The Critics Respond, Part Fifty-One

Norrington: No additional shot nor powder, a compass that doesn’t point north, (looks at Jack’s sword) and I half expected it to be made of wood. You are without doubt the worst pirate I’ve ever heard of.

Jack Sparrow: But you have heard of me.

The story thus far: Your humble author writes about CNN’s Trump obsession, suggesting that the overuse of the word “racist” renders it essentially ineffective and therefore inadvertently aids/abets the future appearance of actual, no-holds-barred racism. I do not call President Trump a racist, but I also do not make any attempt to exonerate him of CNN’s charges. I write the whole piece with an eye towards being value-neutral, neither pro-Trump nor anti-Trump. If you go back and read the thing, it’s almost offensively milquetoast at times.

And this is what I get: a flat-out statement that I am a “twisted and hypocritical bigot” because I refuse to… what? Demand Trump’s impeachment? Register as a Democrat? Throw a Molotov cocktail at a propane tank?

My first impulse, upon reading this Tweet, was to construct an elaborate and intricate defense of my, ah, non-bigot-ness. I’ve trained, hired, and promoted women, gay people, people of color, and the auto industry’s first transgender author on the Web. For fifteen years of my life, I operated a variety of businesses with African-American partners. I’ve been the only white man in a band, I’ve traveled cross-country with “diverse” athletes. From 1999 to 2002 I had a rotating crew of South American BMX racers living with me, at my expense, so they could take a shot at competing in the United States. My first wife was Jewish and I was married by a rabbi. You will search in vain for a legitimate example of me professionally or personally denying someone an opportunity because of their race, creed, or color. For fuck’s sake, I drove for the “Pakistan Express” race team and had the star and crescent of Islam on my team clothing!

I could say all of that on Twitter in response to this dude. I could get testimonials, character witnesses, whatever. Now here’s the question. Do you think any of that will cause him to reverse his accusation? Keep in mind that his accusation is far more damaging to my personal and professional life than, say, an accusation of pedophilia would be. If someone said I was out there molesting kids, most people would answer, “Is there any evidence?” Accusations of bigotry, however, require no evidence — and they are impossible to refute with facts. You’re trying to prove a negative, which is a losing game.

Now here’s where things get meta. The more often I see accusations like this flung towards either myself or other people whom I know to be generally sane and open-minded folks, the less credibility I am likely to attach to the accusations when I hear them regarding someone I don’t know. And the less credibility I, and others, assign to the accusations, the louder and more vitriolic they will become. Which, in turn, will cause other people to disregard them.

I’ll give the Twitter poster in question credit for this: he was at least self-aware enough not to claim that I was a “racist”, given that my whole column to which he was responding concerned the dissipation of that word’s power. Instead, he chose “bigot”. Was he tacitly acknowledging my lack of racism, choosing instead to claim that I oppress people based on other characteristics? Or did he just rotate his List Of Powerful Words forward one notch and use the next one that popped up? And what makes me “twisted”? How am I “hypocritical”, exactly? Are those just the next two words on his list?

There will be a reckoning from this type of hysterical behavior, and it will happen when the next generation of kids grows up with this kind of chatter as just so much background noise. If you want a preview of the future, think about how seriously society as a whole, and media companies in particular, used to take accusations of salaciousness or obscenity in the movies, music, and books distributed to the public. Elvis being censored, John Updike having to take the F-word out of Rabbit, Run. That sort of thing. Now fire up your streaming music service and give a listen to the top R&B or rap music. Imagine that sort of “progression” occurring when it comes to discussion of race, faith, or sexual orientation in this country. In truth, you needn’t imagine it at all; the blueprint was laid down ninety years ago. The more willing we are to demonize anyone who disagrees with us, the more eager we are to “unperson” them, the more bloodthirsty we are when calling for violence against the people we have “unpersoned”… the more likely we are to end up as the victims of an authoritarian regime. It was street violence, largely promoted by “antifacists”, which put the actual Nazis in power.

I could end this piece by asking you to act in moderation, where possible. Avoid slurs which reduce people to some sort of “Nazi” or “commie” caricature. Try to understand your opponent’s viewpoint, however imperfectly, before you respond. And understand that very few people are driven exclusively by hate or fear. The supporter of open borders loves, and fears for, the immigrant; his counterpart on the opposition loves, and fears for, his fellow Americans. Even if you consider Trump or Soros or AOC or the Koch brothers to be evil masterminds, the same is likely not true of the person on your street or in your school who agrees with some, or all, of their public positions. Let’s try to determine the American future in a legitimate and well-thought-out fashion rather than by shooting it out in the streets. Well, I could ask you to do all of that — but why would you take the advice of a bigot?

79 Replies to “The Critics Respond, Part Fifty-One”

  1. AvatarRoamer

    Honestly, Jack, I’m already well beyond ‘less credible’. Living in Seattle means dealing with this nonsense on a frequent basis, and by now accusations that lack attached hard evidence will result in my dropping the accusor from my friends or acquaintances. And I’m a lot less merciful professionally. IT Ops is already hard enough without dragging these sorts of distractions into the mix.

