to have it both ways: (1) be separate with no requirement to follow state guidelines, and (2) participate in mechanisms that offer resources to public schools…vis a vis the recycled tire playgrounds, again, with no obligation to meet state requirements.

        You want state funding for your playground? Accept any child, meet state guidelines (all), and then you can have your recycled tire playground.

  4. RobA says:

    Wow, this is amazing. The man, literally, cannot help himself. And he’s unable to see how this is a no win situation for him. All he needed to do was JUST SHUT UP about Machado and her weight. We’re entering Khan/Curiel levels of tone deafness.

    As someone who hates Trump, I’m thrilled he fell so hard into Hillary’s trap and seems intent on relentlessly prosecuting this inevitably losing issue again and again and again. But man, the impulsiveness and inability to think big picture/strategically is truly frightening in a potential POTUS. He simply cannot stop himself, he needs to “win” against every perceived slight, no matter how tiny or unwinnable.

    • flypusher says:

      He keeps proving again and again that he is not qualified. Yet people like objv will rag on HRC because she wanted to turn a helicopter around to fetch forgotten sunglasses. We need new vocabulary here, because cognitive dissonance is becoming inadequate to describe the denial and rationalizing from the cohort who used to insist that “character matters”.

      • RobA says:

        Looks like he’s also going ahead with the Bills infidelity angle.

        Hopefully he does. Not too hard to see how she’d play it.

        “Well, first of all, those infidelities were my husband’s wrong doing, not mine. But more importantly, unlike my unfaithful thrice married opponent, I took my marriage vows seriously. When I said “through thick or thin” at the altar, I meant it. My husband has made mistakes, just like many men and women, and I made the decision that my family was worth fighting for, worth keeping together. When I see my grandchildren bouncing on their grandfather’s knee, with the joy on both their faces, I know I made the right choice.”

      • flypusher says:

        Please proceed Donny.

      • johngalt says:

        Rob, that is absolutely the right way for her to handle it. I’d guess the chances of her going that route are about the same is her being struck by a meteor.

      • objv says:

        Rob that is a lovely sentiment. It’s too bad that by enabling Bill’s foibles other women had their lives ruined. Gennifer, Katherine, Juanita and Monica may have a different take on the matter.

      • RobA says:

        Perhaps they shouldn’t have had an affair with a married man then?

        I’ve been cheated on. I give ppl a lot of leeway in how they treat the person who potentially destroyed their family.

        When someone’s family is in danger of being destroyed by an outsider, there are very, very, very, very few ppl in this world who would treat the other woman/man with anything but hatred and contempt. That is an almost universal fact, and to think that makes her worse then all of Trumps issues is, frankly, laughable.

      • objv says:

        Rob, only Monica Lewinsky had an affair with Bill Clinton. Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey claimed assault and Juanita Broaddrick said she had been raped. There was also another charge of rape by a young English woman who said that Clinton raped her after they met at a pub while Clinton was a student at Oxford.

    • flypusher says:

      I wonder who is that unlucky staffer with the task of taking away Donny dimwit’s phone? He’s so eager to be petty and vindictive that he’s up at 3am tweeting this. But Hillary is worse.

      /major eye roll

    • 1mime says:

      This ABC poll underscores the problem. Trump knows his base well. Study the contrast between Clinton and Trump supporters.

      ” 50 percent of Clinton’s backers say men have too much influence, and 53 percent say
      the same about whites. That view plummets to 20 and 8 percent, respectively, among Trump
      voters. ”

      Click to access 1182a2Groupinfluence.pdf

    • vikinghou says:

      While the media obsesses about Trump’s tweets, tens of millions have no health insurance, student debt is exploding, we are in never-ending war (adding troops in Iraq) and have crumbling infrastructure.

      But why talk about real issues when you can divert everyone’s attention from what really matters? I find this terribly demoralizing.

      • 1mime says:

        Not to mention, playing politics with funding for Flint, MI….a poisonous situation that has persisted for over two years, and Republicans with hold funding in the budget to force Democrats to negotiate? That is depraved.

    • tuttabellamia says:

      I hope Mrs. Clinton received Ms. Machado’s permission to mention her in the debate. I hope Ms. Machado is not just a pawn.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        I know Mr. Trump is to blame for having created this situation 20 years ago, and for continuing to drag Ms. Machado’s name through the mud today, but as a result of her story being mentioned in the debate, she is being victimized again.

        Her story reminds me of Monica Lewinsky, who was also used as a political pawn.

      • 1mime says:

        Monica Lewinsky was a willing participant, which she herself admits. Others used her as a political pawn, which is unfortunate, but she and Bill Clinton, both were guilty of improper decisions….he more than she as he was not only an adult, he was POTUS.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Alicia Machado is actively campaigning for Hillary Clinton and supports her. As Hillary noted in the debate, Alicia was in the audience for the debate and apparently invited by Clinton. She is definitely “not just a pawn”.

      • 1mime says:

        She has a great deal of incentive to hit back at Trump, for wrongful treatment and future personal gain. I don’t know who approached whom in terms of her participation in the campaign, but I’d hardly say she had to be convinced.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        It seems a lot of things from 20 years ago are being resurrected for political gain — Mr. Trump brining up the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and Mrs. Clinton bringing up Alicia Machado.

        Both leave me with an uneasy feeling.

      • 1mime says:

        There’s a big difference between the two events, Tutta. In the Lewinsky matter, Hillary was the victim, Bill and Monica the participants. In the Machado matter, Trump was the direct perpetrator. Sort the villains out in your mind because that’s important.

        Just as I have always felt that “zero tolerance” policies in schools were terribly unfair (both the initiator and the victim were simultaneously suspended), so do I believe there is a difference in the two situations you mentioned.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        What is “uneasy” is the differing responses to the unearthing of the past “for political gain”.
        Clinton ignores the attacks and Trumps refights the battle with lies (claiming Miss Universe officials were going to fire her, which they denied to somehow ridiculously present himself as some kind of “white knight” and that his insults were preserving her title somehow) and nasty middle of the night character attack tweets.

      • 1mime says:

        Classic Trump. Weasel out of a situation he created by spinning it. He’s such a piece of crap.

      • RobA says:

        I think it’s almost unthinkable that she wouldn’t.

        Aside from the ethics of bringing someone into the nat’l spotlight, Clintons a lawyer. As such, she’d know that one thing you never, ever, ever do is ask a witness on the stand a question that you yourself don’t know the answer to.

        Similarly, I don’t think shed bring up Machado unless she knew where it would lead. For all she would’ve known, Machado might have great things to say about Trump. “Yeah, he was hard on me, but honestly, I needed the extra push. His tough love policies were what I needed at the time, and he was otherwise great with me”.

        Not likely maybe, but certainly not crazy, and certainly not a risk Clinton would take. Also, they had a video out before morning and she was a surrogate on all the shows the next day. Frankly, I’m impressed by her strategic play. It’s not dumb luck that Trump is killing himself with this. It looks like masterful trap set by Clinton, knowing her opponents flaws and exploiting them very well. And Trump took the bait probably better then they could’ve hoped.

      • RobA says:

        “and for continuing to drag Ms. Machado’s name through the mud today, but as a result of her story being mentioned in the debate, she is being victimized again.”

        Tutta, Ms Machado is the one who approached Clinton. She herself says she got her citizenship SPECIFICALLY to vote against Trump. And she’s been campaigning for her like crazy the past few days.

        Ms Machado doesn’t need anyone’s protection. She is actively seeking this out. In many ways, I’m sure it’s cathartic for her.

      • flypusher says:

        “I know Mr. Trump is to blame for having created this situation 20 years ago, and for continuing to drag Ms. Machado’s name through the mud today, but as a result of her story being mentioned in the debate, she is being victimized again.”

        No, Tutta, I think that assessment is wrong. Everything posted in this sub-thread points to Ms. Machado wanting to do this. Hell, I would volunteer to do the exact same thing if I had such dirt on that sexist pig (sorry pigs). She’s tough enough to stand up to him now, and good for her!

      • 1mime says:

        I agree completely. Payback time

      • RobA says:

        Also Tutta, I think Clintons main reason in bringing this up (or even if it’s just serendipity) is not so much as litigating comments he made 20 years ago (even though that fits nicely into the narrative of Trump as sexist pig). I think it’s mostly to highlight the impulsiveness and poor temperament of Trump.

        Far more damaging then Clinton bringing up Machado in the debate is Trumps response to it. If he had just ignored it, it would t be nearly so bad for him. But Clinton knew he can’t let a perceived insult slide, no matter how small, and she knew he’d beat it to death, hurting himself more and more in the process, and that these bizarre attacks would bolster her argument that “a man that can be baited with a tweet isn’t fit to have the nuclear codes”

      • 1mime says:

        Don’t forget the very real benefit of appealing to women for their votes, Rob.

      • flypusher says:

        “….these bizarre attacks would bolster her argument that “a man that can be baited with a tweet isn’t fit to have the nuclear codes”.’

        Does anyone doubt that all the scumbags leading ISIS are praying everyday for this immature fool to have that power? They’re probably doing planning sessions in how can we goad this idiot into ordering a knee-jerk military response in the ME or get him to violate the Constitutional rights of American Muslims? They WANT a clash of the West vs Islam, and Donnie dimwit would play right into their hands.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Thanks to all for clarifying.

        Rob, I was thinking of Colin Powell’s hacked emails in which he complains that Mrs. Clinton’s people cited his words about the use of personal emails without his permission, that they continued to do so after he asked them not to, and that he had to throw a “mini-tantrum” before they would take him seriously.

        Bubba, welcome back.

      • Turtles Run says:


        Ms. Machado had cut pre-recorded promos prior to the debate. It is pretty clear she knew about Clinton’s use of her name.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Thanks, Turtles.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        Thank you Tutt. I took a self imposed break for my sanity and the decorum of the blog. Woke out of the hibernation when Chris made his momentous decision/announcement and slowly dipping the toes in the shallow end of the pool.

    • 1mime says:

      I found these tweets from Pocahontas (-; in response to Trump’s 4:30 tirade…..

      Elizabeth Warren ✔ @elizabethforma:

      “You never tweet at 3am with ways to help students getting crushed by debt or seniors struggling on Social Security, @realDonaldTrump.”

      “You never tweet at 3am with ways to create new jobs for workers or hold Wall Street accountable, @realDonaldTrump.”

      “Nope, @realDonaldTrump: the only things that keep your mind racing at night are your next racist, sexist tweets & disgusting lies.”

      “A thin-skinned bully who thinks humiliating women at 3am qualifies him to be President does not understand America & is not fit to lead.”

      Damn, little Lizzie knows how to throw a punch! (-; You go girl!

  5. Sir Magpie de Crow says:

    Privilege (or the benefit of the doubt):

    Many people don’t have it. Other people (for no good rational reason) have it in spades…


    Found an article on the Bundy Family/allies legal case.
    Here are some excerpts:

    “Ammon Bundy’s federal conspiracy trial resumed Thursday despite a motion from his lawyers seeking a postponement until a court rules on their appeals.”

    “Among other things, attorneys Marcus Mumford and J. Morgan Philpot have taken issue with U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown’s order that the ownership of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge is not on trial, and her notice to jurors that the federal government owns the refuge that Bundy and his followers occupied for 41 days last winter.”

    “Philpot, in a separate court document, reiterated a longstanding argument that Bundy’s pretrial detention has hindered his defense.”

    “He also lodged complaints about the government’s treatment of his client during the trial, saying U.S. marshals have not allowed Bundy to confer with attorneys during breaks and that Bundy has been denied the use of “normal” pens, paper and amounts of paper.”

    “Philpot said his client is also not getting enough food.”

    “Since the beginning of trial Mr. Bundy has regularly been deprived of meals and adequate sustenance, resulting in physical and mental fatigue beyond what is normal or allowable under basic principles of fairness and decency,” he wrote.


    Not enough food? Denial of “normal” pens and amounts of paper?
    Cry me a f**king river.

    There are about a dozen black families right now who have their loved ones taken away from them, they reside now in deep cold ground and many of them were not hardened criminals, didn’t have weapons and a number of them even tried to comply with law enforcement and still…
    They got blown away for their troubles.

    Not one of those poor bastards ever tried to take over federal land by force while armed with high powered rifles. The Bundy tribe and their followers (despite being armed and committing a number of egregiousness crimes) seem to have fared well.

    Most of them are still sucking air, save Lavoy Finicum who died as a result of his remarkable idiocy.

