Month: November 2016

“My mother was a big fan of the queen!”

by digby

Check this out:

Donald Trump revealed that his late mother was a big fan of the Queen during his first phone call with Theresa May. The US president-elect also asked the prime minister to pass on his regards at her next audience at Buckingham Palace, according to sources.

The two leaders held a ten-minute conversation last Thursday lunchtime during which he called the UK a “very special place for me and my country”.

As well as invoking his late mother, Mary, who was born in Scotland, Mr Trump offered a casual, open-ended invitation for Mrs May to get in contact if she crosses the Atlantic.

“If you travel to the US, you should let me know,” he told her, according to an official transcript of the conversation. The informality of the invitation raised eyebrows among British officials.

He Terry! If yer in the neighborhood just drop on by!

He also invited the Irish prime minister to come to the US for St Patrick’s day. God only knows what puerile nonsense he’s saying to everyone else.

This is a guy who ran on a platform based on the idea that the rest of the world is laughing at us.

Well they are now. We just elected a cretinous moron to run our country. They’re laughing and laughing. Also crying whenever they think about the fact that the global security guarantees everyone’s relied upoin have just been thrown into the garbage disposal.

But hey, maybe that’s a good thing. I guess I just think it would have been preferable to have someone with a worldview that has advanced beyond a 4th grade level. (“My mother was a big fan of the queen!!!”)

.

.

Celebration of the Trumpists

by digby

This is an essay from a prominent men’s rights activist: 

The celebrations have ended and we’ve all come to absorb the fact that Donald Trump is our next President, an outcome that many of us have aggressively worked for in the past several months. Now that we’ve gotten what we wanted, it’s time to describe exactly how a Trump presidency will improve our standing.

If the President can say it then you can say it

The biggest effect we’ll see is the death of political correctness. We now have a shitlord for President who has insulted ugly women as “fat pigs,” and whose private macho talk, which all masculine men have done, was relentlessly attacked by the press but not punished in the voter booth. This means that when you talk like Trump, the first thought your listener will have is, “He sounds like the President of the United States.”

What excuse will they now have for limiting your speech if one man was able to gain the highest office in the land because of it? Either Trump was elected because voters liked a person who makes those kinds of statements or they didn’t care enough that he made them. Whichever explanation you accept means that the will of the American people has stated that you can exercise your free speech, your opinions, and your desire to flirt with attractive women without having to obey a speech police force that evaluates everything you do based on how offensive it is to a kaleidoscope of races and loony identities. You can begin removing your politically correct filter.

I’m in a state of exuberance that we now have a President who rates women on a 1-10 scale in the same way that we do and evaluates women by their appearance and feminine attitude. We may have to institute a new feature called “Would Trump bang?” to signify the importance of feminine beauty ideals that cultivate effort and class above sloth and vulgarity. Simply look at his wife and the beautiful women he has surrounded himself with to remind yourself of what men everywhere prefer, and not the “beauty at every size” sewage that has been pushed down our throats by gender studies professors and corporations trying to market their product to feminist fatsoes. The President of the United States does not see the value in fat women who don’t take care of themselves, and neither should you.

Liberals will be forced to tolerate us in a way they didn’t have to before
mlk-trump-hat-575×324

There are so many of us that we can ease out of the closet and not be afraid of persecution like before. What are they going to do, fire everyone who supports Trump? Accuse every man who voted for him of rape? The way the establishment has been able to marginalize us is to corner men individually and apply intense pressure, but now we have natural allies in all men who back Trump, even if they don’t subscribe to our particular interpretation of masculinity.

Liberals will not be able to point and shriek to get you to withdraw like before. They will not have easy victories by using labels like “racist” or “sexist.” They will have to endure us in their midst and bite their lip when we offend their degenerate ideals, knowing that the price of attacking us is becoming too costly. It may be as simple as whipping out your MAGA hat, as if it’s a bat signal, and having fellow Trump supporters come to your aid. I know that if I see a Trump supporter in trouble, I will help him, regardless of his race or station. Liberals will be forced to share space with those whom they hate, instead of trying to exile them like in the past.

It will be easier to find a fellow traveler
stonecutters

Men who hold our beliefs have long ago learned that we can’t go around sharing them in public to those who are not vetted. If you’re like me, you first “test” a new man you meet with a masculine comment to see how he responds, such as remarking on the attractiveness of a woman or how you’ve heard of a community online that trolls liberals without mercy. We’ve even had to devise a special “pet shop” code to know if a man is aware of the teachings that are found on ROK or the forum. We now have a easier shortcut in Trump.

