They’re even rolling out gay nazis again, like Peter Thiel and that Milo Yippeeshitswhatever.
Still didn’t work.
If black people want to start doing this that's there business, but ew.
@3 Kanye West does not represent "Black people." No individual person can.
@2 Love the moniker you gave Milo "Yippeeshitwhatever." I think I will be smiling about that into next week!
Tons of gay men already adorning themselves in the confederate flag, but not in the way the letter writer suggests. Consult the internet for visuals.
"The gay community itself is a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-faith/non-faith community. Please make a note of it." YES Thank you Dan.
I just cannot see a pink swastika with a lavender field ever working out no matter the altruistic intentions. I agree with Dan; whatever the innocent origins of the Indian swastika it is forever tainted and be-fouled, especially in the western world...
Best moniker I ever heard applied to Milo was "Yolo Minneapolis"
Apparently Milo has been begging his fb friends for money. It has cost him dearly, this crusade of his. He’s been fired and terrible things have happened. If his fb friends believe..
I mean, I do appreciate the letter-writer's naive assumption that there aren't any racist gay men out there.
This letter made me smile. But it woulda been funnier if those displaying the Confederate battle flag were all in Hitler costume.
Sorry, but I don't want to have anything to do with their symbols.
Why should gay people clean up other people's messes? Especially hateful assholes like confederate flag wavers.
And yes, unfortunately some of those wavers are LGBT people. We try to show our nasty racist brothers and sisters how awful that is but it seldom works.
Of course the LGBTQIA community even includes nasty racists, so I totally get that making common cause with them is important. (And challenging, and icky...)
Of course outside that context I needn't be personally dissuaded from privately offering a hearty 'fuck you' to nasty racists.
p.s. I was just going off on a tangent (not disagreeing with anyone), because I've actually known activists who have a hard time switching hats depending upon what injustice they're fighting.
p.p.s. I feel similarly about those who cast ballots in log cabins for Republicans like Trump. The usual "it's about economic issues" couldn't be a worse excuse; since economic power is unfortunately translated into political power, economic justice would translate into the political power to achieve social justice.
Noticed Dan’s stayed outta politics lately. The temperature is sure hot over there. Maybe there’s a little Good in Mueller taking so long, means less time Pence might be in charge.
Hope you’re all ringing your senators about this horror of a Supreme Court judge nomination.
Ms Lava - If we all lived in Maine, that might accomplish something.
As for the letter, even if the suggested outcome wasn't secretly the idea all along, the idea never worked the other way around.
It could be ideal if Mueller finishes up after the midterms, if both houses go to the Dems. Then (since the Repubs colluded to steal the election) what should really happen isn't a Pence presidency, it's a new election. ITMFA isn't sufficient for the crime.
I can't of course guarantee this, but Trump may well resign of his own accord soon after the election if Dems take over the House and start digging in with subpoenas. It seems at this point to be his only hope of -maybe- saving himself and his family from public disgrace and private ruin. Most Dem candidates are correctly calling not for impeachment but for a thorough investigation of his holdings, debts, cronies and tax and business records. Impeachment is always unpopular and fraught with risk, and thus should be considered only as a last resort. It shouldn't be necessary in the case of Trump. Either Ds will chase him out or Rs will push him out, probably before 2019 is half-over.
And I agree with Michael Moore regarding whether Pence is preferable: Yes, because he has a definable, internally (somewhat) coherent belief system that can be more effectively countered via conventional means than Trump's unrelentingly chaotic reckless abandon in pursuit of his own self-interest, whatever he might perceive that to be in a given moment. Trump's resilience stems directly from his willingness to annihilate political norms, which are bred into professional pols like Pence. Getting rid of Trump will tamp down the crazy -- and right now I think that outweighs Pence's ideological focus and fervor. We can and will deal with him in 2020.
@19 - I agree that the focus should be on a robust, thorough investigation. But if the investigation reveals terrible crimes, I think we have to pursue impeachment. What does it say if we allow massive crimes to go unaddressed because of political expediency? (Yes, in theory Trump could be criminally charged later. Even so, impeachment was the remedy meant to protect the Republic.) I think Dems should focus any potential impeachment proceedings on persuading the American public of the grave nature of the crimes, and should only be pursued if that case can be made.
Unless Dems win big at the mid terms, how would Pence be stopped. And he’s a very disturbing and repressed man who hates LGBTI people and women being strong and independent.
While trump is fumbling around and his staff picking up the pieces there is no stability in the party, more people being alienated. Pence would do it quietly, he’d still attack vulnerable people. And the R party would settle again, people return to the fold.
Yeah a flaming gay guy who poses for pics with the confederate flag? Or how about one that puts rainbows on the militia flag? Oh, guess what, Milo already non-ironically did both. Because it turns out that white bigots have a lot in common, regardless of who they have sex with. And when Peter Thiel got up at the GOP convention to talk about how much he wanted Trump to win, the media called it progress: straight white racists accept gay white racists into their ranks! It's easier when they are united in their hatred of women, people of color, and democracy.
The problem with this bullshit letter is that it avoids the inconvenient fact that a small but loud minority of gay men embrace the confederate flag non-ironically. And the more gay rights are mainstream (and yay for that), the more it's going to be acceptable in the GOP ranks to be gay, and the more racist gays will be open about their racism. Being born gay happens across all demographics including into families and cultures of bigotry. And some of them, like some of any group, are just assholes and racists.
funny but been done.
Word, Dan. Word.
But. It got me thinking. You know what does need a make-over? The Producers. See, instead of presenting a light-hearted re-telling of a certain Austrian failed painter, our intrepid heroes, Bialystock & Bloom, present FORREST! A light-hearted re-telling of Nathan Bedford Forrest, the hero & savior of Fort Pillow, the man who united the races by his brave leadership of the KKK.
That would be fuckin' awesome.
I took this letter as a failed comedy piece rather than a sincere suggestion. A tongue-in-cheek thought experiment. Good-natured trolling. It was silly, but I'll defend it on one level: I kindamaybesorta enjoyed reading it.
@22 I know I could prove grievously wrong about preferring Pence to Trump. It's a tricky calculus but right now I just want everything to stop spinning, including my head.
Let’s all hope then Marcia @27 that Manafort has dirt on both of them.
Absolutely. Because as joyous as it will be to be free of Trump the unbearably vile disgusting revolting pig...Pence might be less incompetent and thus better able to achieve their heinous goals.
This is getting interesting. Looks like this tool is going to be taken down by his dick. Another one.
This is a test, if they ignore a Professor of psychology’s disclosure to the character of what’s his name.. .. a white woman of education.. and give him the job, they don’t really know what the women of America might do. This is a different time and the women have been erupting and disclosing for a while now, will they go off if they approve this weasel? I can just see him as a fumbling nasty little teenager, putting his hand over her mouth. This has got to be the straw.
@19. MarciaX. Very lucid--would that all Trump's opponents were so clear-headed. But it will be hard for the Dems to take the Senate.
I have a different take to US politics to many--that a proportion just under 40% of any population in a declining or stagnating country are vulnerable to fascism; and that what matters is the degree to which a layer as thin as 10% of that proportion feel that they can determine their own destiny; that their voices are heard by an establishment or mainstream; that they are respected, not condescended to or scorned, by people evidently more privileged or doing better than them. On these metrics, things look bad; and I'm awaiting the emergence of a visionary Democrat leader who can give the left-behind what they need.
I don't know, Lava. They ignored Anita Hill.
Gorsuch (Trump's first SCOTUS appointment last year) was recommended by the right wing corporate advocacy think tank Americans for Prosperity which has millions in Koch Bros funding- they have put seven figures specifically into judge appointments. Kavanaugh is also on the AFP list, and he's also on the Heritage Foundation list as well - that's another right wing think tank, advocating for conservative moral agendas, funded by other billionaires including the DeVos family (remember Nancy DeVos is currently destroying the public school system as Trump's education secretary and her brother Eric Prince ran Blackwater, the for profit mercenary group that slaughtered people in Iraq under Bush.)
So these right wing billionaires are literally purchasing the judges, federal and SCOTUS. And there are two lists of them for Trump to pick from- dozens of them.
So while it would be nice if these allegations bring Kavanaugh down and he slithers back down the hole he came from, there are a dozen more in waiting.
The only hope I see is stalling until after the midterm, hoping to god the Dems do take back the Senate, then continuing to stall until January, then the Dems growing some balls and refusing confirmation of any SCOTUS pick for the years that the GOP stays in power. I don't think that will happen, but I'd like to be surprised.
Your percentages are reasonable.
Research studies of the authoritarian personality (examined in the superb "Conservatives Without Conscience" by John Dean) show 20-25% of people (in the US, virtually all right-wingers) very strongly demonstrate authoritarian personality attributes, and thus are especially submissive to, and intolerant of criticism of, established authority which is compatible with their ideology. They are predisposed to submit too fast, too long, and accept statements, instructions, and actions of their authorities almost without question.
Then we have the example of Nazi Germany (which precipitated the studies mentioned above), into which the great majority of the society was indoctrinated. For an examination of this, I recommend the insightful writing of "They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45" by journalist Milton Mayer.
"If Kanye West couldn't do it then — pre-palling-around-with-Donald-Trump Kanye West — random/clueless/exhibitionistic gay dudes aren't gonna be able to do it now. Some symbols are too hateful, too poisonous, and too blood-drenched to ever be re-appropriated, repurposed, or redeemed."
Given all that we know about Mr. West, could it be that the reason that his attempt to 'reclaim' the flag failed was that he was never attempting to reclaim the flag or change its meaning in the first place, and was instead just using it as the White supremacist symbol it is? I think Kanye West is simply a fan of White supremacy - it's the simplest, most consistent explanation of his behavior. He doesn't want to disrupt our systems of inequality, he wants to be one of the few who benefit from them, a case I think Ta-Nehisi Coates makes well here - https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/05/im-not-black-im-kanye/559763/ - and since the wealth of the capitalist elite is inexorably tied to colonialism and slavery (now re-imagined as a highly interconnected global system of resource and labor exploitation that retains features of racist colonialism), chasing that elite White freedom means collaborating with White supremacists and advancing White supremacy.
Probably best to not try to rehabilitate the Confederate flag, Nazi swastika, etc. in any case; I just wanted to push back against the notion of some sort of pre-Trump Kanye West who wasn't a narcissistic White supremacist (or collaborator/apologist if you're not quite down with labeling him a White supremacist directly).
@EmmaLiz #32: "remember Nancy DeVos is currently destroying the public school system as Trump's education secretary"
Betsy DeVos - is that a Freudian slip blending her with Nancy Reagan? If so, I've done the same.
I heartily endorse your last paragraph.
@curious2 #33: I prefer Bob Altmeyer - https://www.theauthoritarians.org/ - I'm always suspicious of people who claim their conservatism is ONLY rooted in a desire to be able to manipulate and exploit others without those others being able to engage in collective action to protect their interests in not being manipulated and exploited (which is the whole idea behind the democratic governance that 'traditional Conservatives' and Right Libertarians wish to keep "small"). That said, Dean was very much on the inside of the Right-wing movement, so his view is nothing if not informed.
And the Palestinian Ambassador expelled from the US, his family’s assets frozen. Wtf America.
Pence would probably be a better money manager. Pull the plug on the massive self indulgences going on. Frugal.
3: Actually, black people tried it-there was an African-American artist in Atlanta who created a version of the Confederate flag in black, green, and gold.
There are a lot of rich old white ladies named Nancy (Reagan, Pelosi, Demoss, Grace, Sinatra, Drew). Your Nancy Reagan theory gives me a good excuse, but I have to dismiss it. Nancy Reagan, for all her personal brand of evil, grew up working class, living out of a car traveling the country while her mother tried to become an actress until she settled for becoming the wife of a man with moderate wealth. Nancy's own path to fame and fortune was the silver screen- she was once Clark Gable's girlfriend, she was briefly blacklisted during the McCarthy era, and she was the living model from which the bobble head dolls take their body proportions. Her role as a conservative family values proper wife first lady was entirely an act- one that contributed to the deaths during the plague years and the war on drugs- but still an act. She was an image-obsessed superstitious gossip diva with all the noveau rich insecurities, completely lacking in any moral center but waaayyy more interesting a person.
Betsy DeVos is born a billionaire who married another born billionaire. She's an entitled and poorly educated Calvinist who has only scorn for people who aren't rich and who has never done a single interesting thing in her life but doesn't know it. That family is American aristocracy- and just as stupid, weird, bloody and out of touch as European aristocracy though less inbred. Imagine growing up with every opportunity under the sun available to you, the entire big fascinating world accessible to you, no struggle or climbing necessary- you could just do whatever you wanted- and then deciding that the way you want to spend the decades of your existence is by destroying a nation's public school system. Nancy Reagan is vicious but she makes sense in a way. Betsy DeVos? I just can't wrap my brain around such a boring ass person. And her brother, if he hadn't been filthy fucking rich enough to find a legal way to murder people, would probably have been a serial killer if he'd been born in any other family.
TLDR: Nah, I said Nancy and not Betsy for no reason other than just saying something dumb. And I said all this bullshit for no reason other than I'm drinking coffee and there's no other column to talk about.
Wait...I thought Nancy Reagan's dad was a wealthy surgeon in the Midwest. It's true she was briefly blacklisted, but that was the result of a typo. There was already a Screen Actors Guild member named Nancy Davis-who also didn't deserve to be blacklisted, because no one on the blacklist deserved blacklisting-who the blacklisters confused with her. The blacklisting incident never reflected Nancy's actual political views, which were always conservative-so conservative, in fact, that the general consensus was that Nancy converted Ronnie to conservativism.
Oh yes, I know she never had even a drop of leftist blood in her cold veins. But she had an interesting life, and the blacklisting (plus Reagan's role in clearing it up) is a part of that. As was her childhood on the road with her mom as her mom was trying to become an actress. Mom had mixed results in her acting career and eventually married the wealthy surgeon you reference. But that was Nancy's step-dad, not her father.
I'm not defending her in the least. She was a cruel opportunistic snob who couldn't lift a finger to help thousands of people dying of AIDS, even her former friends. But she was a fascinating as a historical figure. Absurdity piled upon absurdity. Reading about the lives of Nancy and Ronald both really put the current fucking batshit admin into perspective. Same if you go back to JFK. This country has always been ridiculous.
40: Hadn't known about the life-on-the-road-with-her-mom thing. Or that Dr. Davis was her stepdad. Thanks for the info and for the thoughtful, civil response.
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.