    So in closing, I propose that the Bundy Klan, co-defendents, their allies in the alt-right scrum and in the Sovereign Citizen movement can all eat sh*t.

    • flypusher says:

      I’ll second your motion. These people have been paying around with treason. Obama made a big mistake in not arresting Bundy much earlier.

      And Finicum, ye gods what a fool! Natural selection in action.

  6. tuttabellamia says:

    I mean no disrespect, but it’s easy for White people to decry White SUPREMACISM when White SUPREMACY is still the norm.

    Are the White people on this blog who call for the end of White SUPREMACISM truly ready to give up their White SUPREMACY and all the advantages that come with it?

    My question is sincere.

    • tuttabellamia says:

      SUPREMACISM and SUPREMACY are two different things.

      Supremacism is the oppression of certain groups deemed to be inferior. Supremacy is the state of affairs which results from that oppression and which benefits one group over others.

      If you benefit from being White, then you are benefitting from that oppression, even if you were never an oppressor yourself and decry that oppression.

    • tuttabellamia says:

      Can you criticize angry White men for clinging to their White supremacy when you also benefit from that supremacy?

      • flypusher says:

        So what does a White person do, other than voting for people who oppose the sumpremacy system?

      • 1mime says:

        Yes, definitely. White men or women who abuse other people in their pursuit of their own personal goals, are wrong. I understand anger, but anger that is misdirected is inappropriate and it should never be focused at other people.

      • “Can you criticise white men for clinging to their white supremacy when you also benefit from that supremacy?”

        Yes, in a heartbeat. I’m white and a man, and I would gladly tear down white supremacy. I work at it every chance that I get.

        White people like me are playing life on easy mode. If you’re also straight and male and university-educated, you’re playing on ultra-easy mode. We have infinite coins at the arcade and all the monsters move in straight lines. That means that when we get a high score, it doesn’t count, because we didn’t earn it.

        An educated cisgender straight white man (like me) who achieves something is like that kid who slapped Muhammed Ali and watched as Ali intentionally mimed falling over. If that kid goes around actually believing that he’s a great boxer, that’s just sad.

        This is a bad state of affairs and I want it to stop.

    • Stephen says:

      I am OK with it. My field was more based on talent not skin colour. Worked with many bright people of all ethnic back grounds. But I had the mental equipment to compete. But many other white dudes do not and in the past got the gravy jobs due to bigotry. That is why they are angry. They want to make America Great Again, which means bringing back the golden fifties and sixties . Of course that world has long since vanish. But they are sure a strongman can bust heads and bring it back. They are being hustled by a demagogue and too ignorant and desperate to realize it.

      • RobA says:

        Agreed. For those that are confident in their ability to compete, competition doesn’t scare them. For those used to being spoon fed everything and with a lack of confidence in their own abilities, it can be terrifying. But as a society, we need not cater to the unreasonable demands of an untalented mediocrity.

        To someone with no skills and used to getting every advance, equality can seem an awful lot like oppression.

    • RobA says:

      I’m more then ok with a level playing field, where blacks and minorities have the same opportunities as everyone else. Competition and equality don’t scare me. Most whites I know feel the same, although of course there are always notable exceptions

      • 1mime says:

        I agree, and most people who think like you and I on this point, associate with “like” people. Why waste precious time and energy on those who hold different views on something so fundamental?

    • johngalt says:

      It’s a fair question, Tutt. Am I going to try to treat people fairly and equitably? Yes. Am I going to spend extra time to help students from less advantaged backgrounds achieve their full potential? Yes. Do I mind affirmative opportunities to help level the playing field? No. Am I teaching my kids the benefits of diversity? Of course. Am I going to move my family to the Third Ward and put my kids in a substandard school so we can practice that diversity? Hell no.

      • tuttabellamia says:


      • 1mime says:

        “Exactly”. I assume you see that last statement as “white privilege”? I don’t. I see it as responsible – no matter what race or ethnicity one is, they do the best they can for their children. Having the money to live in a quality school district is not race-specific, and shouldn’t be. It should be based on one’s personal achievement. There should be no bad schools for any child, in any neighborhood, but socio-economics is a hard nut to crack.

      • RobA says:

        Tutta it seems you’re suggesting there are only two acceptable options: you can either give up all your property, and move to a third world country and volunteer the rest of your life, or you’re a hypocrite who perpetuated white supremacy.

        There is a grand canyons worth if middle ground there. I also don’t think it’s hypocritical for someone opposed to climate change to drive or take a plane. It’s not reasonable to expect somebody who voices concerns about something to expect them to basically give up their entire lives in pursuit of some phony ideologically pure notion of said thing.

        With regards to the white privilege thing, one doesn’t need to sell their belongings and move to a 3rd world country to avoid charges of “being part of the problem”. I think acknowledging that white privilege is a thing, systenic racism is a thing, and being open to legislative changes to address them is perfectly fine.

        If everybody took that route, real and permanent solutions would start to happen pretty quickly. At the very least, NOT actively fighting efforts to address systemic racism would even be acceptable.

        Not everybody has to be mother Theresa to not be a hypocrite.

    • 1mime says:

      Fair question, Tutta, to which I state that one cannot give up one’s race or birth circumstances that privileged them through nothing more than “luck” of parents. I think that in life, one has to make conscious choices about how they will live. Since the question asks each of us what we would give up – I can honestly say that I try to live my life respecting all people, not take advantage of my race or position in society, and simply live by the golden rule. The only time race and class matter to me is when people within them abuse their positions. I try not to do that but being human and flawed, I am certain I fail each and every day. I do not consider myself in any respect supreme because I am Caucasian. I am one of many people who inhabit this great earth and my responsibility to my fellow man is greater than my race.

    • Creigh says:

      Tutt, the ability to see other’s faults more clearly than one’s own is something we all need to acknowledge.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        It wasn’t meant to be a “gotcha” question, just a “something to think about” question.

        I’m not accusing anyone of hypocrisy. I’m just saying it’s easy to take things for granted.

  7. tuttabellamia says:

    I wonder if Mr. Trump’s basic appeal for some and their apparent trust in him is based on the fact that he’s a man, plain and simple, and a successful man at that, no matter how off kilter he appears to be.

    • Bobo Amerigo says:

      Somehow I think it’s related to the narrow definition of being male.

      It’s changing, but in my corporate life I saw good-hearted, kind, generous white males unable to symbolically leave the white male group to support just treatment of women and people of color.

      I can only believe it must be terrifying.

      • tuttabellamia says:


      • 1mime says:

        Standing up for people and for principles is not gender based. You either do it or you don’t.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        I guess?

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Mime, I think gender does play a role in some cases. I think women have a special responsibility to stand up for other women who are being mistreated, in the name of sisterhood.

        I also think men have a responsibility to defend women against other men, to speak “man-to-man” with their fellow males and set them straight. It’s about communication. Men may be more willing to listen to other men.

      • 1mime says:

        It’s important to stand up for other people when they are being unfairly accused or treated badly….whether they are women, men, or especially, children. Bullies are created by being accommodated (Trump), and many of them grow up to be adult bullies.

    • 1mime says:

      I take exception to calling Donald Trump “successful”. I guess my definition of “success” implies more than financial gain….it includes integrity. Trump has not exhibited this quality in his foundation, his speech, his treatment of those who have worked for him, his treatment of women, his honor in business dealings with his partners and stockholders, the banks who have lent him money, his wives. And, of course, not that money is important to me as a measure of success, but Trump has also refused to release his tax returns and every indication is he is proud that he has paid zero taxes to a country that has given him so many opportunities.

      No, I would say on many levels, certainly to include financial success, Trump is a failure.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        Your rejection of successful seems to illustrate what I’m trying to say about narrow definition of manhood.

        He’s got money and recognition. Many people are considered successful based on those attributes alone. And that’s a narrow definition of being a successful man.

        Stepping out of that narrow definition to acknowledge justice for others may simply be too frightening for all to act on.

      • 1mime says:

        Women are still struggling to be seen as “successful” and accorded the nominations to Fortune 500 BOD, as well as limited in appointments as chief executive officers. When they do attain executive positions, they typically are not paid commensurate with a man’s pay scale but are expected to equal or exceed his performance. And, most do. This has to be threatening to men who don’t have fundamental self-confidence, and god help them if the woman is black or latino. Our society in America is male dominated and that will change over time. Achievement and success should be driven by personal effort, not race or gender or class.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        We need more courageous people like Bobo and Mime.

        Bobo, who sued for equal pay for women 30 years ago and won.

        Mime, who is never afraid to speak her mind and always plays fair.

      • 1mime says:

        Thank you, Tutta. I try but do fail as I am human.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        I don’t remember posting that, tutt. You have an amazing memory.

      • 1mime says:

        She does…she really pays attention and has great recall. I’ll add my kudos to you for standing up for yourself years ago. Share that story again if you don’t mind.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Bobo, I think we were commenting about whether salaries should be open knowledge within a company, and I was opposed to the idea, in the name of privacy, and you were in favor of it, because finding out men’s salaries versus women’s at your company led to your realization that there was a situation of unfair pay and resulted in your lawsuit. What I viewed as privacy you viewed as secrecy.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        I also remember Owl arguing that discussing salaries with friends, relatives, and colleagues should be a socially acceptable practice, instead of taboo. I, of course, disagreed with that as well.

  8. Resident Alien says:

    Here’s a review of a book that’s in agreement with your post.
    Anger and Mourning on the American Right
    By Arlie Russell Hochschild.

  9. 1mime says:

    A picture that needs no words…….

    I follow a blog written by a female pastor that I really enjoy. The link above was posted on her blog. Here’s a link to her own blog and her thoughts about Trump. BTW, her spouse is a Trump supporter….(but she’s working on him).

  10. 1mime says:

    This piece looks at the schism that Trump’s candidacy has opened within the far right media wing of the party. Lots of interesting details, names you’ll recognize, stories that will make you cringe. It is relevant because it shows how a personality like Trump is a destructive force and gathers others around him. We must hope he is not successful, but from reading this article, I’d say we will live with Trump fallout for years.

  11. RobA says:

    Effective ads, with personal stories of “the little guy” (you know, the ppl he’s going to fight for…. right?) getting ripped off by this scumbag.

    I think it’s easy to get lost in the weeds when you hear things like “he didn’t pay hundreds of contractors”. It’s easy to forget that these are real ppl with real lives that he’s destroyed.

    But hey…..he didn’t use a private server for his emails, so it’s all the same thing, right?

  12. Stephen says:

    This might hurt Trump in south Florida with older Cuban voters a high turn out demography for Republicans. I really do not think Trump realize how much intense research would be done on him when he won the Republican nomination.

  13. flypusher says:

    This is an excellent essay:

    The best line (among many good ones): “You never know who someone is until he or she has real power, and Trump has already abused every little piece of power that he’s been given.”

    We all KNOW this to be true. Had Trump hijacked the Democratic Party, I would have voted for Jeb or Rubio or Romney of even W. Hell, I’d vote for that evil mofo Cheney over Trump, and I despise Cheney. That’s how bad Trump is.

  14. RobA says:

    Wow. Literally the worst Congress ever. And Dems are just as bad in this case. But McConnel takes Obama Derangement Syndrome to a new low.

    So, to sum up: Congress sent a flawed bill to POTUS desk, who vetos it, then goes on a campaign against the override. The override passes almost unanimously. THE VERY NEXT DAY the Senate apparently reads the bill for the first time and is like “oh wait…..this is bad. Maybe we can fix it”.

    To top it all off, Turtles blames Obama (natch). Apparently, Obama didn’t do a good enough job explaining it to him. Maybe he didn’t use hand puppets and books with big pictures?

    Like wtf. It’s f’ing amateur hour over there.

    I get it. 9/11 is a touchy spot and nobody wants to be seen as getting in the way of 9/11 vengeance. But sometimes, the adults need to stop the toddler from grabbing the pot of boiling water, even if the toddler gets upset.

    • Kenneth Devaney says:

      It is a dangerous precedent. They just made every US serviceperson and military action subject to civil action and we have tangible assets that could be frozen or seized upon a foreign court order. Aren’t most of these folks in Congress walking around with Law degrees?

      • Fair Economist says:

        Yeah, they are, and now they’re squealing about the bill, notably McConnell. McConnell has the nerve to say the problem is that Obama didn’t “warn them strongly enough” which is doubly laughable as most of them know on their own and it was in his veto statement too. My take is that McConnell expected the Dems to bail his ass out by sustaining the veto (and allow him to run smear ads against them). But they didn’t, and now he’s facing the consequence of nations around the globe denying us immunity and possibly even forcing closure of our bases.

      • flypusher says:

        ‘McConnell has the nerve to say the problem is that Obama didn’t “warn them strongly enough” ‘

        Forgot what a veto means, did he? I wish we could impose a quota for such stupidity in Congress. Pass the limit, and you loss your office immediately.

      • 1mime says:

        “Pass the limit, and you lose your office immediately..”

        But, but, who would be left?

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        I’m all for a stupidity quotient for elected officials.

      • 1mime says:

        If only intelligence resulted in wisdom, and degrees equated to intelligence.

      • flypusher says:

        “But, but, who would be left?”

        Elijah Cummings and Elizabeth Warren, for starters.

      • 1mime says:

        They could run the whole Senate as far as I’m concerned (-; But, I do like Jeff Flake and some others….

    • 1mime says:

      I had the same thought when I read that earlier. As I recall, Paul Ryan also has concerns. What was more important than trying to “fix” the problems in teh legislation, was using it to embarrass the President.

      Let us hope that neither McConnell nor Ryan are elected to lead their chambers in the new year. How petty and small can one be? We’ve just seen how…

      • Kenneth Devaney says:

        They submitted this piece of legislation and passed the law; went on to override a veto…and they are…cough…cough…lawyers. “I don’t know nuthin bout birthin no babies” is not a good excuse doctor.

        Besides isn’t the Kenyan Socialist with strong Muslim tendencies suppose to be incompetent?…why would they heed let alone solicit his advice on legislation. UGH, I am done with these straight white men and I hope the first lawsuit is against a servicemen from Kentucky, so McConnell can whitesplain his vote for this law to the good people of Kentucky. He might get by with “I voted for it because Blackenstein was against it”.

  15. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    More Jim Crow stuff for today…

    It is a lovely story. The main subject is an 18 year old freshman.

    “An East Tennessee State University student was arrested Wednesday after going to a Black Lives Matter protest on campus wearing a gorilla mask and handing out bananas.”

    “Tristan Rettke, an 18-year-old freshman, wore overalls and a gorilla mask and, wandering barefoot holding a burlap sack with a Confederate flag and a marijuana leaf on it, offered bananas to students who were protesting, according to the ETSU police department report. He was arrested and charged with civil rights intimidation.”

    • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

      Ummmmm… nice overalls.

      I am going to go out on a limb and speculate this individual will likely vote for Trump Nov. 8th (so long as he doesn’t have a felony conviction on his record).

      Is it just me or does this young fella have that “I am going to one day kill as many darkies as I can before they rape our women” look?

      I’m really sorry… I just get that vibe from him.

      • flypusher says:

        I wonder if it was more a protective custody thing to save him from himself, but yeah, those charges are pretty flimsy. Unless the guy was packing a lot of heat, he was too outnumbered to be intimidating. I commend the protesters for NOT smacking the jerk, because they had to be tempted.

    • Stephen says:

      I remember when much worst stories than this would not make the paper. The fact this is news shows how rare open bigotry has become. As sorry as this young man is he does show progress has been made.

    • Houston-Stay-At-Homer says:

      I saw this a bit earlier today, and I’m a bit torn about it.

      While it would be nice to have a world without asshats, I’m not sure that being an asshat should be a crime.

      This idiot was interrupting a BLM march with a gorilla mask and a banana, and said he did it to “provoke” the protesters. Absolute asshat behavior.

      He didn’t hit anyone. I don’t think he even yelled at anyone.

      I am as flaky a liberal as they come, but his behavior as “civil rights intimidation” that can get you arrested worries me a bit.

      • 1mime says:

        Free speech and all that stuff, right? Your point is well taken, Homer. The BLM group had gone through the proper channels to schedule a peaceful protest in an area of the campus designated for “free speech”. As much as I dislike what the white student did to provoke (his choice of words) the BLM protestors, if in deed it was a “free speech” designated area, it seems that he would have as much “right” to be there dressed in his offensive garb. One student observed that he should have been allowed to stay as he was making a point about racism better than the BLM students could with their signs.

        I have to agree with you that he should probably not have been arrested. Just ignored. I did think the University handled things well by calling a campus forum that same evening. Here’s the University statement:

        “Our university values diversity, inclusivity and respect for others. In keeping with those values, there will be an opportunity for community dialogue tonight at 7 p.m. inside the D.P. Culp Auditorium. University leadership will be present.”

        That type of coming together offers an opportunity for dialogue and personal growth. It was, admittedly, a shameful act and a tough call.

      • RobA says:

        I think the unique legacy of voter intimidation, civil rights intimidation, lynching etc across the South makes it appropriate to have an exception to free speech laws. All rights require a balancing act. In this case, the rights of black ppl to protest and participate in democracy without being intimidated and/or assaulted and/or murdered trumps someone else’s free speech right to be a racist PoS.

        I’m sure if this person had just done this randomly at black ppl, they would not be arrested. Socially ostracized hopefully, but not arrested. But the unique legacy of intimidation and violence against black ppl (and not really all that long ago) means that official political events/rallies/protests need and deserve special protections.

      • Kenneth Devaney says:

        The irony is that he was probably the most safe of anyone attending that demonstration. This is what majority groups don’t seem to understand. When you are are a person of color or gay and encounter demonstrators or counter demonstrators/protestors you can’t touch them, yell at them or intimidate without being held accountable for “provoking trouble”.

        White straight privilege is a real thing…that young man probably had no fear at all…probably wasn’t even a consideration when he chose this action. We learn our roles young and always the hard way. He won’t be prosecuted but anyone who attacked him would be…and he knows it. Any person of color attending East Tennessee State knows the rules….welcome to the America.

      • 1mime says:

        So true, Kenneth.

        “He won’t be prosecuted but anyone who attacked him would be…and he knows it. Any person of color attending East Tennessee State knows the rules.”

      • Griffin says:

        I’m not sure I can totally agree with that line of reasoning Rob. Yes he was being a crazy racist ass but he wasnt murdering anyone. Couldn’t you use the same line of reasoning to ban anti-Semitic speech/stmbols since Jews also have a history of being uniquely persecuted?

      • RobA says:

        Griffin, I think it’s very likely this guy is just an idiot, with no violent intent. But given the history of violence and intimidation and murder at these types of things against black ppl solely BECAUSE they are black and exercising their civil rights means that special protections should be granted, regardless of the intentions of this particular person.

        It is less a worry that this person will commit violence and more an acknowledgement of the institutionalized violence that pervaded these types of things not all that long ago, and understanding that the unique history merits unique protections.

        Kinda like how the voting rights act infringed on some states right to pass their own voting laws. Because of the unique legacy of those states don’t ng everything they can to restrict minority voting.

        And while one could argue “well, violence and political intimidation against black ppl happened decades ago, they don’t need special protections anymore” I would refer you to the same voting rights act I just mentioned. Those laws were struck down with the exact same reasoning, and lo and behold, within years, those states have done exactly what those laws were designed to prevent.

        While this guy was likely just a moron with a monkey suit….I have no doubts that if special protection for black political activists were removed, eventually politically motivated violence WOULD find its way to these types of events in the South.

      • Griffin says:

        Pretty sure you’re strawmanning me there Rob considering I never said anything of the sort and “special protections” add an extra layer of protection to that which is already a crime, this guy wasn’t breaking the law in the first place. Now, if you said the protestors should have police protection to protect them actual assault, sure, that doesn’t infringe on anyones rights.

  16. flypusher says:

    Let’s revisit this little assertion:

    “Well, Chris, Dilbert IS the quintessential, geeky white guy working from a cubical. Why wouldn’t he be a Trump supporter?”

    As a certified White, white-collar geeky type, I will speak for the members of my tribe who wouldn’t be Trump supporters.

    One very important thing about us in Tribe Geek- we love facts and reasoning and knowledge. We will happily spend hours, even days arguing/dissecting/ nit-picking the smallest of details. We don’t respect people who don’t do their homework and/or try to baffle us with BS, or outright lie about something they are on record as saying. Why should we have anything other than contempt for Trump, who violates all of these things we value?

    We nerdy types also value free expression. We get on our Internet forums and we duke it out in the arena of ideas and the snark often flies. But want to know who is universally despised by the vast majority of the participants? It’s the whiny little bitches who are eager to dish it out, but can’t take it. Sounds just like a certain GOP candidate.

    Because we love knowledge, and the WWW is our all you can eat buffet, we’ve looked beyond the sanitized, white-washed version of American history taught in many of the public schools, and the dumbed down science. Those of us with a sense of fairness are going to say Hey, BLM has some valid points about how Black citizens are treated by law enforcement. Hey, being gay or straight is not a choice, so maybe we shouldn’t be making laws the restrict the rights of gay people based on old religious biases without scientific backing. Instead of passing abortion restrictions based on bogus medical concerns, how about more on the things that actually help, like more sex-ed and access to birth control? But we see the sellouts attaching themselves to Trump who keep advocating for all these things that don’t work. So we say no, even if we might be in a better place to weather such a disaster.

    • objv says:

      fly, you do realize that the percentage of college educated white men who support Trump outnumbers those who support Hillary, don’t you?

      My husband, an engineer, is a prime example of a supposedly rational geeky character who may not like Trump, but thinks Hillary a worse option

      • flypusher says:

        But what happens when you add college educated White women?? We count as geeks too, and we tip the balance the other way.

        I spoke for those who don’t deny reality. And honestly HRC would have to literally be the anti-Christ to justify overlooking all the filth that has attached itself to Trump. And I say this as someone who is NOT any fan of hers.

      • objv says:

        I meant only that Dilbert was male and geeky and would be more statistically prone to being a Trump supporter.

        My daughter is a science major with a master’s degree. I regularly brainwash her by having her watch FoxNews with me. 🙂

        I could take your last statements and just change the names around to make it applicable to how many Republicans like me feel.

        The wording made me chuckle. After all, Hillary has been called the Hilda-BEAST.

        I know some folks here have a fondness for Snopes. Apparently Hillary likes her secret service so much that her favorite greeting involves the F word.

      • Griffin says:

        Id probably be considered a white male geek and yet I somehow find the willpower to not support loony white nationalists. In fact I find it interesting that throughout this thread you’ve never actually disputed the claim that Trump’s a racist, you just apparently consider this not as bad as being Hillary Clinton.

      • flypusher says:

        “In fact I find it interesting that throughout this thread you’ve never actually disputed the claim that Trump’s a racist, you just apparently consider this not as bad as being Hillary Clinton.”

        Trump is a bigot, he’s vain and he’s clueless, and he’s selfish and he’s too lazy to do the required work and he’s a bully. Yet Hillary is worse. This is irrationality defined.

      • objv says:

        Hillary is vain. She is a bully. She’s been stunningly clueless about security and ensuring she kept a record of her correspondence which she was legally required to do.

        For crying out loud, she’s an entitled rich, white lady who wanted a helicopter to turn back because she forgot her sunglasses in her limo.

      • Griffin says:

        And you STILL don’t disagree with the idea Trumps a racist, you just legit aren’t bothered by it practically at ALL if you seriously consider being “entitled” to be a worse trait.

      • 1mime says:

        I have decided to simply ignore some posts.

      • objv says:

        Griffin, I will address that topic as soon as possible. Maybe, tomorrow.

        Let’s say for now, that I think that a Trump presidency would be much better for minorities than a Hillary presidency.

      • Griffin says:

        Do my eyes deceive me right now or did I just read the most beautifully insane sentence of the week?

      • Griffin says:

        Though I am genuinely curious as to the proportion of readers who read Objv’s above post and audibly guffawed. Like, on a scale of either no guffaw, half-guffaw, or full guffaw. I had a half-guffaw, what about you guys? I’m gonna see how well I know you all and guess:

        Mime: No guffaw (due to lack of surprise)
        Rob: Full guffaw
        Lifer: Full guffaw, possible facepalm

      • objv says:

        Ummm, Griffen, I think Hillary is more of a racist than Trump. (I guess this statement will top the previous in your mind as the most insane of the week.)

        I’ll add a few guffaws of my own. guffaw guffaw guffaw and a muah ha ha for good measure. 🙂

      • @1mime: >] “I have decided to simply ignore some posts.

        ‘Atta girl. 🙂

        @objv: >] “Let’s say for now, that I think that a Trump presidency would be much better for minorities than a Hillary presidency.

        Ummm, Griffen, I think Hillary is more of a racist than Trump. (I guess this statement will top the previous in your mind as the most insane of the week.)

        A single facepalm, ma’am, is not suitable to the degree of insanity with which you have visited upon this place with those two statements.

        That aside, and granting that you’re not just being an utter troll with what you said (still a distinct possibility, I reckon), you’re arguing that you know what’s better for minorities than the overwhelming majority of African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians and others that will vote for Clinton this November in overwhelming numbers compared to Trump.

        Tell me, exactly, how do you figure that? Do you think that Donald Trump, a man that clearly committed housing discrimination against African-Americans, will have their best interests in mind as president?

        Do you think Trump, who started off this farce of a presidential campaign by going on television and calling Mexicans rapists and murderers has any sincere or genuine interests in Hispanics or their culture? Well, one need only look at that unforgettable tweet of his that had him with a stereotypical taco bowl and the words “I love Hispanics!” to figure the answer to that one.

        This is a guy so self-obsessed with himself that even when a Gold Star family, the Khans, took their pain onto the national stage and asked Donald Trump for a modicum of decency and respect, he resolutely refused and instead gave nothing but platitudes and hollow words to their grief.

        Honestly, and in all seriousness, you tell me what Hillary Clinton has done to minorities that would even come remotely close to what Trump has done in this campaign.

        Spoiler Alert: She hasn’t and you can’t.

        Frankly, the idea that you would even entertain that line of thought is not only ignorant, it’s insulting and you should be ashamed of yourself.

      • flypusher says:

        “Ummm, Griffen, I think Hillary is more of a racist than Trump. (I guess this statement will top the previous in your mind as the most insane of the week.)”

        That is the dumbest and least substantiated claim I’ve seen on this blog since that worthless thread-sh*tter DanMan was rightfully banned. You are becoming as shameless as that lying sack of crap you keep white knighting.

        You KNOW you can’t prove that.

      • flypusher says:

        “For crying out loud, she’s an entitled rich, white lady who wanted a helicopter to turn back because she forgot her sunglasses in her limo.”

        Oh you got us there!! That’s far, far worse than failing to pay contractors, or abusing eminent domain to try to take an elderly woman’s house, or demeaning a beauty queen over her weight, or demanding that his resorts fire female employees who weren’t attractive enough, or getting busted for housing discrimination or pushing the racist lies that are birtherism or running the Trump U scam.

        And she’s eating those damn crackers like she owns the place too!

      • Turtles Run says:

        objv says:
        Let’s say for now, that I think that a Trump presidency would be much better for minorities than a Hillary presidency.

        As one of those Mexican rapists I am really trying hard to believe you are not losing your mind. How in the heck can anyone believe that person that makes disparaging remarks about minorities actually be better for them than the person that has a history of engaging and supporting minorities.

        Griffin, I will address that topic as soon as possible. Maybe, tomorrow.

        Why not know? You have been supporting Trump for months, why can you not defend your support for him.

        Please tell us what “Make America Great Again” really means. We are the richest and most powerful nation in the world with no real rivals. What is different about America now versus 60 years ago.

        I will sit hear in my miserable community with the rest of the hispanics waiting for your replies.

  17. RobA says:

    White nationalist leader: “Every alt right Nazi I know is volunteering for Trumps campaign”

    OBVJ, I don’t mean to pick on you , you seem like a good person. But, come on….how are you able to justify voting this piece of garbage? Because Hillary used a private server for her emails (with no evidence that any damage came from it)? Because Benghazi?

    The man has literal white supremicist nazis VOLUNTEERING their time. That’s less of an issue to you then Hillarys emails? If there are lots of ppl willing to make that same absurd false equivalence, then America truly is in a moral decline.

    If the religious right thinks they have any moral high ground whatsoever after this abject capitulation to such an immoral piece of shit, they’re dreaming. Think ppl are turning away from religion now? Expect that to increase exponentially in the coming years.

    And Trump doesn’t even need to pay lip service to the religious stuff. When was the last time you heard about gay marriage? Abortion? Trump is exposing the religious right for what its always been: a group of hate mongers who don’t actually care about anything except lording their clear moral superiority over anyone they decide isn’t part of their ridiculous Sky Daddy cult.

    If there was a better way to speed up the secularization of society then embracing Trump, I can’t think of it.

    • 1mime says:

      You are more kind than me, Rob. Anyone who regularly reads this blog and is supporting DJT has no excuse. They are doing so not because they have not had the opportunity to become informed, they are doing so for other reasons which I do not respect or accept.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Mime, if I turned against everyone in my personal sphere who intends to vote for Mr. Trump I would be shutting out my in-laws, my boss, many business associates, and some members of my own family — otherwise totally sane and intelligent people – who’ve made the personal choice to support Mr. Trump.

        All I can do is accept their opinions, as long as they accept my own, even if I disagree with them. Mr. Trump has done enough to divide the nation. I will not allow the specter of Mr. Trump to bring about divisiveness in my personal life.

      • 1mime says:

        Each of us who posts on a public blog has to accept responsibility for our comments. We also have to accept that our views will be challenged and that opposing views will be asserted. I welcome that. I have refrained from responding to Ob’s many anti-Hillary and pro-Trump posts because I don’t agree with the reasons she presents to support her statements. Further, I understand that she is unwilling to consider rational arguments offered by many smart people who participate in this blog – Lifer included. This blog functions at a very high level of substantiation and fact which requires that each of us who choose to comment be prepared to present opinions and posts and also to defend them. This election is critically important to me and even more so for our country. Each of us will deal with the political differences in our own personal circles in our own way. I try not to be offensive but I will not equivocate either. This is a political blog. It is not a social network.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Mime, I see this site as a combination of both — political blog and social network.

        Part of its appeal is the social connection. As you have pointed out in the past, we are like a family, and you enjoy being able to reach out to people in a semi-social way through this site, since you are homebound caring for your husband who is ill.

        I appreciate and respect the fact that you take this election very seriously. I do as well, even if I throw out the occasional pun and rhyme and joke around with OV. I mean no disrespect to the seriousness of this election.

      • 1mime says:

        None taken, Tutta. I do enjoy exchanging friendly comments, but when I share a political POV, that opens the floor for rebuttal. I expect that as we all should. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but facts are facts.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Mime, I also appreciate the fact that you are respectful and that you don’t engage in personal attacks toward those who would disagree with you.

    • Houston-Stay-At-Homer says:

      Not to speak for Obj (because we disagree on everything), but she does not want another Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. I love RBG, but Obj would much rather have two more Scalias appointed in the next four years rather than folks like RBG, Kagan, or Sotomeyer.

      Plus, I’m sure that Obj correctly believes Clinton will at least try to implement tax policies that Obj doesn’t like.

      What’s a little White supremacy when you get a 3% marginal tax cut, can keep gays from getting married, and can stop women from getting an abortion?

      • goplifer says:

        I do hear that one occasionally, but it’s another invention. What on Earth might lead someone to think that Trump is more likely to nominate a Scalia than a Judge Judy. What would stop him from nominating Donald Trump, Jr.? So far everything he’s done has been a madcap parody. Interesting angle and it probably does explain what some people are thinking, but they are inventing their own personal Donald Trump in order to arrive there.

      • >] “I do hear that one occasionally, but it’s another invention. What on Earth might lead someone to think that Trump is more likely to nominate a Scalia than a Judge Judy. What would stop him from nominating Donald Trump, Jr.? So far everything he’s done has been a madcap parody. Interesting angle and it probably does explain what some people are thinking, but they are inventing their own personal Donald Trump in order to arrive there.

        I can’t speak for objv, but I would think a pro-Trump response to that line of thinking would be that Trump would have to compromise with a Republican Senate and that he couldn’t just get through anyone that he wanted to, so this idea that he would nominate anyone he wanted to would just be Trump being Trump, exercising his business acumen by testing the waters and so on before we finally got a nominee closer to a Scalia or Alito.

        Obvious problems arise with this of course, the first of which is that one’s presuming Trump is going to act in a reasonably predictable way; never a good idea.

        Second, and perhaps much more importantly, is that that thinking is predicated on Republicans being in any kind of position to stymie a President Trump. This is the guy who steamrolled the entire Republican Party, took it from them by force and made the overwhelming majority kneel and kiss his gold-painted ring. Anyone who tries to tell me that these are the guys who will make Trump capitulate on anything, please, spare yourself a piece of hypocritical bullshit even you don’t believe.

      • flypusher says:

        It’s totally a battered spouse syndrome thing here- I CAN CHANGE HIM!!!

        No you can’t.

      • flypusher says:

        “Second, and perhaps much more importantly, is that that thinking is predicated on Republicans being in any kind of position to stymie a President Trump. This is the guy who steamrolled the entire Republican Party, took it from them by force and made the overwhelming majority kneel and kiss his gold-painted ring. Anyone who tries to tell me that these are the guys who will make Trump capitulate on anything, please, spare yourself a piece of hypocritical bullshit even you don’t believe.”

        Also some of them probably hope that if he does go too far, they’ll have grounds for impeachment, and they’ll have some eager allies in the Dems. But in such a case, it would be reasonable and actually poltically smart for the Dems to say “Screw you, WE are not going to save you from the consequences of YOUR stupid choices.” Because if it really get that bad, the major damage would have already been done, and impeachment hearings would be so much closing the door after the whole herd of horses was long gone.

      • objv says:

        Good point, Chris. For all we know Trump could nominate his own sister.

        However, what we do know for certain is that Hillary would want to appoint someone more like RBG. At least with Trump, there is some hope he would go with a conservative or moderate.

        I know your opinion of Scalia. You and I have different worldviews probably brought about by how we were raised. There is a huge disconnect on the importance we place on certain issues.

  18. 1mime says:

    This is O.T. (I’m really bad about that, sorry.) but it is such a fine interview that I wanted to share it with you. Two of my favorite people – Barach Obama and Doris Kearns Goodwin. An exit interview as POTUS. I am so going to miss him in office. I’ll bet Goodwin gets to write his biography…They are good friends and share a love of history.

  19. tuttabella says:

    LIFER, do you receive monetary compensation for your posts on

    I hope so, because you put a lot of time, effort, and brainpower into your writing, which is of high quality.

    In today’s digital age too many people work for free in exchange for “exposure.”

  20. Houston-Stay-At-Homer says:

    It is sad to note that if only White people were allowed to vote…Trump is winning in a pretty nice landslide.

    Let that little nugget sink in for a while.

  21. 1mime says:

    Visit #3 for FBI Director, James Comey, to capital hill questioning his decision to not prosecute HRC. To which he responded:

    “Despite the second-guessing from Republicans, Comey said he remained convinced that prosecution wasn’t even remotely appropriate given the facts.

    “As painful as this is for people, this was not a close call,” he said. “This was done by pros in the right way.”

    Which makes one wonder – If the outcome isn’t the one you want, the tactic is to discredit the people involved in the process. To his credit, Comey defended his people who did the grunt work on this matter. Guess we’ve got another 45 days of House Oversight Committee crapola to go. And people wonder why Trump thinks he can get away with saying whatever he wants to whoever he wants? He’s had plenty of role models on this House Committee to show him how easy it is to throw good people in the sewer. They deserve one another.

  22. objv says:

    I’m not sure why my Dilbert flip-flop comment didn’t post. Here’s a section from Scott Adam’s blog on why he’s decided to support Trump:

    “Trained persuaders like me see this as something called pacing and leading. Trump “paces” the public – meaning he matches them in their emotional state, and then some. He does that with his extreme responses on immigration, fighting ISIS, stop-and-frisk, etc. Once Trump has established himself as the biggest bad-ass on the topic, he is free to “lead,” which we see him do by softening his deportation stand, limiting his stop-and-frisk comment to Chicago, reversing his first answer on penalties for abortion, and so on. If you are not trained in persuasion, Trump look scary. If you understand pacing and leading, you might see him as the safest candidate who has ever gotten this close to the presidency. That’s how I see him.

    So when Clinton supporters ask me how I could support a “fascist,” the answer is that he isn’t one. Clinton’s team, with the help of Godzilla, have effectively persuaded the public to see Trump as scary. The persuasion works because Trump’s “pacing” system is not obvious to the public. They see his “first offers” as evidence of evil. They are not. They are technique.”

    • texan5142 says:

      The republican team, with the help of Godzilla, have effectively persuaded the public to see Clinton as scary.

      Works both ways, for thirty years the republicans have been painting a false narrative of Clinton. He is not qualified to clean your toilet, much less less to be POTUS.

    • texan5142 says:

      “Trained persuaders like me see this as something called pacing and leading. Trump “paces” the public – meaning he matches them in their emotional state, and then some.

      That is what con men do.

      • objv says:

        That’s also something people who negotiate favorable deals do.

      • Griffin says:

        Objv I’m curious as to how you think trade deals are negotiated. The way you seem to present it is that Trump would waltz into a boardroom in, say, China, and use these tactics to fool that countries leadership into signing a trade deal that favors us (nevermind that Trump doesn’t seem to even understand the details of what he wants out of such a deal becauae he doesnt seem to understand policy but moving on) and then after a handshake or two America will get, like, the best deals.

        In reality trade deals take (at least) months to work out and experts working for other countries would be carefully looking over the text of such deals to make sure they aren’t fooled, and in this case Trump cant leverage his wealth/lawyers as he does with the small businessmen he screws over if they back out after catching some tom foolery on his part.

      • Griffin says:

        Also keep in mind that we don’t have to live in mercantilist times anymore. Trade deals are supposed to be mutually beneficial, if they aren’t they don’t get signex. One country doesn’t HAVE to be on the “losing” side of a trade deal. Trumps scheming and backstabbing is wholly unnecessary because its not a zero sum economy.

    • goplifer says:

      “Trained persuaders?” Well there’s a new one.

      One of the strangest phenomenon in this election has been watching people you once thought of as sane and sober defend their support for Donald Trump by inventing their own, imaginary Donald Trump.

      Apart from a few blatantly racist morons, I’ve yet to hear one person step up and say, “I’m supporting Donald Trump because he’s right about [insert a thing the man actually said].” Supporters of his who are moderately credible as human beings aren’t willing to endorse the vile filth he constantly spews. They always make up some fantasy Trump, some version of the guy known only to them. And when they’re done describing this mythical candidate, they follow that description with a “but, Hillary” word salad.

      This is a YUGE departure from previous elections, where people could say with a straight face that they disagreed with Obama or Romney on some documented, verifiable policy point. And then people could argue about the merits of that policy point. This election pretty much comes down to, “are you cool with putting an incoherent, ranting bigot who perhaps isn’t quite like Hitler in the White House, check yes or no?”

      And a remarkable number of people are basically going, “Yes. I’m white, so I’m pretty sure it will turn out OK for me.”

      Horror show.

      • objv says:

        Well, Chris, Dilbert IS the quintessential, geeky white guy working from a cubical. Why wouldn’t he be a Trump supporter?

        I do have one point where I disagree with you. Over and over again, people who have disagreed with Obama on policy have been called racist with no real justification.

      • flypusher says:

        My breakdown of Trump supporters (some fall into more than one category).

        1) The true deplorables- these are the alt-right, the klan and aryan nation types, and all the other bigots/misogynists/xenophobes/etc.

        2) The economically left behind

        3) the fan club- people who live vicariously through Trump’s vulgar displays of wealth.

        4) The stigginit crowd- they just want to watch the world burn.

        5) The sellouts- these people hope to persuade Trump to give them something they want, should he blunder his way into office. People like Ryan, who want more tax cuts for the rich, Pence, who sees himself as the power behind the throne, evangelical hypocrites who over look Trump’s unrepentantly profane lifestyle, people who want another Scalia (or 3) on SCOTUS. This may be the most contemptible group because THEY KNOW BETTER. When confronted with Trump’s unfitness they either flee like cowards or make rationalizations that are dangerous to neurons. You get the WHOLE package with Trump, not just the favor you want (maybe), but all his ignorance and bigotry and dishonesty and childish temperament and endless grudges and short attention span and narcissism and delusions. You vote for him and you own ALL of it.

      • 1mime says:

        Racists and bigots are supporting Trump? You are kidding me, right? You know full well that there is no racism and bigotry in America! That’s just a liberal GOTV motivator. Oh, but what about these folks? Surely they are the exception….

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        Karma, in the form of three black potential customers, all lawyers.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        Dilbertman may be talking about people trained in rhetoric. In scholarly documents, they are sometimes referred to as rhetors, teachers of rhetoric.

        Aristotle, Socrates … they spent considerable time identifying different types of rhetoric for specific occasions, e.g., death of a statesman, a court hearing, logical inquiry, etc.

        They also spent time identifying the qualities a rhetor should possess in order to be persuasive, to have credibility.

        You can major in rhetorical studies today, if you choose. Theories abound, but one that resonates with me is the belief that rhetoric that doesn’t lead to active justice isn’t worth much.

        For me, tRump has no credibility and could lead me nowhere, even if Dilbertman thinks he is bad-ass.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Fly, excellent breakdown of Trump supporters.

      • Robin R. says:

        I recognize all too well this defense of the imaginary Trump. It’s just like when I was young and dumb and trying to be in relationships with bad boys who drank too much and didn’t call and flirted with other women as soon as I looked away. How many times did I say to people, “I know he’s awful in public, but you don’t know him like I know him” It’s sad that this myth won’t die. How are we not smarter than this by now?

    • tuttabellamia says:

      OV, I was thinking along the same lines the other day. Mr. Trump has done such a thorough job of winning over his supporters that there is nothing he can do that would result in his losing their vote.

      He can insult John McCain, brag that he can shoot someone, flip-flop on issues, and not lose their support, to the point that I think he could even call for blanket amnesty for all illegal aliens and STILL not lose support.

      I once heard a lady interviewed at a Trump rally, and she was asked how she felt about Trump softening his stance on the wall with Mexico, and she replied that she wasn’t worried at all, that she would “let him work out all the details.”

      • tuttabellamia says:

        And were Mr. Trump to call for blanket amnesty for all illegals, I am guessing his supporters would probably reply with something like, well, Mrs. Clinton would probably also call for amnesty, and she is way worse than he is, so he would still come out winning their support, as the lesser of two evils.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        One argument I HAVE heard is that, while Mr. Trump is terrible because he MIGHT curtail freedom of the press, Mrs. Clinton is even worse because we KNOW she will curtail freedom of the press.

        In other words, better the devil you don’t know than the devil you DO know.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        I predict that after all is said and done, Mr. Trump will lose the election, but the American people will thank him for making politics exciting and interesting, for jolting us out of our apathy.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Timing is everything.

    • flypusher says:

      Adams is full of crap. Trump first came to my attention about 25 years, and I concluded that he was a loudmouth jerk, a bully, and the caricature of the boss from hell come to life in orange stained flesh. I see now that my initial evaluation was overly generous. But HRC and her smear squad have a time machine?

      So Adams sees leadership in Trump’s bluster and bellowing and chest pounding. I, and millions of others, see an ignorant fool trying to cover for the fact the he is in over his head. He matches the emotional state of people who reject critical thinking. He is a disaster. He is not qualified. He couldn’t be bothered to prep for the debate. Being President takes even more prep. Stop insulting our intellengence with these lies.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        yes yes yes yes yes yes

      • Stephen says:

        I had a short discussion today with some one who supports Trump. The main reason he supported Trump was because working class whites have been shafted for 20 years from both parties. He wanted change period. Like many people he had not the imagination to see how a Trump presidency could go wrong for him.

        I also talked to three millennia woman at their office. One White, one Black and one Hispanic. All three are disgusted with Trumps rhetoric and treatment of woman and their ethnic group. The Black and Hispanic woman were riled up with Trump’s dystopia view of their communities. There are more people like them. It is going to all depend on turnout. I am helping register new voters. The more voters that vote the more likely Hillary will win. And BTW all three ladies were registered and plan on voting.

      • @Stephen: “I had a short discussion today with some one who supports Trump. The main reason he supported Trump was because working class whites have been shafted for 20 years from both parties. He wanted change period. Like many people he had not the imagination to see how a Trump presidency could go wrong for him.

        Always find it amusing when Trump supporters resort to such broad rhetorical word play like “being shafted”. What’s that supposed to mean exactly? Their incomes have stagnated? A factory they worked in was shut down and moved overseas? They had to go on welfare?

        Or is it that the sense of social standing and perceived respect they once enjoyed seemingly vanished overnight?

        I will say it’s interesting (and more than a bit frustrating) just how many proverbial rabbit holes Trump supporters try to jump down when you ask them why, exactly, they’re angry.

      • Griffin says:

        @Ryan I thought Lifer covered pretty well how they feel “shafted”. Yes respect was part of it for many but there were tangible benefits to those people via white supremacy. We (rightfully) tore down that system but (wrongfully) without ever really putting up a post-racial alternative that was viable for them. I remember Lifer once commenting that white supremacy was a horrible, immoral system that had to go but it was also immoral that wealthier whites (especially the descendants of plantation owners) who had benefited most from such a system never had to pay for it and that all the costs of its collapse instead fell on poorer whites with less political power/influence.

        That said when you go into the numbers Trumps support among “working class” whites is actually much more limited than previously thought (give them their due!). Much of his support seems to be coming from those who worked middle class jobs that are becoming increasingly obsolete, with hardline protectionism seemingly being their best bet of slowing down the process of their jobs becoming irrelevant by undermining the growth of more urban, post-industrial jobs that are taking their place, I think.

      • 1mime says:

        I posted this yesterday but it is such a perfect accompaniment to your comment that I offer it again. This is not a problem only for America; it is a global concern. Sadly, trade is seen as the culprit when it is merely an economic tool (and an important, vital one for world peace and prosperity). What is lacking is attention to the fall out from the shifts in society and in the workplace

      • @Griffin: I understand all that, Griffin. Perhaps I could’ve been a less beat-around-the-bush on it, but I was trying to infer just how desperate a lot of Trump’s supporters are to find some excuse, ANY excuse, to avoid the real heart of why they’re supporting him.

        Take our fellow commentator, objv, as a prime example, throwing out everything from the tired rhetoric of Trump being a “good negotiator” to blatant strawman distractions like this: “Over and over again, people who have disagreed with Obama on policy have been called racist with no real justification.

        @objv: That may well be true for some, but that neither explains the reflexive opposition that Republicans have made their hallmark for anything President Obama supports (like keeping people on the terrorist watchlist from buying guns BECAUSE THE 2ND AMENDMENT AND A BLACK MAN WANTS TO TAKE ALL OUR GUNS AWAY!!!) nor the absolute, unyielding resistance in denying him any kind of credit whatsoever, no matter how good the economy gets and no matter what kind of tangible progress the US makes.

        There are exceptions to this, thankfully, but they’re just exceptions. They’re not the rule in the Party of Trump.

      • Stephen says:

        You nailed it. I suspect madam President will work to defuse this bomb. Bill came right out of poor southern working class. He knows this animal well as do I. A huge infrastructure build up will mute much of the intense angry and dissatisfaction.

      • @Stephen: >] “You nailed it. I suspect madam President will work to defuse this bomb. Bill came right out of poor southern working class. He knows this animal well as do I. A huge infrastructure build up will mute much of the intense angry and dissatisfaction.

        I wouldn’t raise my hopes too high about that. For a lot of people, matters of perceived respect and social standing are personal issues that no degree of income or job security can compensate for.

        Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

    • flypusher says:

      ‘They see his “first offers” as evidence of evil. They are not. They are technique.’

      Salve your own conscience with that dreck if you wish, but please spare us. I have observed him for myself. He speaks evil, and he associates himself with some very vile people. You are who you roll with.

      • 1mime says:

        One of the points that Hillary haters always bring up is her poor decision to use a private server and her cell phone for state related business. The GOP has made much “hay” over this, the House Oversight has claimed great harm was done.

        We need to be reminded of what happened early in the G.W. Bush campaign in regards to email – for one “Karl Rove”. Let me refresh your memory:

        “The funny thing about the scandal surrounding Clinton’s private email account is that there was a similar scandal in the Bush administration. Dozens of White House staffers, including Karl Rove, improperly used email accounts provided by the Republican National Committee, which were supposed to be for political work only, for their official duties, thus evading public-records requirements. They then deleted some 22 million emails, thus systematically flouting the same public-records principle that Clinton evaded.”

        NOTE: They deleted 22 MILLION EMAILS.

        That wasn’t the only thing they did.

        “The administration pressured federal attorneys to find and prosecute vote fraud, which they believed Democrats were committing on a wide scale. When the (Republican) attorneys were unable to find any significant evidence of such vote fraud, the administration fired eight of them, an unusual breach of norms designed to insulate the legal apparatus from partisan politics.”

        That still wasn’t the only thing they did. The list is so long that I’ll post the link here so you can read it in its sordid entirety. The point is: the GOP is milking the email “scandal” but is carefully hiding the FACT of their own personal email use and deletion thereof. Hypocrisy, redux.

        All those “white” people voting “for” Trump? Including some I know? They are the sad result of a Republican Party that conveniently hides its own email practices while bludgeoning Clinton. What can anyone say except how very sad this is for our country.

      • 1mime says:

        And, this story. Come on, Dems, fight back! Pull the lid off this issue.,8599,1610414,00.html

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        Willful blindness can’t be overcome.

      • flypusher says:

        “Willful blindness can’t be overcome.”

        Indeed. Only out-voted

      • 1mime says:

        (-; Good one…

    • bubbabobcat says:

      Scott Adams flip flopped because of overriding self interest/greed/avarice. He states it openly and flamingly on his website. He is now opposed to Hillary because she proposes raising the estate/inheritance tax. Presumably so he can be free to raise another rotten, spoiled and indulgent rich hateful Trump born with a spoon up some bodily orifice. So a White guy as Adams who (giving a loose benefit of a doubt) may not be racist but tolerates it, rationalizes, and turns a blind eye to a racist and his rampant racism and hate as long as he gets to keep his $$$$$. Everything else he rambles on is just rationalization to justify his own self interests.

      A rich White guy doesn’t care about anything else but ensuring above all else, he stays a rich White guy no matter what. And supports a “Presidential” candidate with the same “character” trait. I’m just absolutely shocked.

    • Archetrix says:

      I really hate Hitler comparisons. But anyway,

      • 1mime says:

        The comparison between the tactics of Hitler and those of Trump is fair game. Equally concerning is that millions of Americans who have grown up in a democracy would so willingly buy into this pap. They have the benefit of hindsight. Why do some people have such animus for their fellow man?

      • 1mime says:

        There is a new book out on Hitler that studies his ascent from a different POV. The author, Volker Ulrich endeavors ” to strip away the mythology that Hitler created around himself in “Mein Kampf,” and he also tries to look at this “mysterious, calamitous figure” not as a monster or madman, but as a human being with “undeniable talents and obviously deep-seated psychological complexes.”

        “In a sense,” he says in an introduction, “Hitler will be ‘normalized’ — although this will not make him seem more ‘normal.’ If anything, he will emerge as even more horrific.”

        Hitler, speaking from the grave through modern day Trump.

    • 1) I’ve never found Scott Adams funny. His schtick basically boils down to “I want people to put up with me being an entitled asshole.” The character in Dilbert with whom I suspect most people identify is Alice: she likes her work, is good at it, and doesn’t like people who don’t pull their weight. The fact that Adams doesn’t agree speaks volumes about what he must have been like as an employee.

      2) Scott Adams claims to be a trained persuader. He demonstrates this by being utterly unpersuasive. Perhaps he is not as knowedgeable about persuasion as he thinks he is.

      3) Scott Adams has also, famously, claimed that he’s so smart that he can master any topic with an hour’s tuition. Really? I don’t know about your job, but my job required many years of training, not just an hour. I think this illustrates Adams’s attitude to what “mastering a skill” consists of.

      Also, I want to buy him ballet lessons. Adams, if you’re reading this, I will happily pay for you to study ballet for an hour if you will then dance Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake for me at a masterful level.

      • flypusher says:

        Dilbert did have some amusing moments, I’ll give Adams that. Agree that Alice totally rocks and I want colleagues just like her. But 1 hour to mastery?? That’s Trump-level delusional. I’ve tried my hand at a number of skills, from music to martial arts. Just to get basic competence requires so much focus and practice. Even someone who is a genius at something isn’t going excell at everything.

      • 1mime says:

        Trump is not just delusional, he is a hypocrite on steroids….(as noted on a post-debate panel discussion, Trump is the only known presidential candidate who released health records including his testosterone level…..)

      • flypusher says:

        Rumor has it that Maples cheated on Donnie with one of the bodyguards. So what does that say about him? Small “hands”?

      • 1mime says:

        More Trump employees are speaking out on his sexist views.

      • bubbabobcat says:

        “One hour mastery”? Oh that is absolutely perfect. I challenge Scott Adams to take a one hour hang gliding class and then jump solo off a 500 – 1,000 foot mountain. I’ll even pay for whatever the cost is from whomever he wants to learn from. Better yet, launch a hang glider (solo) from atop a speeding pickup truck with same “one hour mastery”. I guarantee you there will not be one peep heard from Mr. Adams ever again. But someone will have to cleanup the sloppy splat he leaves behind.

        Oh and by the way, I have done both after over a year of training and do not feel like I “mastered” a thing. Guess I’m just not as bright as Adams. Stupid me. But I am still alive.

  23. Bobo Amerigo says:

    In other news, I wonder how we’re going to deal with Russia.

    They’re still bombing the hell out of Aleppo, not to mention any group Syria’s nogoodnik identifies as an radical enemy of the state.


  24. Bobo Amerigo says:

    I’m liking this wapo article:

    It has a little round up of the impact of the beauty queen portion of the debate.

    They probably don’t have time to do so, but I hope Clinton’s campaign take time to enjoy their success.

    • 1mime says:

      I liked this data point mentioned in your link:

      “Experts predicted there would be a big dip in viewers after the first half hour, but what’s most striking about the overnight numbers was that most stayed with it for the full 90 minutes. That means they saw the final half hour, when the Machado exchange happened. ”

      Sniff, sniff….so sad….

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        mime, you’re so emotional.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        My fellow Hispanics loved the debate. They gleefully talk of it as if it were a boxing match. They are proud of Mrs. Clinton for putting Mr. Trump in his place.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        You’ve gotta hand it to Mr. Trump for making politics exciting and interesting (and scary) to the formerly apathetic.

      • objv says:

        With the Russians hacking, Hillary coughing (when she’s not barking), and mime and Trump both sniffling, I’m fearing the cold and flu season has hit. This might be a good time to head to the medicine cupboard for a Zinc lozenge. 🙂

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        Bitterness becomes you, non-obj.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        OV, dahling, I must say you look smashingly deplorable today!

        You are an adorable deplorable.

      • objv says:

        Why thank-you, Tutt, daah-linck (using my best Melania accent).

        I love being adorably deplorable!

        Well off to put on my bunny slippers and put the kettle on for some hot tea. I better keep my immune system strong. Some of the folks here appear to be sickly.

      • objv says:

        Bobo, I’m not bitter. I try to become better. 🙂 I am an unusually upbeat and happy person – sometimes annoyingly so.

        Like you, I am from Ohio. I grew up in Cleveland at the tail end of the baby boom. I went to a school that was roughly half African-American during fourth and fifth grade. Unlike Lifer’s tales of woe from the South, I drank from the same water fountains, used the same restrooms, took the same bus and had gym class with my African-American counterparts. My family moved to the lily white suburbs when I was in sixth grade. With a growing family (five kids) space was becoming quite tight in our 800 square foot house, so we moved to the burbs and closer to our church and German-American friends.

        I do not claim that there wasn’t any racism in Cleveland. There was quite a bit, but it was not institutionalized like in some parts of the South. Racism seemed to be mostly a problem with older people. Those of my generation had basically moved on.

        And, yes, this did cause conflict when some of my friends started to date African Americans or Hispanics. In most, but not all cases, the parents adjusted – especially when grandchildren were born.

  25. Sir Magpe De Crow says:

    There is stupid, dumb and then there is next level idiocy of the kind I never knew existed.
    Today’s star moron is perhaps Melissa Adamson, police officer in Pennsylvania (lovely looking state by the way).

    “Pennsylvania police officer fired for writing racial slur in uniformed selfie”

    Posting on Snapchat a pic of yourself in uniform with the text “I’m the law today n*gger.” is a good way of throwing away a sweet police officer’s pension coming to you in about 20 years.

    The story gets better (no it doesn’t)…

    “She called the photo “a stupid mistake” — and insisted she’s not a racist.”
    “Everyone that knows me knows I don’t have a racist bone in my body,” she said.”

    Can I please be allowed to be doubtful of this claim. Or this strange phenomenon of “racism without racists”.

    She may not have a racist bone in her body, but I have to imagine some of her cartilage is awfully bigoted…

    I am sorry Mr. Ladd, but I think the Jim Crow generation may not be our biggest concern right now. I am starting to get freaked out by their grand kids.

  26. Sir Magpe De Crow says:

    One causal thought that has been bouncing in my noggin the past two days.
    The complaints by those on the right that there was horrible bias against Trump… by Lester Holt.

    Lester Freaking Holt people.

    Mr. Holt who apparently is a registered Republican, who seems to me as easy going and unthreatening as a half hour yoga session featuring the music of smooth jazz saxophonist David Sanborn.

    What makes the verbal dress down of him even worse is that Trump was initially praiseworthy of him after the debate, but that ended with the mounting criticism of his debate performance over the past two days.

    Like a vampire, Trump finds no need to look into a mirror.

    Looks like the far right and the brigades of Trumpers have found a new “black guy scapegoat” for their hero’s failings as Obama’s presidency is drawing to a close.

    • Bobo Amerigo says:

      Sir Magpie, I think Lester Holt did okay in a very difficult situation. tRump interrupted him, interrupted Hillary…Holt kept the debate together without becoming part of it.

      I wonder how the forthcoming debate monitors are feeling right now.

      • 1mime says:

        Bobo, I’ve given the Lester Holt criticism a great deal of thought and here’s how I feel. Trump – by interrupting both Clinton and Holt repeatedly, talking way beyond the two minute limit, by using inappropriate and incoherent commentary – hurt himself. Not with his base, who appear to think there is nothing too crass for Trump to ever be criticized for, but with people who either were undecided or not enthusiastic in their support for Clinton. Holt did as good a job as anyone can with a man like Trump who refuses to respect and follow the debate rules.

        Trump’s rambling helped the voters of America and the world see what an ass he is. His lack of personal control clearly showed in the prestigious presidential debate, and affirmed all the bad things people had heard about him and saw in the GOP primary debates. This man is not going to change, he lacks the dignity, composure, civility, temperament and judgement to be POTUS.

        The problem was never with Lester Holt, the problem was with Donald Trump. 84 million people go to watch him self-destruct. He finally ran up against a “reality” he couldn’t change.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:

        I agree. He let the debaters reveal themselves.

  27. Sir Magpe De Crow says:

    I have discussed this issue before, looks like I regretfully will do it again. Being a minority, male and having a disability (such as having a severe mental health issue) should not be an automatic death sentence.

    How can a person comply with a “peace” officer’s demands if they have a condition that impairs their ability to communicate or understand others?

    There is a good reason why U.S. soldiers in foreign countries don’t typically pop off rounds into crowds of citizens who are angry about the occupation of their country and speak a different language (examples Iraq & Afghanistan).

    Why can’t we have that level of restraint and training with certain police departments?

    Did we really empty those horrible mental asylums and institutions of the 70’s and 80’s just to move those former/future residents into a cemetery for paupers?

    This latest incident in California needs to result in nationwide reform. A settlement to the family is in my opinion worthless if that doesn’t happen. Have you ever tried hugging a pile of money on a holiday like Christmas?

    It is not the same as embracing your child I can assure you.

    I continue to be appalled by our society’s treatment of both respective groups. These people are falling through the cracks and winding up six feet under.

    Reading this story is like hearing the sound of pure heartbreak.

    “At one point, the woman yelled, “Oh, my God, you killed my brother” several times.”
    “I called for help. I didn’t call you guys to kill him,” she told officers as she shrieked.”

    • Sir Magpe De Crow says:

      One more thing. The officers didn’t have body cameras.

      So I must ask this question…

      Why is it easier for police departments to acquire quickly military grade weapons (like 50 caliber sniper rifles, armored vehicles that can deflect IED explosions and night vision googles) but it takes far longer for them to acquire and implement body cameras for police officers, especially troubled police departments who are one shooting death away from a full blown city riot?

      The citizens who were present once again are the only source for video recordings of a controversial shooting incident.

      This phenomenon of inept or non-existent video documentation of police actions is beyond pathetic…

      It’s actually dangerous.

      • 1mime says:

        It’s not difficult to understand, Sir Crow. It’s easier to shoot first and explain later than it is to be recorded and have to justify actions.

    • 1mime says:

      In a nation driven and rewarded for mental prowess, mental health issues are problems we’d rather ignore. I am especially saddened about our troops who are returning from war theaters with mental issues and not receiving help despite their personal risk to protect the nation. It, of course, extends to the broader population. We are not less of a nation for acknowledging we have huge problems in this area; we are a better, stronger nation for helping those with these limitations. Too few resources are devoted to helping the mentally ill.