If a man tells you that he voted for Trump, it’s safe to say that he is favorable to strong borders, nationalism, masculinity, and beautiful women. On a basic level, you will be able to get along with this man and build a bond. It also works the other way around where you bring up Trump to screen out those who are offended by him. It’s fine if someone is politically indifferent, but if a man opposes Trump then I have to anticipate him attacking or sabotaging me in the future. I will distance myself from him for my own well-being.

The cultural decline will halt
man-spiral

We now have a President who will not encourage anti-male propaganda, rape culture, and female victimhood. While I do have minor concerns on the influence of his feminist-minded daughter, Ivanka, Trump will not continue the attack on men that has been institutionalized since the sexual revolution and accelerated during the eight years of Obama. Because our current cultural dystopia is the result of intense long-term manipulation, it is more than enough for Trump to simply not touch the gender issue to allow the culture to return to a more patriarchal order. Stop feeding the rot and it will die off, allowing biology to naturally reassert itself.

We’ve experienced so many changes in the past decade that we haven’t had a chance to understand what’s going on and adapt. Instead, we’ve been reacting from one blow to the next, whether it’s the loss of our jobs through witch hunts or the rape culture horror that has turned a banal consensual hookup into possible incarceration. Trump’s victory gives us room to begin pushing back against the fictions that have put men in harm’s way.

Conclusion
Paradoxically, the benefits of a Trump presidency will not involve specific actions from Trump. His presence automatically legitimizes masculine behaviors that were previously labeled sexist and misogynist. While we may still get heat for them, it will be less severe and we’ll be less likely to sustain serious damage. Liberals will have no choice but to silently stew on our words and we can more effortlessly connect with men not only for male bonding but also to push back against a demoralized and fractured left. Victories will be far easier to achieve under Trump than Obama.

This is our moment. The door is opening for a renaissance of masculinity where men can take pride in being men, and the best part of it is that we don’t need to wait for Trump to do anything. His victory is more than enough for us to apply our own individual strength in seizing the bull’s horns where we can come out of the politically incorrect closet and assert our beliefs and behaviors. It would be icing on the cake if Trump rolled back anti-masculine laws and policies, but it’s not required, because the power to change ourselves and our country is within our hands. Return Of Kings opened in 2012, and the only surprise for me is how quickly the name is being fulfilled.

Sign me up for the resistance

A primer on the new lingo for people who don’t live online



by digby

This piece from the LA Times is useful for thos e of you who don’t do battle with these people every day:

Stephen K. Bannon’s fringe brand of conservatism is suddenly front and center, after he was named to be chief strategist in Donald Trump’s White House. As the chairman of Breitbart News, Bannon turned the website into, in his own words, the “go-to platform of the alt-right” – a far-right ideology that  promotes what many consider to be white nationalism, racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny.

This week, we examined the general worldview of the alt-right. But how can you identify someone who considers themselves part of it? Like most groups, the alt-right has its own code words and slang. Here are some terms they use, and other hallmarks to look out for:

Beta: Members of the alt-right are obsessed with masculinity, manhood, gender roles and the concept of “alpha” and “beta” males. Alpha males are leaders, like Trump; beta males are portrayed as weak and emasculated.

Crybaby, whiny: Anyone who disagrees with them or their preferred candidate, particularly protesters and people who complain that the alt-right is embracing racism and anti-Semitism.

Cuckservative, cuck: The term “cuckservative” originated in the alt-right. It’s a portmanteau of “conservative” and “cuckold” used to describe Republicans who are perceived to be emasculated or “selling out.” Frequently shortened to “cuck,” the term has come under scrutiny for its racist implications.

Human biodiversity: Despite the fact that many say racism is at the heart of its platform, the alt-right is very sensitive about being called racist. They use the term “human biodiversity” as a more scientific-sounding way of referring to issues of race.

Libtard: The alt-right revels in the rejection of “political correctness,” so embracing an outdated term for a person with an intellectual disability (“retard”) serves the purpose of insulting liberals.

Masculinist: A word meant to embody the opposite of feminist, celebrating “manliness” and the traditional “heroic” nature of men. To the alt-right, “masculinist” principles are ones that serve and advocate for men. Critics say they primarily reinforce antiquated gender roles.

What is the alt-right? A refresher course on Steve Bannon’s fringe brand of conservatism »

Memes: The modern alt-right originated in places like 4chan and 8chan, which are hubs for meme creation. Meme creation is still a centerpiece of the movement. The alt-right is responsible for getting the Pepe the Frog meme classified as a hate symbol.

Multiculturalism (as a derogatory term): A major component of the alt-right platform is white supremacy and nationalism. “Multiculturalism” is used as a negative term for the blending of multiple cultures, as opposed to celebrating the supposed superiority of Western European culture. . Often used as shorthand for policies that benefit immigrants and people of color.