    Reply
  2. AvatarRonnie Schreiber

    Once you’ve decided that those whom you oppose are not just wrong but truly evil that mindset permits all sorts of mischief. Because of the shear bad faith on the part of leftists I’m having a harder and harder time thinking that they’re just wrong.

    Part of the problem is that many on the left attach what is accurately described as religiousity to their political values (and if they are nominally Christian or Jewish they will shape how they practice those faiths to fit into a progressive political framework), so when their politics are attacked they react as most people would when their deepest religious convictions are attacked.

    I’m just getting a little tired of being called a bad Jew (by Jewishly illiterate Jews) because I voted for someone with Jewish grandchildren.

    Reply
    • AvatarJeff Zekas

      Well stated, Ronnie. As Jack said, you can’t disprove a negative. I can say my best friend is black, that my girlfriend in college was Jewish, that my grandchildren are Hispanic, and none of that matters to the crazy dogmatists. Luckily, the boy who cried wolf has almost run its course.

      Reply
  3. AvatarLuke

    I think your point would be better received and more impactful if you focused equal attention on the President’s (and his party’s) all too frequent use of terms like “communist”, “America haters”, “al Qaeda lovers” and the like for people that disagree with him and his views on the future of our nation.

    I don’t know if the President is racist. I do know that he’s a master of using language that manipulates and provokes and that have special meaning to his most ardent supporters. The opposition is doing the same. They know how to amp up their true believers.

    None of this is helpful or conducive to a functioning democracy. And you’re right that if these terms are applied to everything they quickly mean nothing.

    Reply
    • Avataryamahog

      Come to Minneapolis, I’ll take you to the Somali neighborhoods that elected Omar and you can tell me how what they think of Islamic terrorism and communism. Here’s a hint – the Somalis haven’t got the message about the cultural melting pot or e pluribus unum.

      Reply
  4. Avataryamahog

    I’ve been worried about this trend of extremists mutually reinforcing each other, but this last month really has me concerned. Prior to this, it was mostly people calling each other Nazis and my own concern with that is concept inflation of ‘nazi’, at least when you call someone nazi as an insult you’re still reinforcing the message that the nazis were bad.

    In the last month, I’ve noticed that the left is starting to give their favored classes the moral standing of holocaust victims. I just really worry about a future in which kids grow up without recognition of the unique horrors of World War II. I don’t know what happens when a kid hears the message that the suffering an MS-13 member feels for traipsing across the border is comparable to what people felt when they were processed into death camps, but it’s not good.

    Reply
  5. AvatarFred Lee

    I don’t think you are racist or a bigot. What I do think, however, is that you intentionally ignore or, worse, try to justify racist and bigoted statements from President Trump.

    I’m no democrat, and I believe people who marched wearing pink vagina hats or whatever TF those were and yet ignored Hillary’s transgressions towards women are also hypocrites.

    But as a high school Republican and adult Libertarian, I find myself very disappointed at those who are willing to tolerate hate speech from the President because they, like congress-folk, value political party over country or their fellow citizens. Both sides of the aisle are guilty of this, but the Republicans (both elected and electors) have taken this to new heights in the last few years.

    Reply
    • Avatararbuckle

      “value political party over country or their fellow citizens.”

      So what is your answer here? Unfortunately, the political party at the head of government sets the policies that impact my life.
      If you give me the choice of a well-spoken statesmen advocating for racial reparations & student loan bailouts & a decriminalized border & the GND & bans on semiauto rifles or a boorish reality TV star that acts as a roadblock to all those things, then I’m picking the reality TV star even if his tweets don’t fill me with pride.

      Reply
    • Avatarsilentsod

      In all seriousness – is your charge of racism and being bigoted based on mind reading or is it the verbatim of what he said that left no alternative interpretations?

      I didn’t vote for the man, it annoys me I think I have to state that to establish I have no skin in the game as far as him being someone I consciously sided with, and I have difficulty seeing the racism or hatefulness in what he says (as opposed to what is reported about what he says).

      Reply
      • AvatarFred Lee

        There are always alternative interpretations. Ask any jury who has to decide that an argument from the defense (or prosecution) just doesn’t hold water. And the explanations given by Trump’s press folk, family, and Republican colleagues have run the gamut from outright lies, to increasingly strained attempts to explain outrageous statements, to denials that the statements ever occurred. So yes, there are alternative explanations and I find them unconvincing. We aren’t talking about one or two slip-ups. We’re talking about hundreds upon hundreds of statements.

        I honestly do not understand how a rational person can see the statements Trump makes frequently, whether it’s mocking the disabled, insulting POWs, telling American citizens to return to their crime ridden countries, defending white nationalists and conclude anything else about them. He is a rotten man, a rotten human being, to his core.

        I can understand those who acknowledge this fact, but claim that the only other option (Hillary Clinton) was worse. That’s a fair argument. While I believe that she is slightly less rotten than Trump, they are both crooked and horrible. What I cannot understand is those who don’t even acknowledge Trump’s transgressions against much of what our country stands for.

        Reply
        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

          I’m not here to defend Trump but in at least two of these cases (the disabled thing, the current Tweets) what he said and did is being deliberately edited and misrepresented. He told Ilhan Omar to “go fix your home country then come back and fix this one.” Which is not quite as its being said.

          Reply
          • Avatarpanatomic-x

            i think the racism accusation stems from this tweet from july 14:

            “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

            trump is referring to the gang of 4 congresswomen not just omar. the problem is that the other 3 congresswomen are american born. this has been interpreted to mean that they aren’t truly american because they’re not white. as far as i know, trump has not corrected himself on this point.

            the link to the full tweet is here:

          • AvatarIan Cooke

            “go fix your home country then come back and fix this one.”

            The only problem with this line of thinking is that it’s patently un-American. If a 10 year old kid from a failed state grows up to be an elected Representative in the United States Congress, well God/Allah/Vishnu/Buddha/Jobu/Alger bless America, no?

            Two people, both descended of immigrants, campaign on the idea that America must change– and Now. They critique culture, policies, and institutions with vigor. They win their respective races, and represent those who elected them with a lot of shit-stirring nonsense.

            It all sounds very normal to me, except the part where people outside the Minnesota 5th (pretend to) give a damn what that district’s representative says, about anything.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

            I think there are people who object to the fact that certain factions within the United States Government knowingly created a situation where there would be a critical mass of Somalis in what was previously a sleepy Midwestern area. We have a similar critical mass in Columbus, Ohio; the area in which they have resettled has more violent crime in five square miles than the rest of the county combined. These critical masses then elect members to represent them, which is extremely American; that’s how you got Irish politicians in New York. But the social engineering involved in turning red states blue by importing five-figure quantities of foreigners to those states rankles a lot of folks.

          • Avatar-Nate

            Oh sure Jack ~

            Next you’ll be saying that Tammany Hall wasn’t a good thing……

            /sarc .

            -Nate

          • AvatarIan Cooke

            ~60k Minnesotans claim Somali ancestry. As occupying electorates go (http://www.startribune.com/how-did-the-twin-cities-become-a-hub-for-somali-immigrants/510139341/) it’s a pretty slim reed. But then, Humphrey and Wellstone and Franken suggest that there wasn’t much ‘flipping’ to do anyway.
            She’s 1 freshman 435th of a political body whose power’s not been lower since the Truman era. Were she not so Other she couldn’t buy national coverage from State Farm, much less from FoxNN.

          • AvatarRonnie Schreiber

            trump is referring to the gang of 4 congresswomen not just omar. the problem is that the other 3 congresswomen are american born. this has been interpreted to mean that they aren’t truly american because they’re not white. as far as i know, trump has not corrected himself on this point.

            As far as Rashida Tlaib is concerned, she explicitly has said that she will represent Palestinian interests in Congress. Regarding Ayanna Pressley, her remarks hardly deserve being characterized as truly American: “We don’t need black faces that don’t want to be a black voice. We don’t need Muslims that don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We don’t need queers that don’t want to be a queer voice. If you’re worried about being marginalized and stereotyped, please don’t even show up because we need you to represent that voice.”
            Just imagine, by the way, if a Republican used the word “queers”.
            Occasionally-Cortex makes much of her Puerto Rican heritage. All four are consumed with identity politics, a quintessentially unAmerican ideology. Fuck em.

        • Avatarsilentsod

          If you include “defending white nationalists” which I presume to be the Fine People reference then the transcript literally says the opposite and I would recommend you read it aloud to yourself. That combined with other clearly contradictory cases makes me very hesitant to believe the reporting on him. As Jack says below, two more of those cases are also manipulations in terms of editing and presentation.

          The problem with Trump being a racist (or Nazi) is that he wouldn’t then proceed to act in ways directly contradictory with him being a racist. Racists going to racist, if you will. Him being a racist does not accurately predict him backing prison reform (which affects African Americans in a much higher proportion and could perhaps be seen as favoring that group of people). Him being a racist or white supremacist doesn’t jive with moving the American embassy to Jerusalem or having a Jewish son in law who he appears to hold in high regard as Jared Kushner is an important figure in the administration.

          I suppose you could say he’s doing all those things to try and provide a counter narrative but that would defeat the racist’s goals.

          Reply
    • AvatarJeff Zekas

      I don’t like Trump, but he has said nothing worse than what was said by George Carlin in the 60’s. The difference is: the left was the outcast party during Vietnam. Now that the far left is in power, everyone who disagrees, who uses “bad words”, who makes politically incorrect statements like “a man is not a woman”, that person is a now Natzi or a racist.

      Reply
    • Avatar-Nate

      Naw ;

      it’s dead simple : just accuse the other guys of what you’re doing and never accept responsibility even when the facts clearly show you’re in the wrong .

      See ? .

