Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Mahlerian]

     How Donald Trump Supporters Attack Journalists

Because I have written critically about Trump, I have received innumerable death threats, sometimes just general invocations that I should die, sometimes more specific threats that I should be shot or "lynched," as one Trump fan wrote. I have been called "kike," "Jew" and "anti-American Zionist," even though I'm Episcopalian with a Jewish father (as if that makes a difference). I have received video cartoons that look like they are from Nazi Germany of hook-nosed men dressed in Jewish garb rubbing their hands greedily over piles of money. I have been told to go back where I came from, whatever that means. I have been called "fag," "pedo," and once—in an email that made no sense—"nigger-lover." One Trump fan mentioned he knew which schools my children attended, and correctly named them. Topping it off, some Trump fans have even gone after one of my sons online, although he knew enough to immediately block them.

   

Sickening.  He has epilepsy, so a troll thinks it's a great joke to send him a seizure-inducing video?  These people either have no contact with reality or they're devoid of empathy.

[Karl Henning]

If the Tuperos don't like a country with a free press, they might consider moving to Russia.

Sickening.  He has epilepsy, so a troll thinks it's a great joke to send him a seizure-inducing video?  These people either have no contact with reality or they're devoid of empathy.

Much like their candidate.

[Mahlerian]

Much like their candidate.

Well, he fits both criteria.

[Karl Henning]

Well, he fits both criteria.

Indeed.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Sickening.  He has epilepsy, so a troll thinks it's a great joke to send him a seizure-inducing video?  These people either have no contact with reality or they're devoid of empathy.

Trump supporters are good that way. Like the idiots wearing shirts "LOCK HER UP" as if locking anyone up is going to improve their job situation or make the foreclosures going away.

[San Antone]

Trump gives America chance to correct course
By Rep. Mike Kelly

(CNN)"For of all sad words of tongue and pen, The saddest are these: 'It might have been.'"

John Greenleaf Whittier wrote those words 160 years ago, but they are just as relevant today. Indeed, they serve as a guiding light for the decisions I make every day, whether as a father or a husband or a businessman or a public servant. And in less than one month, those words will guide my decision as a voter.

Four years ago, I watched our country miss a tremendous opportunity to vastly improve our national well-being when we re-elected President Barack Obama and shunned Mitt Romney.

To this day, I believe the United States suffered on every measurable level -- economically, societally and internationally -- because of that decision, and I suspect many of my fellow Americans retrospectively agree.

Why? Because of what "might have been."

Compared to the undeniable chaos of the last four years, a Republican presidency would have delivered a dramatically better reality for our citizens and for the world.

The course of the next four years is completely in our control and should not be permitted to resemble the last eight years. The challenges of those years still exist, yet for now, so do many of the opportunities. Time will not stand still if we wait to seize them.

It is abundantly clear that a President Hillary Clinton, bound to a ruthlessly left-wing base, will simply not be able to break from the Obama trajectory and thus provide the stronger leadership these tough times demand. Only a unified Republican government, unbeholden to the status quo, is capable of confronting today's reality and securing a more prosperous and hopeful future for all Americans.

This, of course, means making Donald Trump our 45th president.

Read the rest HERE.

[drogulus]

     Even Republicans know the Bill Clinton attacks don't work


     If the standard is "get Trump elected", then no, the attacks don't work and never have in past campaigns. But if the goal is to lay the foundation for the inevitable "Impeach Hiltery" campaign, then it's probably the best way to go about it.

     

[zamyrabyrd]

Sickening.  He has epilepsy, so a troll thinks it's a great joke to send him a seizure-inducing video?  These people either have no contact with reality or they're devoid of empathy.

Of course, it's horrible and despicable. It would help if Trump himself could come out and restrain these dogs because they are not obviously helping his cause. But with all due respect, the level of rhetoric is at an all time low everywhere. Broadcasting bloopers said in private conversations 11 years ago used to be considered muckraking and uncharitable gossip. It isn't as though foul language isn't the norm on the streets, on TV, films and even in schools. There is a difference between action and words, although, sure, there is a connection between the two, but they should not be confused. In fact, not being able to distinguish them is at the basis of thought policing, which is already rampant.

Those who don't tow the line with the politically correct mandates of secularism, instead claiming their rights to conscientious religious objection are routinely hounded and even deprived of their livelihoods. There is brutality everywhere. