When it comes to presidential debates, I tend to lose patience with the word games and turn them off after a few minutes. This year I watched all three debates, and realized around the time of the third, that I was there because I needed to believe I was giving Hillary moral support. She didn't need it, but I needed to give it.
Watching Donald Trump vomit on everything and everyone we hold dear for the past year and a half has made me feel as though I am caught in an abusive relationship. I must listen, every time I turn on the t.v. or internet, to more lies and assaults by a man who has used his inherited wealth to bully American into giving this idiot the voice of authority.
I have heard commenters lately ruminate about whether it was inevitable that it would be the biggest pig on the planet who would run against the first possible woman president -- I am paraphrasing in the interest of accuracy. The road that led to Donald Trump running for the presidency is a long one, even longer than Hillary's path. Unlike Hillary, though, Trump's quest has been fueled by bigotry and greed. Misinformation and outright lie. Right wing eyes on the prize, the prize being ever more power and wealth.
Some trace it to the Reagan machine, those capitalists and warmongers who craved power and who were smart enough to take advantage of Reagan's fuzzy-headed good nature and evangelical Christians' need to prove their righteousness by making their beliefs the law of the land. This is certainly when the right-wing took over the American language and turned it on its head, with Orwellian flights of fancy like "trickle-down economics" and "death tax." And it worked.
The other thing that worked was taking advantage of the insecurity and desires of the average American, i.e. me and you. When Reagan handed out millions in tax breaks for the wealthy, he made sure he doled out a few dollars to the rest of us. When he talked about that welfare queen who drove up to pick up her check in her limo, he was talking to those of us who worried about making ends meet now, and in the future; he didn't need to say that people like her were taking our hard-earned money away from us. Unlike Trump, Reagan actually had a political philosophy, and he really, really, believed it. He had a smooth style and winning smile, much like... the evil Mike Pence. But we'll worry about that in four years.
With people like Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2, that "conservative" philosophy -- nothing conservative, really, about giving money away to big corporations and allowing the wealthy and powerful to rape the planet -- had been ground through think-tanks and forced into logical-sounding sausages of policy. It is that very same policy that Paul Ryan is trying to force down our throats today.
Which leads to the end of this dreadful road. That would be where everybody from Putin to Ryan believe that, once in office, Trump will be happy to do their bidding. Even though each time he has been pressured to read a coherent sentence from a teleprompter, he ends up combusting into rants at rallies and in 3 a.m. tweets.
If you guys, Paul Ryan and Rubio and all those others who slice and dice reality by saying they don't support Trump but they will vote for him, if you guys paid attention, it would be obvious to you that Trump is merely playing the game so that he can win all the marbles. And once he's got them, he won't need to pretend to listen to you.
Donald and his sleazy sons, Uday and Qusay, can't wait to get into the Oval Office. If Trump has been able to make money from bankruptcies, suck dollars out of the Trump Foundation and pinch pennies by denying his workers wages due, you can bet that his main goal as president will be to expand his power and his profit. Just as with the high powered financial and legal experts he has at his disposal, he will use the republican lackeys that have been afraid to stand up to him to further his megalomaniacal agenda. And, as he has in his life so far, he will unceremoniously rid himself of anyone who attempts to block his desires, or who no longer serves his purpose -- "You're fired."
As I was sitting in MacDonald's this morning over my senior coffee and egg mcmuffin, I was actually -- I swear -- wondering just how drunk I was going to need to get next Tuesday night while waiting for the election to be determined. It was then, this morning, after a year and a half of insults and abuse, I was mistaken for a Trump supporter.
This is what happened.
An average looking older white man, on his way out the door, stopped and said to me, "Have you voted yet? You HAVE to vote!" I quickly used those powers of perception that I have honed in these years living in this red state to ascertain that this was not a passionate Hillary fan. And so I slowly and calmly said, "You are voting for Hillary?" And he proceeded to begin the Trump rant, the one about how he is going to fix everything that is wrong with the country. I said, "Have you listened to the words he is saying?" And he said he sure has, and he would "never in a million years" vote for Hillary. Because she's a liar." As he walked out the door I added that that wasn't true, that it was thirty years of people accusing her of lying. But it didn't matter, because he and his ignorance were out the door.
"Damned right I'm voting," I muttered.
But that experience left me about as unsettled as I get these days. How on earth could I be mistaken for a Trump supporter? Of course, he hadn't seen my car regaled with lefty bumper stickers, and I wasn't wearing a tee-shirt advertising my political beliefs. Was he making that ugly assumption because I was an overweight badly dressed white woman eating by myself at MacDonald's? Or was he just suffering from that mania fueled by the FBI and seesawing polls in this last stretch?
To be honest, there is my own mania with which I am trying to cope. Suffering the awareness of the sane, I wonder if I am being paranoid in thinking that there is a mole in the FBI, getting under Comey's skin with implied threats. After all, why would a smart person like Huma Abedin leave emails on a computer being investigated by the FBI? She has said she had no idea they were there. How hard would it be for someone in the pocket of Putin to copy a whole grunch of those Hillary emails and put them on Weiner's computer? And maybe throw in a few of his own invention? And for some partisan agents to pressure Comey to notify Congress about them -- or else???
With all the internet malfeasance coming out of Russia, I'm wondering why that isn't being considered.
Anyway, as insulted as I am feeling about being mistaken for a Trump wacko, I am sure that there is still time for more bizarre events. If Hillary wins, and she should, she will have beaten the dirtiest, most corrupt, anti-American, foulest human being to have ever run for the presidency. Along with the basketful of deplorables that are cheering him on.
Wish us all luck. My MacDonald's encounter is unlikely to be the final insult.
Showing posts with label Anthony Weiner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anthony Weiner. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Monday, June 13, 2011
Another Thing Women Are Better At...
The "Weiner thing", and you know the pun is intended, has got me thinking way too much about what's wrong with men. And then I heard a panel of women on This Week discussing whether women aren't just better than men at most things.
Of course we are.
I could end there, but the women on the panel, who of course were powerful and successful, went on to overachieve at being in this discussion. So it was brought up that in studies, women in corporate positions of power made more money for the company than did men, and there is absolutely no doubt in anyone's mind that more of that weiner thing goes on with men than with women at the helm, and I'm sure there's also a pun in there somewhere.
I would like to analyze that a bit. Why is it that women in power are more successful? Why don't they fool around and get into all kinds of trouble sexually?
Are you nuts?
A woman in a powerful position, first of all, was raised by a mother. A mother who did not bring her up to aspire to be a doctor, but a doctor and a mother. A mother who taught her that it is reprehensible to allow someone else to raise one's children, bake one's children's brownies for their school parties, clean up the sick when one's child has the flu. And get a graduate degree and a career before you even think about all that motherhood thing, so you can get on that corporate ladder while baby is learning to climb stairs.
The mother of a son, on the other hand, is just as proud if he can get out of bed and shower on the day he aces his SAT's.
And then there's sex. Given all that maternal upbringing, a women certainly is too exhausted to have the desire. Not only that, a girl is taught that sex is slutty and/or needy, a boy that sex is just one more achievement.
One of the suggestions made by a member of the panel is that in order for more women to attain positions of power and thus save the world, it is necessary to make life easier for women. This would never work.
The reason there are fewer shenanigans with women than men is that there aren't even enough hours in a woman's day to play a round of golf much less engage in sexual hijinks. This is the secret to remaining focused and successful.
We all know that busier people are more efficient, and keeping that carrot just out of reach will keep us women chasing it. Meanwhile, we end up improving the world at bargain rates, and without the free time to get into trouble.
Of course we are.
I could end there, but the women on the panel, who of course were powerful and successful, went on to overachieve at being in this discussion. So it was brought up that in studies, women in corporate positions of power made more money for the company than did men, and there is absolutely no doubt in anyone's mind that more of that weiner thing goes on with men than with women at the helm, and I'm sure there's also a pun in there somewhere.
I would like to analyze that a bit. Why is it that women in power are more successful? Why don't they fool around and get into all kinds of trouble sexually?
Are you nuts?
A woman in a powerful position, first of all, was raised by a mother. A mother who did not bring her up to aspire to be a doctor, but a doctor and a mother. A mother who taught her that it is reprehensible to allow someone else to raise one's children, bake one's children's brownies for their school parties, clean up the sick when one's child has the flu. And get a graduate degree and a career before you even think about all that motherhood thing, so you can get on that corporate ladder while baby is learning to climb stairs.
The mother of a son, on the other hand, is just as proud if he can get out of bed and shower on the day he aces his SAT's.
And then there's sex. Given all that maternal upbringing, a women certainly is too exhausted to have the desire. Not only that, a girl is taught that sex is slutty and/or needy, a boy that sex is just one more achievement.
One of the suggestions made by a member of the panel is that in order for more women to attain positions of power and thus save the world, it is necessary to make life easier for women. This would never work.
The reason there are fewer shenanigans with women than men is that there aren't even enough hours in a woman's day to play a round of golf much less engage in sexual hijinks. This is the secret to remaining focused and successful.
We all know that busier people are more efficient, and keeping that carrot just out of reach will keep us women chasing it. Meanwhile, we end up improving the world at bargain rates, and without the free time to get into trouble.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
On Throwing Stones
Well, here we are, Puritan America. It's not as though we are actually pure, though. We are always happy to dwell on a bit of dirt, pursing our lips as though it is ever-so-distasteful the whole time we are hearing about it.
Many of us watch dirty movies, listen to dirty song lyrics, tell dirty jokes.
Those of us who do not engage in the above are perfectly willing to obsess about those of us who do. And while they are spending all that time thinking about us, they feel free to judge us as they assume God meant us to be judged.
I once spoke with a library patron who was looking for murder mysteries that didn't have dirty words in them. You are reading for pleasure about murder, but you are offended by bad words???
In my younger days I hung around with people of foul-mouth, laughed at dirty jokes, was, you might say, indiscreet, myself. As I grew older my life became more conservative (in the Webster dictionary sense of the word). Sometimes, I might add, to the point where it is surreal in its pretense of purity.
I now live in a world in which people believe only bad people have affairs, curse and drink to excess. I have of late had to learn to keep my salty words to myself. An old acquaintance was appalled that I actually used the word "cuss" rather than "curse", and I am ashamed to say that that is the world in which I live.
The Daily Show thankfully wakes me back to reality, although the reality I am watching has censors that will not allow me to hear bad words, even after 11 p.m. Sponsors of the NBC Nightly News at 6:30 p.m. might sell medication to allow you men to have erections, but it would be dirty to call it fucking. And if Brian Williams said the word, pressure from the sponsors would require that it be censored. Ironically, if we could call it fucking, we might not need the meds.
In this land of bullshit, in which Rachel Maddow has to call it "bullpuckey" or some such horseshit, I believe many of her viewers would be shocked if they were to learn that she curses. (Don't faint, I'm not saying she does, just that someone might learn that she does.)
The thing is, we have allowed ourselves to become so led by our own conflicting prurience and prudery, that we are spending weeks learning the "sordid" details of Anthony Weiner's dirty pics, and ignoring the fact that Clarence Thomas, whose wife lobbies for the health insurance industry, is about to hear cases involving ObamaCare.
A few short summers ago we were so in thrall with stories of our own South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's adventures down his mistress's Appalachian Trail that the fact that no one in the state knew how to reach him in an emergency for a week was pretty much an afterthought.
And then there are the blowhards who are forcing their religious dogma down our Constitution, only to end up with their own personal scandal. They are the ones who are using our tax dollars to ban abortion, even birth control, because of their reverence for life, and then in the same pious breath vote down funding for health care for all.
I don't think Anthony Weiner's dirty pictures are as immoral as a media that spends its time focused on his private life rather than on his legislation. The impeachment of Bill Clinton was far more shameful than his sexual antics.
And when we talk about all those tight-assed religious fanatics on C Street, including our own former Governor Sanford, we should be looking at the threats that they pose to our individual freedoms by virtue of their own presumed virtue, and not who they are boinking.
Finally, finally, I am sick of hearing about whether or not dirty emails were sent on government computers. To paraphrase:
Let him who has not sent a personal email from work cast the first stone.
Many of us watch dirty movies, listen to dirty song lyrics, tell dirty jokes.
Those of us who do not engage in the above are perfectly willing to obsess about those of us who do. And while they are spending all that time thinking about us, they feel free to judge us as they assume God meant us to be judged.
I once spoke with a library patron who was looking for murder mysteries that didn't have dirty words in them. You are reading for pleasure about murder, but you are offended by bad words???
In my younger days I hung around with people of foul-mouth, laughed at dirty jokes, was, you might say, indiscreet, myself. As I grew older my life became more conservative (in the Webster dictionary sense of the word). Sometimes, I might add, to the point where it is surreal in its pretense of purity.
I now live in a world in which people believe only bad people have affairs, curse and drink to excess. I have of late had to learn to keep my salty words to myself. An old acquaintance was appalled that I actually used the word "cuss" rather than "curse", and I am ashamed to say that that is the world in which I live.
The Daily Show thankfully wakes me back to reality, although the reality I am watching has censors that will not allow me to hear bad words, even after 11 p.m. Sponsors of the NBC Nightly News at 6:30 p.m. might sell medication to allow you men to have erections, but it would be dirty to call it fucking. And if Brian Williams said the word, pressure from the sponsors would require that it be censored. Ironically, if we could call it fucking, we might not need the meds.
In this land of bullshit, in which Rachel Maddow has to call it "bullpuckey" or some such horseshit, I believe many of her viewers would be shocked if they were to learn that she curses. (Don't faint, I'm not saying she does, just that someone might learn that she does.)
The thing is, we have allowed ourselves to become so led by our own conflicting prurience and prudery, that we are spending weeks learning the "sordid" details of Anthony Weiner's dirty pics, and ignoring the fact that Clarence Thomas, whose wife lobbies for the health insurance industry, is about to hear cases involving ObamaCare.
A few short summers ago we were so in thrall with stories of our own South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's adventures down his mistress's Appalachian Trail that the fact that no one in the state knew how to reach him in an emergency for a week was pretty much an afterthought.
And then there are the blowhards who are forcing their religious dogma down our Constitution, only to end up with their own personal scandal. They are the ones who are using our tax dollars to ban abortion, even birth control, because of their reverence for life, and then in the same pious breath vote down funding for health care for all.
I don't think Anthony Weiner's dirty pictures are as immoral as a media that spends its time focused on his private life rather than on his legislation. The impeachment of Bill Clinton was far more shameful than his sexual antics.
And when we talk about all those tight-assed religious fanatics on C Street, including our own former Governor Sanford, we should be looking at the threats that they pose to our individual freedoms by virtue of their own presumed virtue, and not who they are boinking.
Finally, finally, I am sick of hearing about whether or not dirty emails were sent on government computers. To paraphrase:
Let him who has not sent a personal email from work cast the first stone.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Wow, They Did It Again
I have nothing but admiration for Anthony Weiner, one of the Congressional representatives (which I can count using the fingers of one hand) that will always speak honestly, regardless of hounding by the media, and regardless of popular opinion.
Hah, you thought I was talking about the Twitter thing that is the media's obsession of the week.
What I am referring to, however, is Weiner's letter requesting that Justice Clarence Thomas recuse himself from any cases regarding the constitutionality of the Obama Health Care Act. It appears that Ginny Thomas has her hands in all kinds of lobbying against ObamaCare, and that, although Thomas is typically steamed about having to admit to this source of income, he indeed benefits financially from his wife's political activities.
I quite accidentally learned of this as I caught up on my week's worth of The Rachel Maddow Show, working backwards, nearly missing the Friday interview with Anthony Weiner before the Twitter business hit. On that show, Weiner appeared and explained his House petition asking Thomas to recuse himself.
The thing is, not having time during the week to catch much news, what I heard ad nauseum was about Weiner's hacked Twitter account. I saw the lewd photo, heard all the bad jokes, and the back and forth about why Weiner wasn't giving the drooling media the meat (no pun intended, really) it was craving. The last straw was Luke Russert insisting on finding out whether the picture was really of Anthony Weiner.
This is absurd and tragic for us Americans. We are so easily led by a shallow and lazy media, which we have allowed to exercise this dirty journalism. It is upsetting to think that we are being denied, in this time of failing schools and health, lost jobs and homes, and neverending war, accurate representation of the real issues.
So let me just thank Rachel Maddow for committing real journalism.
Oh, I would also like to thank Jon Stewart for his astute journalistic observations on whether the photo could really have been Anthony Weiner. Good to have a laugh at all this nonsense.
Hah, you thought I was talking about the Twitter thing that is the media's obsession of the week.
What I am referring to, however, is Weiner's letter requesting that Justice Clarence Thomas recuse himself from any cases regarding the constitutionality of the Obama Health Care Act. It appears that Ginny Thomas has her hands in all kinds of lobbying against ObamaCare, and that, although Thomas is typically steamed about having to admit to this source of income, he indeed benefits financially from his wife's political activities.
I quite accidentally learned of this as I caught up on my week's worth of The Rachel Maddow Show, working backwards, nearly missing the Friday interview with Anthony Weiner before the Twitter business hit. On that show, Weiner appeared and explained his House petition asking Thomas to recuse himself.
The thing is, not having time during the week to catch much news, what I heard ad nauseum was about Weiner's hacked Twitter account. I saw the lewd photo, heard all the bad jokes, and the back and forth about why Weiner wasn't giving the drooling media the meat (no pun intended, really) it was craving. The last straw was Luke Russert insisting on finding out whether the picture was really of Anthony Weiner.
This is absurd and tragic for us Americans. We are so easily led by a shallow and lazy media, which we have allowed to exercise this dirty journalism. It is upsetting to think that we are being denied, in this time of failing schools and health, lost jobs and homes, and neverending war, accurate representation of the real issues.
So let me just thank Rachel Maddow for committing real journalism.
Oh, I would also like to thank Jon Stewart for his astute journalistic observations on whether the photo could really have been Anthony Weiner. Good to have a laugh at all this nonsense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)