Neoreactionaries: Also known as NRx and the “Dark Enlightenment.” A group of people who call for stripping away anything other than supposedly rational thought, as opposed to a “feelings first” mentality. They advocate for libertarianism, traditional gender roles and neofascism.

Political correctness: Anything that challenges an alt-right person’s right to say whatever they want, whenever they want, in any way they want to say it. According to the alt-right, political correctness is responsible for most of society’s ills, including feminism, Islamic terrorism and overly liberal college campuses.

Snowflake: Short for “special snowflake,” a pejorative for an entitled person. Most people protesting Trump are “snowflakes,” according to the alt-right, as are anti-Trump celebrities and most liberals.

SJW: Short for “social justice warrior,” this insult is mostly reserved for young women who try to argue on behalf of liberal or feminist ideas.

White genocide: What many alt-right members feel is the natural conclusion of liberalism and pro-immigrant policies. The alt-right views just about anything that benefits nonwhite people, particularly ones who aren’t American citizens, as a risk to whiteness and a step on the road to the eradication of the white race.

What’s good for the lame duck…
by Tom Sullivan

The Lenox Globe, image by Kattigara via Wikimedia Commons.

With all the concern that we might see Trumpism “normalized,” you might think if he’d lost last week that it would have been a victory for normalcy. Hardly. Things have not been normal in this country for decades now, as slowly the rudder and keel that have kept democracy on course have rotted away from below.

Case in point: the transparently ludicrous notion Republicans in the Senate advanced after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia that Barack Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland, should not get a hearing, much less a vote. As a “lame-duck president” with a year left in his term, they argued, the “people” should decide who gets to pick the next Supreme Court justice. The Los Angeles Times observed, this was a custom Republicans “fabricated from whole cloth.” What they intend, of course, is to oppose any justice nominated by any Democratic president, both being illegitimate no matter what “the people” decide:

Senators have every right to question nominees about their views about the Constitution and their approach to judging, and to vote against those they consider truly outside the mainstream. But to reflexively reject — or refuse even to consider — a sitting president’s nominee because he or she is from the “wrong” party is a recipe for perpetual gridlock.

But America has veered off the map into terra incognita where there be dragons. Desperate times requiring desperate measures, David Dayen suggests a course for Obama that he is unlikely to take:

Come January, President Barack Obama will be consigned to the sidelines as Donald Trump occupies the Oval Office and begins the work of dismantling his legacy. But there is one action that Obama could take on January 3, 2017 that could hold off some of the worst potential abuses of a Trump administration for up to a year. Obama can appoint his nominee Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court on that date, in between the two sessions of Congress.

Based on everything we know about Obama’s temperament and politics, he won’t resort to this. But given how Republicans relentlessly obstructed his efforts for eight years, he would be completely justified in playing one final trump card. And there’s a cost to ignoring that card. The fact that Democrats prefer to maintain governance norms, even while Republicans break them time and again, inescapably pushes the policymaking apparatus of the country to the right.

Dahlia Lithwick seems livid at the prospect that Republicans might get away with obstructing a sitting president from making this appointment, saying flatly “it was stolen by unprecedented obstruction and contempt.” She writes:

The only proper response from progressives today must be that Donald Trump is a lame-duck president with only four years left in his term, and we must let the people decide the next justice for the Supreme Court. Less fatuously, it must be to obstruct the nomination and seating of any Trump nominee to fill Scalia’s seat. We will lose. But that’s not the point now. Democrats need to repeat Ted Cruz’s lie that eight justices will suffice. If Democrats can muster the energy to fight about nothing else, it should be this, because even if you believe the election was fair or fair enough, the loss of this Supreme Court seat was not. That seat is Merrick Garland’s.

A recess appointment would be a “grotesque spectacle,” Lithwick writes:

If Merrick Garland is to be seated in the coming weeks at the Supreme Court it will be by way of an Obama recess appointment, if there is a recess, and in that case he will be seated for a year and no more. It will all be a grotesque spectacle, demeaning the players and diminishing and compromising the public esteem for the court. A recess appointment would be the kind of stunt-nomination Obama has eschewed throughout his presidency, guaranteed to embarrass the executive and Judge Garland, who deserved to have us fight for him long before now. But it would at least be a symbol that tantrum can be met with tantrum, and that Democrats will not be rolled. So that’s one option. It’s not a fix. But at least it’s not a capitulation.