      It’s dead easy .

      =8-) .

      -Nate

      Reply
    • AvatarNewbie Jeff

      “It’s hard to take the high road when your political opponents continue to take the low road.”

      Absolutely. Progressives are so buried within their own echo chamber, they’re completely unable to comprehend how they essentially created Trump. For decades moderate, competent Republican candidates were pummeled by the media and Hollywood narrative (especially in movies… it’s literally everywhere), and those Republicans “took the high road” and either let it go, or played directly into their agenda by trying to defend themselves on progressives’ terms.

      I think Republican voters finally got sick of it in the 2015/16 primaries… Trump’s primary victory effectively said, “No more high road… pummel them back.”

      Reply
      • AvatarFred Lee

        “””
        Progressives are so buried within their own echo chamber, they’re completely unable to comprehend how they essentially created Trump. For decades moderate, competent Republican candidates were pummeled by the media and Hollywood narrative
        “””

        This is a statement I can agree with wholeheartedly. When you call Bush Jr. a Nazi, when you call John McCain a Nazi, you lose all credibility. Like Carter, Bush Jr. was a lousy President but a decent human being. When you call decent human beings “Nazis”, the term loses all meaning. When you tell 40% or so of the population that their party’s candidate is bad, they tend to ignore you, and apparently proceed to nominate a *truly bad* person. So, you get what we had here last election. And I don’t like it any more ‘n you men.

        Reply
  6. Avatargrrgle

    I think that there was never a time when Trump’s supporters would have been put off of him by accusations of racism, however credible. When he says the quiet part loud it’s just money in the bank for them (you). I know that *you’re* not racist, Jack, *but*… you do support a racist, who says racist things and acts like a racist.

    Whatever you may think of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, they are supposed to enforce the law of the land, and here’s what they say: (see, https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/immigrants-facts.cfm )

    Harassment Based on National Origin
    Ethnic slurs and other verbal or physical conduct because of nationality are illegal if they are severe or pervasive and create an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment, interfere with work performance, or negatively affect job opportunities. Examples of potentially unlawful conduct include insults, taunting, or ethnic epithets, such as making fun of a person’s foreign accent or comments like, “Go back to where you came from, ” whether made by supervisors or by co-workers.

    So that’s the law, and I guess if you don’t like it you can go back to um Germany? Trump is harassing his colleagues and subordinates, with slurs based on their national origin.

    I understand (I believe) that your support for Trump comes not from any racism on your part (your past remarks about “teens” notwithstanding) but from your love of, and fear for, (many of) our fellow Americans. I am really breaking my ass to understand how anybody at all could, as the majority of the electorate did in 2016, support someone whom I find so utterly and objectively despicable.Yours is the *only* coherent and non-repugnant representation of Trump Country that I can find — even your buddy Up In the Valley drops clunkers when he gets into it. But I still can’t get there with you, and I’m sorry to say that in the current climate Chapo Trap House makes more sense to me politically than you usually do. Truly sorry — I used to be a libertarian until the squares ruined that. It’s just that, given the choice between left-totalitarianism and populist-right totalitarianism I’d rather try the other brand for a while and then see if we can walk it back.

    And there I go, using one of those Big Words; it’s not totalitarian, yet, until we get better at AI facial recognition and ALPRs and RealID and where ARE your papers, please? This has been freaking me out ever since they started making us take off our shoes in the airport. Maybe the word’s too diluted already — sure, the President did a racism but so what? Okay, well maybe he is doing a Populism? Maybe that is a step towards Totalitarianism? Do we have any words left? Or is it all down to “cement” milkshakes and jointed rubber truncheons? Remember when bringing up Orwell resulted in automatic ridicule? My old brain is a little dim on that but I think it was during the period when Obama was perpetuating Bush 43’s foreign adventurism and domestic lockdownism. Anyway smash the state

    Reply
    • Avatar-Nate

      “it’s not totalitarian, yet, until we get better at AI facial recognition and ALPRs and RealID and where ARE your papers, please? ”

      ‘Um, I only have a _pipe_, man’…..

      =8-) .

      -Nate

      Reply
    • AvatarNewbie Jeff

      “So that’s the law, and I guess if you don’t like it you can go back to um Germany? Trump is harassing his colleagues and subordinates, with slurs based on their national origin.”

      I know, right?? I mean, Trump is basically telling them, “you don’t belong in the federal government, motherfucker!” Certainly can’t find any example of such low rhetoric on the female Democrat freshman congresswoman side, can we? It’s not like there’s any history there, is there?

      Everyone, see Exhibit A of modern progressive mental acrobatics… amazingly quick to lecture us all on harassing our fellow Americans and government officials, yet completely dances around the “little” inconvenient tidbit that for the last two years, Trump, his children, his associates, and members of his administration were turned inside out by investigators, dragged through the press as Russian agents, labeled “traitors” and “Nazis” by political opponents based on the lie that Trump was a Russian agent. Gee… can’t imagine why Trump’s so sore. But regardless, he (or anyone in his administration) should never eat at a restaurant in peace until they go back to, um, Germany?

      Also, points awarded for qualifying right-totalitarianism as “populist” on your journey towards totalitarianism… what do progressives call populism, again? Oh… that’s right: “grassroots”. Man, that’s such a more comfy-sounding totalitarianism.

      Reply
      • Avatargrrgle

        Trump is specifically telling them they don’t belong in the US; he didn’t tell them to go back to their home districts. He said that they should leave the country, and that’s racist, workplace harassment, as defined by the EEOC (see link, above).

        He also complained that they were telling us how to run the country — which is THEIR JOB. It’s also THEIR JOB to see that credible evidence of enemy powers interfering in our elections shall be properly investigated. His job too, whether or not he cares to do it.

        If some of Trump’s constituents don’t believe that the people in his administration should be comfortable in public, that’s another matter entirely. It’s not workplace racial harassment if you see someone in a restaurant and tell them what you think of them. Also if you tell someone they should speak English, but that’s another matter entirely

        Reply
        • AvatarNewbie Jeff

          Tried to let it go. Couldn’t.

          First, let’s address your continued mental acrobatics: you quote an entire section of federal code, but selectively edit the part of Trump’s tweet that conveniently hides the part that nullifies your whole point: “…and then come back and show us how it’s done”. I see this as the equivalent attitude of people from New England who relocate to the American South, lured by low taxes and cost of living, and then immediately try to turn their new home into the place they abandoned by voting for tax increases… my personal reply is generally, “if you think that works so well, why did you come here?”

          “It’s also THEIR JOB to see that credible evidence of enemy powers interfering in our elections shall be properly investigated”

          Only a fool thinks the House is just “doing its job” with ceaseless investigations. Mueller and his team already did the job… they looked as far and as deep as they could to find anything to make the collusion narrative true, and they came up empty. You honestly think that House Democrats are going to find something Mueller didn’t? Their “job”, as you say, is to keep the collusion narrative alive for as long as possible to extract maximum political gain. Their “job” is to use the power of Congress to find any political leverage they can by accessing Trump’s personal record. They’ll cherry-pick the most damaging tidbits they find useful, and feed it to their eager accomplices in the media. They care nothing about the truth… at least the truths that do not serve their needs. They do not serve our republic, or even the interests of the American people. They serve their ideology, and their ego.

          Finally: nice to see you’re able to overcome whatever cognitive dissonance may emerge justifying the harrassment of government officials in public… again, everyone, Exhibit B of modern progressive mental acrobatics: bland “interpretations” of activist mob tactics against American citizens, yet triggered out of their mind by reading something on the internet.

          Reply
    • AvatarLatisha Brown

      Did you read the tweets, or simply the reporting on said tweets?

      Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how….
      ….it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough.

      What kind of racist tells the people he is supposedly racist against to come back?

      Reply
    • AvatarBaconator

      ^^^^ This, 100%.

      Here’s the proof in the pudding: If Trump wasn’t really intending this “go back to your country” stuff to mean “I don’t think *America* is your country even though you were born here,” then he would have clarified his remarks. Or walked them back. This is what politicians do when some bullshit comes out of their mouths that gets interpreted in a way they didn’t mean.

      (And by the way, I think you could easily have interpreted his remarks to mean “These people don’t belong here in America because they’re brown and not white,” or alternately “These people don’t belong here in America because they disagree with me, the President.” The first is racist, but the second is flat-fucking-out un-American. The fact that Republicans are calling him out on violating all the American value of right to dissent that we were all taught in high school civics class tells you exactly what the *values* of the Republican Party are right now. And they’re not the values that we were taught made us so different from Soviet Russians.)

      But did he release a statement saying “all Americans that were born here belong here”? Or “obviously if someone got elected to Congress then they’re playing by the rules and trying to create change within the system, which are American values, and so of course I respect these people and sorry if you all took it the wrong way”? Or “hey, what I really meant was … [X]”?

      No, what he did was go on TV and say “I’m not apologizing for this because my base agrees with me.” And then the next day he did his “some people say” routine once again, with the punchline this time being “Some people say that she (Rep. Omar) married her brother.”

      C’mon, are you seriously defending this bullshit?

      Reply
      • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

        Alright, but I don’t recall Presidents Obama or Clinton apologizing or “walking back” any time Fox News made hay of a potentially out of context statement.

        Trump understands that you dont apologize to your enemies, because that only increases the pressure of the foot on your neck.

        Witness McCain’s defense of Obama when someone at a debate called him a Muslim, followed by Obama’s acquiescence to accusations that McCain was a war criminal.

        Reply
          • AvatarLatisha Brown

            I wish I was there in NC.

            A Somali blog first accused her of marrying her brother and of being a bigamist. It prompted her to issue statements which have not helped in disproving the claims. If she committed immigration fraud, send her back. It’s not only a good idea, it’s the law.

            It was pretty obvious that the whole point of his tweets were to force Pelosi to side with 4 unpopular members of her party, whom she was previously trying to distance herself. Not only did it work, but it was a lot of fun.

  7. AvatarMental

    Ronnie,

    I love you buddy, but you cannot ascribe that characteristic to just the left. My father was a ruthless Carter fan as a dyed in the wool born again Southern Baptist.

    Now he defends every action of the Right good or bad, despite the fact that Trump (for better or worse) is not a Christian or a conservative. His support of the current administration and his hatred of the previous is beyond his devotion to his church.

    The flattening of media, often alluded to here, has allowed the population to form
    an opinion, then find support for it. It’s not supposed to be that way, but we all know that already.

    Reply
    • Avatardejal

      Realpolitik

      Realpolitik is politics or diplomacy based primarily on considerations of given circumstances and factors, rather than explicit ideological notions or moral and ethical premises. In this respect, it shares aspects of its philosophical approach with those of realism and pragmatism.

      Somebody is going to get the job. I dislike them both. I dislike one more so than the other. So, I don’t vote? Or do I take the least bad outcome?

      Reply
    • Avatarrambo furum

      Trump is not a Christian? He claims to be a Presbyterian, albeit nobody accuses him of being devout. I agree that he is not really conservative, but I’ve previously mentioned the stink of that label, as it means slow-acting leftist in the modern context. Before Trump’s election victory, Tucker Carlson correctly wrote about this.

      “I doubt there are many Christian voters who think Trump could recite the Nicene Creed, or even identify it. Evangelicals have given up trying to elect one of their own. What they’re looking for is a bodyguard, someone to shield them from mounting (and real) threats to their freedom of speech and worship. Trump fits that role nicely, better in fact than many church-going Republicans. For eight years, there was a born-again in the White House. How’d that work out for Christians, here and in Iraq?”
      https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-is-shocking-vulgar-and-right-213572

      Admittedly, he is not doing much of anything for the online freedom of speech issue.

      Reply
    • Avatarsilentsod

      Opinions are being formed by the population they’re being assigned to them by what they consume which is generally not unbiased and whole fact based.

      Reply
  8. Avatarpaul pellico

    I simply don’t understand how people can throw rocks and be pin point accurate with things that are so useless.
    My point being those that cry out racist! in their drive by style.
    Nothing you would say face to face in a bar, but behind the safe walls of the internet you feel as safe as flipping someone off and speeding off in your car.
    Lemme get this right…nobody is supposed to ever be racist or judgemental?
    Count me out.
    I am pretty flawed.
    The very first thing i do when I see somebody is make a judgement, presumably based upon my 66 years of experience. I do my best, but my mind makes connections and quickly.
    Having been raised on Chicago night city streets, you begin to recognize things and people pretty well.
    And Mr, Mrs and MS Woke, don’t try to tell me you don’t.
    You phony, hypocritical pretenders.
    Folks, you do your best. But don’t try to crap me with the new Woke(ism) where you are part of a lily white, spiritually clean mind, free if sin and judgment.

    Reply
    • AvatarLatisha Brown

      “There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps… then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”

      ― Jesse Jackson

      Reply
  9. AvatarCliffG

    Evolution is a tough beast. For most of the last 400,000 years membership in a tribe was mandatory for the propagation of the species, protection of the young, etc. Yet everyone wanders around surprised when societies easily fall into tribal memberships. The fact that in the Western world tribal membership is somewhat voluntary doesn’t alter the fundamental relationship. CNN’s word salad makes sense in terms of signifying which tribe they belong to, no less than whatever a caveman in the stone age did to signify his tribe. If the only tribal conflict in America was between Chevy and Ford truck owners, we might get out of this. But once money and power are thrown into the equation…alas, intense tribal rivalries never end well. Wish us luck.

    Reply
  10. AvatarDanio

    Why does the author of this tweet imply that good writing has anything to do with one’s character?

    I’ll submit that it’s because in this person’s mins, a “good writer” is defined as “someone who writes things that agree with my cognitive biases.”

    These people define NPC culture.

    Jack has written a lot of twisted and hypocritical things, but this ain’t one of them.

    Reply
  11. AvatarSobro

    I am forced to believe the critic. He/she/they’s Twitter handle is “KnowsThings” so it must be true.

    In other news, Twitter is just YouTube commenters with less tech savvy.

    Reply
  12. Avatarhank chinaski

    (looks under hood)
    ‘Well thar’s yur problem right thir. Ya’ll on Twitter.’

    As amusing as the Donald’s Twitter jousts can be (and c’mon, “Love it or Leave it” is 50 year old rhetoric), it’s white noise to distract his supporters from what he’s not accomplished and to lather up the far left crazies, and in so doing swing enough white boomer moderates his way from Biden (before they or old Joe die) to lock in 2020. It’s politically savvy, but I can’t help but feeling played.

    It’s not a reach to state that DJT may very well be the last GOP president. TX and FL are on the cusp of turning demographically Blue *forever*. Ocasio and crew are just the warm up act. District by district the Pelosis and Schumer’s will go the way of Joe Crowley. Then it gets ugly.