  28. flypusher says:

    I just saw a Trump ad on TV. It’s not October yet, and TX is supposed to be reliably red, so is this a wee bit early? Is this a sign that some people are getting a bit worried?

    I’m sure no one will be surprised if I tell you that it was 100% substance-free.

    • 1mime says:

      Clinton has picked up two interesting and important endorsements from unusual sources:

      “Hillary Clinton is the only choice to move America ahead.” So says the editorial board of The Arizona Republic, which rolled out its official thumbs up for HRC last night. Why is this more notable than, say, The New York Times endorsing Clinton? Because the AZ Republic has never endorsed a Democrat over a Republican, and it has been publishing since 1890.
      “The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified. That’s why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president. … The challenges the United States faces domestically and internationally demand a steady hand, a cool head and the ability to think carefully before acting. Hillary Clinton understands this. Donald Trump does not. Clinton has the temperament and experience to be president. Donald Trump does not.”
      As my colleagues (and Arizona native) Hadas Gold notes: “Clinton has racked up her fair share of non-traditional endorsements from newspapers. Last week, The Cincinnati Enquirer, which by its own admission has backed Republican candidates for president ‘for almost a century,’ also endorsed Clinton. Earlier this month, The Dallas Morning News endorsed the former secretary of state, making her the first Democrat that newspaper has endorsed in over 75 years.”

      This is an important assist for Clinton – especially in OH, but more interesting in TX and AZ.

    • Republicans are rightly worried about TX because Trump is doing absolutely pathetic there for a Republican. We’ve only had three polls out there from September, but each and every one had Trump only up by single digits in a state that Romney won by more than fifteen points in ’12. One Survey Monkey poll actually had Clinton and Trump tied.

      True, the only way for Clinton to take the Lone Star State is for Trump to lose it and that’s not a proud accomplishment by any stretch of the imagination, but it’s a very real possibility nonetheless.

      Needless to say, if Texas is in play this November, by whatever circumstances, this is not going to be a remotely close election.

      • 1mime says:

        I don’t really care about TX this election – give me OH, PA, NH, FL, NC….and I’ll be a happy camper (-;

        (I don’t want much, do I?)

  29. Sir Magpie de Crow says:

    Is it alright for me to admit that when I see Paul Ryan’s face some days I feel like I want to punch him?

    Not to do real harm mind you, but to somehow wake him the F*** UP. To shake him from the haze of a clearly conflicted mind. To help him find the person he may have once been.

    He is clearly intelligent and he can debate/argue, but is he blind now? Is he hard of hearing? Because I am struggling to find a reason, a logical basis for him to say Trump’s debate performance met expectations.

    Why is Mr. Ryan trying to convince the rest of us that the reality we are seeing and can touch doesn’t exist? Doesn’t have actual tangibility?!!

    Why is a producer of “textbook examples of racism” like Trump still a better option than Clinton?

    One of the surrogates for Trump is Carl Paladino? He is a former New York gubernatorial candidate. Does anyone no what that mutha****er once proposed.

    He once wanted to relocate welfare recipients to prison dorms. Yeah… contemplate that s***.

    “Instead of handing out the welfare checks, we’ll teach people how to earn their check. We’ll teach them personal hygiene … the personal things they don’t get when they come from dysfunctional homes.”

    “You have to teach them basic things – taking care of themselves, physical fitness. In their dysfunctional environment, they never learned these things.”

    “Paladino cites the positives of moving poor people into prison dorms — they have access to “basketball courts, bathroom facilities, toilet facilities.” What’s not to like about that?”

    I remember talking to black people about that election who lived in the state and their position was “If you are a person of color, and one of the many people to have avoided jail/prison, an early grave or had achieved some personal achievement in education… why the hell would anyone want to go to prison simply because they are poor.”

    F***in A.

    Does someone like Paul Ryan expect people not to notice the bedfellows Trump keeps (and their awful histories)?

    If Trump is elected as President, Carl “Gulags for Poor Coloreds” Paladino could conceivably become a czar of education, head of a civil rights division or hell… head of the federal prison system.

    These are the stakes at hand. A fact I still struggle to explain to certain people. But I’ll keep working at it.

    But lets get back to the merits of Ryan’s review of that goat***k awful debate performance by Trump this week…

    There was no overall positive review one could logically give about Trump.

    He didn’t equal or go toe to toe with Clinton. She baited him like some character who baits Marty McFly (from the Back to the Future) into doing something self destructive by merely calling him a “chicken”.

    He fell for it like the moths outside my home, the insects that decide night after night that they prefer to fly around our garage light until their wings burn to cinders even though it is clearly not the sun.

    Trump is that programmed for over reaction. Real nasty trait for a would be P.O.T.U.S. to have.

    His post debate arguments that a Latino Miss Universe contestant from 20 years ago and Rosie O’Donnell were indeed fat (and or pigs) is an awful pointless discussion. Yet he persists.

    He has even blamed a microphone for his woes. That was a more pathetic excuse than “The dog ate my homework” or “What could I do? She threw herself at me!”

    Personally Trump post-debate comments make my brain cells hurt when contemplating they were made by an authentic American Presidential nominee.

    And yet still people are saying he won.

    I am beginning to think that the moral wasteland occupied by Ryan, Priebus and Ted Cruz would have seduced them to support David Duke himself if he won the nomination process.

    Does anyone here doubt that in this election cycle the venerable GOP/conservative movement has been reduced to the unthinkable? The rancid reasoning of “Yes, he’s a Nazi… but he’s our Nazi!”

    • flypusher says:

      Ryan is going through the motions. Yes, he is more than smart enough to know just how badly Trump performed, but those poor rich people are oppressed by TAXES! You don’t know their pain!

      </Sarcasm off

      Here's what I would love to see happen when the new Congress convenes in Jan (and yes, I know it won't). I want to Dems in the House to agree (without consulting the GOPers) to all vote for Ryan for Speaker. That cuts off any Freedum Caucus shenanigans, and reminds Ryan that there is a way out from under their thumbs. I think he's too rigidly partisan to reach across the isle and bargain, so this is probably no more than an epic troll.

      • 1mime says:

        Fly, Dems already come to Ryan’s aid when it is needed. Ryan doesn’t “want” Democrat’s support. His personal agenda has nothing for Dems. He will never accomplish it without Republican support. He has already proven where his principles are so why look to him for anything? Is he the “best” Republican leader Dems can hope for in a majority red House? I don’t know, but he has disappointed me by throwing away any pretense of principle.

        The Senate GOP leadership isn’t any better. For the unschooled here, this is how heavy hitters get their personal agendas accomplished in Congress. Money talks.

        From WaPo:

        “The day after it became public that billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson gave $20 million to a super PAC with close ties to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), three GOP senators introduced legislation that would effectively ban online gambling — a measure Adelson has long pushed for.
        The super PAC, the Senate Leadership Fund, backs Senate Republicans and is run by McConnell’s former chief of staff Steven Law.”

        An inside job all.the.way. I don’t oppose debate on online gambling – don’t partake myself – but debate of issues like this is appropriate. But when you throw $20M onto the heap of dung and play it as democracy,

        Chris has stated that money in politics is not the problem. Unregulated money in politics is.

      • flypusher says:

        1mime, I completely understand that Ryan doesn’t want Dem support- that’s one of the reasons I’m suggesting it.

    • 1mime says:

      Well said, Sir Crow. What these people – the politicians and those who have made a conscious decision to support Trump have in common, is they have not only abrogated reason, they have lost their moral core. That includes Ryan, unfortunately. Neither money nor intelligence eliminates stupidity and willful ignorance. You will never convince die hard supporters of the error in their thinking but of the danger to our country and world, because their decisions are emotionally driven, not rationally formed. It’s as much about who “they” are as a person as any justification of their choice of what they believe. It’s sad, but it’s their reality and I have concluded, it is a fruitless endeavor. Move on.

    • duncancairncross says:

      Why are you surprised?
      Everything that Trump has said Ryan has said (but in a “nicer” way) – there is not a tiny thread of difference between their policies
      And both of them are based on made up numbers and strange arithmetic

  30. 1mime says:

    Few people know that the National Museum of African American History and Culture was signed into law by G.W. Bush. This photo offers a powerful message to all about acceptance and forgiveness and appreciation. What a wonderful photograph.

  31. Griffin says:

    But didn’t these voters already accumulate the best benefits to this system? Most of them got cheap homes, a pension, education, etc. well before the time Obama was in his second term. I would think it would be white guys about ten to fifteen years younger who would feel under attack, the seventy year olds already got to take advantage of most of the benefits of that system.

    • Bobo Amerigo says:

      Just so you know, not all 70-year-olds had/have pensions. Of my three sibs, only one has a pension, the kind provided to a dreaded government worker.

      Some of us worked our way through college — more than once.

      We’re not perfect. But for about half a century, we’ve flexed with every bobble in the economy, hoping to stay afloat. Some times we didn’t, sometimes we did. This is true of younger generations, too.

      Tuition costs are simply ridiculous for any country that wants an educated populace. If school debt prevents college-educated citizens from buying a home, that is even more ridiculous.

      It worthwhile to look at historical and generational forces. But too much generalizing makes for poor conversation and poor solutions for problems.

      • Stephen says:

        You tell them Bobo. Even in the golden fifties and sixties most workers did not have pensions or significant retirement savings. Yes I was one of those dreaded government workers with a pension plan. But the job I had was very much in demand and I had to compete hard for it and produce for decades to keep it. Much schooling on my time and dime. Maybe jobs like mine are protected by Unions up north but in the scab south that is not even remotely true. We surely see eye to eye on education. It is the key to redeeming the middle class and opening a path for the working poor to move up to middle class. One of the very few reasons I would come out of retirement would be to help pay for my grandchildren’s college cost.

      • Griffin says:

        Sure sorry if I seem like im overgeneralizing (though we’re talking about a pretty large swath of the population so it’s tough to avoid) but my point is just that these voters still generally aren’t competing (or at least shouldnt be) for jobs as many of them are retired and eithet live off of either savings or family, I would think it would be younger white guys who are generally more active in the job market who would be angrier.

      • 1mime says:

        I think you are correct that the majority of the really angry white men are those who are still of working age. I know several who are employed and are angry at government for all the taxes and other demands government imposes. (which they also benefit from, but, that’s a bridge too far for them to comprehend or admit)….

    • 1mime says:

      Yeah, and those 70 year olds don’t want to give any of it up, either. Nor do they want their children or grandchildren to have to split the pie up into ever smaller pieces in order to accommodate all the “extra” people – by which I mean, minorities.

      • Stephen says:

        People need to be educated about economics. When you add new workers you also add new consumers. The demand they generate means more workers needed. The pie actually grows. Wealth is generated. People do not feel like this is happening because most of the gain goes to top economic tier. Raising taxes actually will encourage rich people to invest additional wealth instead of putting it into rent seeking activities. It is either use it or have it taxed. One of the reasons the Fed has kept interest rates so low is so money is more likely to be invested for actual yield instead at the no gain when you factor in low interest rates and inflation.

      • Bobo Amerigo says:


        A Trump-supporting friend who runs a $15M business sees everything, especially health care, as zero sum. If others get some, there’ll be none for him. I don’t know how he got that way.

        I suspect white male privilege plays a role but plumbing that would be deep research.

      • tuttabella says:

        Bobo, selfishness crosses racial, gender, and party lines.

  32. unarmedandunafraid says:

    I was born late 1946, and your blog is spot on. I grew up in a small midwest town where there were no Black families.

    I now know there were racists all around me, but again, it never came up in conversation. Of course, in high school in a different town, I had Black classmates, I moved away and had Black friends and a Black teacher.

    So, I watch a lot of MSNBC. Lately I was able to step back from myself and observe my reaction to certain a new black face. Minutes into the conversation, I was surprised at the wisdom and knowledge this person had. It was clear to me that the world that Chris describes affects my expectations when I see a Black face. Expectations brought on by living in an entirely White world in my youth. Even after all these years and experiences.

  33. Bobo Amerigo says:

    I was born in 1946. I remember the first black person I ever saw when I was 5 in Findlay, Ohio, where I was with my mom and my beloved but extremely racist aunt.

    I stared at a black woman shopping in the department store. She looked angry with me. True, I was being rude but I didn’t realize it and no adult pointed it out because they were talking about something else.