What’s good for the lame duck, right?
This travesty has gone on long enough. Democrats will lose, as Lithwick says. But fighting and losing is more palatable than getting rolled (or rolling over). It speaks to character. Whatever their reservations about Trump, a lot of Americans voted for him because he promised to stick it to the bastards. Americans won’t vote for wimps. If Democrats hope to regain control in Washington, they had better stop acting as if they are.

Wingnut kitsch is back

by digby

Remember this ridiculous stuff a decade or so ago?

The sales pitch:

“President Bush is a Leader who has the courage to lead. It is political courage. It is not poll driven it is conviction driven. It is consistent and does not change because of pressure or threats of political survival. It is reconfirmed every day. It differs from combat courage in that it is thought oriented not reaction oriented. Combat courage does not necessarily translate into political courage. Combat courage is admirable and you only know if you have it when you are in combat. President Bush has demonstrated that he has political courage and this is why he was re-elected. By owning a bust of President Bush, Commander in Chief you will be making a statement and in a politically charged environment, it takes courage.”

This is just the beginning. Look at this:

Before:

After:

This is just the beginning:

Statistic of the week

by digby

Just this:

That’s called “democracy” by some people.

.

No, you’re the puppet Donald

by digby

If you want to know how the dark lord Steve Bannon will get his way, read this piece about how he deals with Trump. It’s taken from radio interviews Trump has done of the past year or so with Bannon on Breitbart Radio before he joined the campaign:

The flattery often came before a leading question.

Last December, Bannon told Trump that, “I know you’re a student of military history.” Then, he laid out a case for questioning the U.S. alliance with Turkey, a member of NATO since the 1950s.

Wasn’t it true, Bannon asked, that the situation was a bit like the web of treaties that connected European countries before World War I?

“People were locked into these treaties. . . . It led to the beginning of the bloodiest century in mankind’s history,” Bannon said. He said that Turkey had changed since it joined NATO, turning to Islamism under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. What if Turkey was drawn into a broader conflict in Syria, perhaps with Russia?

“This is not something, Steve, that you want to end up in World War III over,” Trump said.

In other cases, Bannon would use his questions to frame policy choices — and then ask Trump if he agreed with the frame and the choice.

In the December interview, Bannon presented the problems of climate change and the Islamic State as a binary option — offering Trump, in effect, the choice of fighting one or the other.

“Do you agree with the pope and President Obama that [climate change] is absolutely a path to global suicide, if specific deals are not cut in Paris, versus focusing on radical Islam?” Bannon asked, referring to the negotiations that eventually led to a global climate agreement in Paris last year.

Trump said that what other people considered to be climate change was probably just weather. Radical Islam should be the focus.

“We are fools,” Trump said, meaning the Obama administration.

In the wake of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s early May announcement that he was not ready to back Trump, Bannon invited Trump to reflect on whether Ryan (R-Wis.) was showing “a lack of respect — not just for you, but for your policies.”

On issues ranging from trade to slowing Muslim immigration, Bannon said, “What [Ryan] wants is for you to drop those policies. Are you prepared to do that for unity?” When Trump later began to say it would be “better if we do get together,” Bannon interrupted, saying that Ryan’s version of unity would represent “a collapse of what you ran on and a collapse on what [voters] backed you on.”

“Well, you can’t do that,” responded Trump.

Bannon also seemed to recognize when Trump had made a potential gaffe — even when Trump had not — and to try to steer him back to correct it. The first time Bannon asked Trump about U.S. foreign policy toward Turkey, Trump volunteered that he had business interests there.

“I have a little conflict of interest, because I have a major, major building in Istanbul,” Trump said. “It’s called Trump Towers. Two towers, instead of one. Not the usual one, it’s two. And I’ve gotten to know Turkey very well.”

A little later, Bannon circled back, asking Trump to explain why his conflict of interest should not bother voters.

“They say, ‘Hey look, this guy’s got vested business interests all over the world. How do I know he’s going to stand up to Turkey?’ ” Bannon said.

Trump did not directly address the question.

Trump is an utter moron and Bannon isn’t. He saw that Trump was a fool and sought him out to use him for his own purposes. He’s an ideologue of a sort we haven’t seen in American politics and don’t yet understand. Trump is a dangerous, dangerous man in many ways, mostly because of his unpredictability. Who knows if Bannon can control him? But it’s pretty clear that’s his plan.

.

Trump’s kind of guy

by digby

ABC News reports that Sid Miller, the current Texas agriculture commissioner, is reportedly being considered for the position of Secretary of Agriculture. That’s this guy:

I wonder why feminists were so frantic about Trump’s election?

Remember, we need to keep guys like this happy in the future. (And yes, the misogynist women by their sides too —)

Speaking of which, Frank Luntz