    Reply
      • AvatarDR Smith

        Hank;
        What do you mean “,,then it gets ugly”. Did you just get up from a 16 year nap? It already is ugly, and has been for 16 years or more. If the FLA and TX turn blue, so what, it is just a matter of degrees of ugliness?

        It is just a matter of time before the reckoning will come; it will either come sooner, or as I predict the country (and most countries except Russia or China will dissolve into city/nation states…..and then the biblical prophecies will come true, because hell will truly be on earth…and the reckoning will come later.

        The difference is a reckoning sooner will spare lives and destruction. If it comes much later, many, many lives will be lost and destruction will be rampant. But all the same it will come, because the natural order/law of things will always try to find balance…thr West in general is horribly out of balance and can’t stay this way much longer.

        Reply
    • AvatarSobro

      But Hank, DJT’s tweet made Nancy Pelosi eat the shit sandwich that is “The Squad”. Just one week before they were accusing Nancy of being racist for reminding the media and Twatterati that they are “just” four votes in the House. That’s racist! Those are four votes “of color” the Squad Twatted! Nan was about to put the smack down on their grandstanding ways and get back to the business of “the people”, but Trump derailed that plan in Trumpian fashion and she was forced to stand up for the “The Squad” instead of relegating them even further on the back benches. It was genius. Maybe even stable genius.

      And now the Four have had thier profiles raised to “leadership” of the Dems, with all of their stupid and anti-Semitic statements coming out. And DJT’s approval number went up after he made Nancy eat that shit sandwich and pretend to like it. He even forced her to throw away 220 years of House Rules yesterday by taking the floor and making personal disparaging remarks about the President, thus showing everyone her true colors once again.

      Stable. Genius.

      Reply
      • AvatarSnavehtrebor

        Yes, Sobro, very well put. I don’t think Donald J. has ever tweeted anything without carefully considering how it will be received by both his supporters and detractors. I’m not on Twitter meself, but I’m amazed at how much “reporting” is done by purported “news” organizations on what is being flung through the bars from the occupants of Twitter each day. Usually we have to wait a few days to see how things play out with DJT’s missives, but speaking generally, Twitter is a tool to make it easier/quicker for emotional/excitable people to be nasty to each other. Frankly I’m surprised Jack is on it (you got such strong Instagame brah)

        Reply
        • AvatarSobro

          I wouldn’t go so far as to say *every* Twat DJT posts is well thought out. But plenty of them are. It’s just too easy to poke the perpetually pissed-off pantywaists of the press.

          Reply
    • Avatarpanatomic-x

      ” DJT may very well be the last GOP president”

      i’ll make a different projection. trump will win, including the popular vote, in the next election mostly because the cnn/msnbc democrats would rather have him re-elected than support sanders. there will be blood in the streets, worse than 1968, as the indoctrinated will not accept the election results. our two party system will implode and it’s anybody’s guess who will be president after trump. so, in that sense, you are right trump may be the last republican president.

      Reply
      • Avatar-Nate

        trump’s going to win make no mistake .

        Don’t forget he didn’t win the popular vote last time but this time he will .

        -Nate

        Reply
  13. AvatarDR Smith

    Jack, with all due respect, and I might add I say this in the most loving way possible, you are – an idiot.What you wish for and what actually is are two very different things. The issue is not what you are fighting, but rather who are you fighting for – which side are you on, because they have been forcing the issue for over 70 years.

    The globalist elite, that want war all year every year, that want open boarders for all countries , and a mixing and mingling of all races and cultures to ensure in the future there is just one…they want all the anger, confusion, and deliberately sow all of this as an ends to their means. In short, they basically want to ensure they rule the world and all the other 99 % of us live to serve them – just like in the middle ages, where the serfs live around the king’s castle and farm his land so he can reap (most) of the bounty.

    This is also why recent forecasts for the US are that 95% of the population by 2045 will live in cities/urban areas. This is not by accident…it is all part of the plan. In the not so distant future (think by 2100 + ) future, there will be no countries, just city/nation states. Where have we seen this before in history?

    Yes, those of us now reading your blog will all be dead by that time – but what about our children;s children? No, you can’t call for appeasement or call for reason, because there are forces that do not want that, not in the least, and they will do whatever they can to keep it going There has been a long term proxy war/insurrection that has been going on since the end of World War II to get rid of all individual countries & governments…..at the expense of everyone but the 99%.

    Yes, it is very tempting to try to all get along and make nice with people. That is what was said when woman’ right/feminism started, that si waht was said when civil rights was started…..now we have #MeToo and #BlackLIvesMatter that willful and gleeful destroy anyone whom dares to disagree with them. They are just getting started on the border stuff – wait 10 years (or loess) and see where it ends up if nothing is done.

    No, if you have to fight because the other side is not willing to concede, then it is better to keep on fighting than hold peace talks. The other side has nothing to lose, and they play the long game very, very well – too well.

    Reply
    • AvatarComfortablyNumb

      How does the fact that you just read 1984 make Jack an idiot? Maybe his point is that the headlines are sensationalized to generate clicks, and that we shouldn’t abandon civility in our daily lives just because CNN has. That doesn’t sound very idiotic to me.

      Reply
      • AvatarDR Smith

        Dear ComfortablyNumb;

        I read 1984 probably before you were born; but no matter my experiences, I called jack an idiot not for wanting people to be civil to each other in the daily lives, just for the fact that he seems to believe the other side, if treated civilly, would actually respond in kind – they will not. Just look at what happened in the House yesterday when their House Leader called for a House Resolution calling the POTUS racist…even though it is against House rules. Buy the $1 into subscription to the WSJ to read it here if you care: https://www.wsj.com/articles/nancy-pelosis-glass-house-11563318625?mod=hp_opin_pos_1. is but a small sample that goes on everyday in this country, and has for over 16 years now.

        Yes, if you treat your neighbors in your immediate neighborhood civility, much can be gained. Much can be gained for cooperation. However, Jack did not preface his article on local actions. Yes, it will take all of us as individuals to change what is going on now, but real change will not happen by not slurring each other or just by being civil to each other individually….the other side is way too powerful for that to have any impact. It will take of of us to go to Twitter, YouTube, Google, CNN, egt al HQ and take down all the “moral arbitrators” i. e. admins and others that deem us not worthy and revoke their license to tell us how to think and act.

        Reply
  14. AvatarRick T

    “I write the whole piece with an eye towards being value-neutral…”

    This is your fundamental mistake right here.

    Reply
  15. AvatarJeff Zekas

    If you want to see the future of Leftism in America, visit me in communist controlled Eugene, Oregon. No freedom of speech. Hobos roam the downtown streets. All whites are racists, misogynists and kkk natzi clones, and there is no tolerance for anyone who goes against the party line. The word police will check you, if you say “girl” instead of woman, “disabled” instead of alter abled, black instead of person of color. There is no gender. There is no evil. There is no moderate. If you wear a maga hat you will be attacked. So, yeah, Trump is a strange person, a crude person, but not a racist in the traditional, historical sense. The problem is: when you call everyone a racist, the word becomes meaningless. When you ask for reparations, when you say “some people did some thing” and deny the Holocaust, when you support open borders and ignore blue collar union workers, then you have lost my vote.

    Reply
  16. AvatarJohnny

    privileged < red pilled < problematic < bigot < *ophobe < racist < fascist < Nazi < Hitler

    Am I missing any? Seems like you are on the low to middle part of the spectrum…I think you are doing OK.

    Reply
  17. AvatarCdotson

    The commenters to this and the previous related thread who decry the Trump Tweets and the man himself as an un-American racist/bigot/homophobe/-istiphobic phobophobe and ponder the inhumanity required to support such a personality have clearly outsourced their ability to think to hapless morons who either believe everything they hear or have a vested interest in making others believe lies. You make the mistake of taking the man literally without taking him seriously. When in any previous modern era did members of the opposition take what the president says as truth? Emotional exuberance and overexposure to endocrine disruptors must have led to the oft warned about side effect of diminished mental faculties.

    Take Trump seriously, but do not take him literally. Even his supporters make this mistake. He speaks of pro-immigrant positions (provided it’s legal) to the howls of foul by his backers while simultaneously decreasing the pool of legal work permits. He threatens tariff hikes to get a trade deal inked. He’s a step (or a few) ahead of News Passive Consumers on his path of getting something done and what you observe him saying or doing is just him moving the ball forward.

    The latest Tweetstorm in question may have just been cover to control the News Narrative for a few cycles to distract from some interesting events that Trump probably didn’t want to draw too much undue attention. Look HERE, not over there.

    Trump’s opposition, the Newsmedia(TM), and unthinking moron class of NPC unlikely voters who howl wildly on Twatter are being trolled so hard they’re missing entire layers of troll buried in the trolling and still reacting as desired by our Shitposter-in-Chief.

    Reply
  18. Avatarjc

    Well, one of the “four congresswomen of color” looks WHITE to me (AOC). Similarly, having a bias against (for example) Mexicans cannot be racist, because Mexicans belong to all three of the main races; and most Mexicans are of mixed race.

    As I said before, every time Trump opens his tweet and shows his ass, he makes it harder to discuss real issues sensibly. And also everytime he does this, it just makes it easier for the left side media to distort and overblow what he says.

    Reply
    • AvatarRonnie Schreiber

      If Rashida Tlaib is a congresswoman of color, if Arabs are brown, can Jews at least be beige in today’s racialist intersectional taxonomy?

      Reply
      • Avatarcontroman

        Well, I’m not Jewish, but I am in fact “of color” too. Of course, my “of color” is more of a pink “of color”, with maybe a faint bit of tan hue. I mean, the only people who aren’t “of color” are albinos or colorless (like, you can see through them like certain fish larvae).

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.