    When it came time to harvest tomatoes, cars with Texas plates could be seen all over town. Mexicans picked the tomatoes and packed them in open baskets that became pyramids on tractor wagons. Those who worked in the canning factory lived in a rude, smelly shack village with outdoor toilets. Just driving by was unpleasant. I don’t know how workers on the farms were housed.

    Conditions were so bad for the migrant workers that labor organizers appeared a few years later. I blame the farmers who swore they’d never hire another Mexican for the pervasive tasteless, hard tomatoes, picked by machine, in our grocery stores.

    Over time some migrants workers settled in our town. My sister dated one good looking boy and his sister was my roommate when I moved to Findlay to work. A Mexican restaurant popped into existence.

    My story is long, and race is intertwined, so I’ll not go on.

    I’m just not sure that end of the Jim Crow generation will improve things. Many people were/are completely thrown by our black president and they’re not all dying anytime soon.

    We’ve all been told a lot of lies about one another. Overcoming them seems a matter of individual effort that somehow must culminate in a more universal justice.

    • tuttabellamia says:

      I’m Mexican-American, born in Houston in 1966 and raised in the Houston Heights. Like the people at the bottom of this thread, I also grew up surrounded by the pop culture of TV and music of the early 1970s which portrayed Blacks and Hispanics as the cool and glamorous set (Soul Train, Blaxploitation films, EZ Reader on the Electric Company, Susan and Gordon on Sesame Street). I was also drawn to nice, quiet but bland White people like Mr. Rogers.

      My neighbors consisted of elderly, well-off White people who adored me but used the N word, whose kids had fled to the suburbs, Mexican-American families, and poor Whites. I got along great with poor Whites. They loved my mom, called her Mamá like I did, with the stress on the second syllable, and tried to learn Spanish. I admit I felt rather sorry for the poor Whites because they didn’t have A/C, their homes smelled of cigarettes, and their moms were not very motherly.

      I did not encounter any ethnic snubs on a personal level until I was in Catholic junior high school, when faced with the well-off White kids of the people who had fled to the suburbs. In my personal experience, they were the racists, not the poor Whites.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        I entered elementary school in the Houston Heights in 1972. The student population was a healthy mix of White, Black, and “Mexican.” The principal was Black, and several teachers were Black, including my own first grade teacher. The girl who won the spelling bee every year was Black. Not too bad for Houston in 1972.

    • 1mime says:

      And, time, Bobo. Time. Too much time, but it will come.

  34. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    Say it ain’t so!

    Is this a plea to throw in the towel… to surrender?

    Trump surrogate and gargoyle impersonator Rudy Giuiliani has some advice for is bff. “Tactical retreat” or “sour grapes” depending on your perspective

    “Rudy Giuliani says Donald Trump should skip remaining two presidential debates”

  35. Jana Leland says:

    Please–PLEASE don’t let me slip onto the third rail, when you change! If you are asking for voluntary change over, I may miss your notification! Please change me over, now. Shalom and GOD Bless you and this venue. –jana

  36. 1mime says:

    If you aren’t “burned out” on the presidential campaign, Frontline (PBS) tonight is hosting a documentary on the two major candidates in the race. Frontline is highly respected for their documentaries therefore I think you can expect a non-partisan, in-depth presentation. DVR it for later viewing if you don’t have time to view it tonight. Check your local PBS schedule for time.

  37. tuttabellamia says:

    Lifer, I would think it’s not just about age but also about geography. In smaller towns, in certain parts of the country, certain belief systems will be around for a long time, with sons and daughters following in the footsteps of their parents.

  38. rebecca mccaughan says:

    Will the goplifer articles still be accessible on the new site?

  39. Stephen says:

    Good historical analysis and explains why so many white people over 70 are supporting Trump. Something I first saw last week in a Upshot article in the NYT on a profile of Florida voters.

    White voters in my age range 50 to 70 are pretty evenly divided. Before age 50 Trump support falls off the cliff. My generation when we came of age was were the changes happen. We , boomers pushed the changes. I took in high school the same Ecology course taught in Universities.The Environment Movement gather great momentum in the sixties and seventies.

    The last few years of high school we got Black Teachers and soon after I graduated black students. Our political leaders of the time were wise and incrementally brought the changes into our communities. Government generally led change and business usually followed. Our companies, government including elective officials look now like our community.

    If you want a view of a minority majority community check out Orlando. We have been that for several decades. Both the wife and me are from the deep south and have turned away from old style thinking on race. I have Hispanic and Black relatives so when I hear Trump spew racial hate rhetoric get very offended. We generally think that we all have to work for life rooting out bigoted thinking. Thankfully my grandchildren are confuse by bigotry.

    I never got that special white uplift having to compete and work hard to climb any social ladder. But really do not need it, with a level playing field my family and I will do just fine. So things like providing higher education and support while you are in school training are very attractive to me. There can be enough opportunity for every competent adult willing to work for it if we provide a path for all. A lot of your ideas Lifer would be described as liberal by the radical right which would call people like us RINOs. Ignore them as that thinking is dying out and is on the wrong side of history. Let us know when you start your new blog as most of us I am sure will follow you.

    • Rev says:

      I am age 70 but have been progressive since I can remember. Age doesn’t have anything to do with it. It is core values and beliefs that drive people, for good or for ill. Yes, we have had different life experiences that other generations, but it is the core that counts.

      • Stephen says:

        Rev. I started out very conservative. And through my life have progress more and more progressive except fiscally. I would of been comfortable in the Republican party of the fifties and sixties. Not so much now. Part of what changed me is the propensity to seek out others different than me. I like seeing different perspectives. It broadens you and makes you more humane.

  40. RobA says:

    Great post. I hope the message resonates over there.

  41. Peter Castaldi says:

    Chris, Thanks for the 100th time for fearless truth!!! I am 75 years old, participated in civil rights activity as a college student, and white with a family of color, and know what Chris means. Even for those of us who saw the evils of racism, it is hard to let go of unearned benefits. BUT many of us are making that effort, and are helping our age mates to do the same. Chris, thanks!! . . . your commentary has lighted up my last two years. Peter Castaldi

  42. Justin says:

    Before this site goes away (and I will definitely follow to the next one!) I wanted to thank Chris and just about the entire commentariat for what you’ve done here. I’ve lurked for a long time (years) and it’s been a true “light in the dark” in the postmodern hellscape that is current political life. You all give hope that all is not lost.

    • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

      I must say it is a damn shame this site’s name has to change because of the aftermath of a political hurricane of flaming stupidity that is known as the Donald.

      • pedneuro says:

        True, somehow I like the name “goplifer”.

      • 1mime says:

        I think if you asked Chris, he would acknowledge this has been a long time coming. Trump is merely the manifestation of Republican dysfunction…Trump does get credit for being the final straw, but the GOP has been in a self-destruction spiral for years.

  43. Sir Magpie De Crow says:

    Speaking of the golden age of American racism and racial segregation…

    There was a recent mass shooting in Houston. 9 injured. Suspect dead (killed by police).

    But I suspect the media coverage will be limited, no innocents (thankfully) have died plus he is not a disgruntled black military vet who hates cops… or Muslim.

    So nothing to see here folks, move along. Move along!

    “Lawyer Wearing Nazi Paraphernalia Wounds Nine in Houston Shooting Rampage”

    • Sir Magpie De Crow says:

      The shooter was apparently of Indian descent. I guess assimilation into American/Western culture (esp. gun culture) for first or second generation immigrants can sometimes be a double edged sword…

    • goplifer says:

      Proof that America is truly an open and welcoming environment. Work hard, get an education, and your children have the same opportunity as any suburban white kid to become a psycho mass-shooter.

      • Fair Economist says:

        That’s a classic!

      • pedneuro says:

        ps: Sorry, not the appropriate occasion for the smily, especially given that I am from India myself, but your response did make me chuckle. I specialize in dark humor, btw.

    • I’ve read reports that the shooter was dressed as a Nazi. This seems somewhat puzzling – can anyone confirm that or offer speculation as to what that means in American terms?

      • RobA says:

        Hard to say. The behavior is consistent with that of an ACTUAL mentally ill lone wolf.

        But everyone knows that only old white men can be such, so I dunno.

      • flypusher says:

        The nazi stuff gets you attention. So does invoking Islamist terrorist groups. Many of these head-cases are motivated by the prospect of infamy, even if it’s posthumous.

      • 1mime says:

        Yes, Nazi dress and insignia were worn by the shooter as confirmed in police reports. Investigation is ongoing to sort out any affiliation/writings/etc that affirm ties to this belief.

      • At the risk of asking a very obvious question: What does a Nazi uniform mean in America? What sort of people wear them?

        I know what they mean here, but it’s probably a bit different.

      • 1mime says:

        I am hardly an authority in this area, but my educated guess would be those who identify as white supremacists.

      • flypusher says:

        “At the risk of asking a very obvious question: What does a Nazi uniform mean in America? What sort of people wear them?”

        I associate that with white supremacists/ Aryan nation types.

      • tuttabellamia says:

        From the BBC link I posted above:

        “The Nazi use of the swastika stems from the work of 19th Century German scholars translating old Indian texts, who noticed similarities between their own language and Sanskrit. They concluded that Indians and Germans must have had a shared ancestry and imagined a race of white god-like warriors they called Aryans.”

      • tuttabellamia says:

        Also from the BBC link I posted above:

        “In the ancient Indian language of Sanskrit, swastika means “well-being”. The symbol has been used by Hindus, Buddhists and Jains for millennia and is commonly assumed to be an Indian sign.”

      • goplifer says:

        All true. Their swastika is usually portrayed bending in the opposite direction from the Nazi symbol.

        Incidentally, it was also used by the Navajo.

    • Bobo Amerigo says:

      The thing is, there was a warning this guy was becoming unhinged.

      He confronted some roofers at his apartment complex with a rifle, reports local radio.

      Had there been some type of intercession, the perhaps nine people would not be wounded.

      But there’s no mechanism, no number for the psychic break investigation squad to determine if he was more than average squirrel-y.

  44. irapmup says:

    You may be right and that is our last Jim Crow generation, but from a perspective that is a bit older than Mr Trump and most of his followers there is what appears to me as a hangover from a parental drunk that more than a few are suffering.

    The DTs which some among us suffer were brought on by rotgut promises made, but never kept, a ginned up fear of an enemy which has never in fact existed and outright lies to cover what can be politely referred to as murder and theft.

    Few of our elected leaders and many less behind the thrones we think do not exist in our so called democracy have been honest with us and they are tossed out as soon as the actual powers regrouped to drop another heavier hammer packed with lies and fear.

    Since our inception the unscrupulous found among us realised thr way to control is through lies which when accepted led to control and the easiest lie is the promise of a better life even if that promise could only be fulfilled after death. Injustice? Poverty? Hunger? All solved if you are faithful to belief and don’t rock the boat for the meek will inherit the earth.

    That message still resonates and is constantly reinforced through fear brought about by the literal dispersion of death visited on the weakest communityes of our so called “united” society.

    However inadvertantly the shiny electronic toys which have become indispensible means of communication have brought uncensored communication allowing people throughout the world to see and know without rumor what is actually going on in parts of the world that were formerly state controlled rumors until this exposure.

    Our citizenry, like growing numbers of citizen’s throughout the world no longer falls quite as hard for the lies and is demanding real change.

    We may not see it, but our kids will.

    ps don’t worry about a blade between the ribs, nobody gets out alive.

  45. 1mime says:

    Super post, Chris. Quite a history lesson, as well….I hope that the different readership at Forbes will be open-minded and learn from the lessons you are offering. Well done.

  46. I was born in 1970. My first look at the world (through pop television) was shaped through a unique moment in pop culture… TV has never been as liberal as it was in the 70’s. Norman Lear and Alan Alda were my early teachers. My generation was the first to be raised from birth knowing that white people had a ridiculous amount of privilege, and that it was NOT a good thing.

    • johngalt says:

      I was also born in 1970, in the South, and agree with most of what you say. Hell, I’m a product of white flight. But to say our generation was the first to recognize white privilege is only part of the story. I have some relatives and friends about my age who still fail to see this.

      • flypusher says:

        I’m a few years older- on that Boomer/GenX cusp. I think people our age are also on a cusp when it comes to attitudes on race, some lean towards the Jim Crow attitudes, some towards the Civil Rights Movement attitudes. We grew up seeing that clash. Probably when most of the Millenials hit their 40s & 50s is when Jim Crow is finally marginalized for good.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 456 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: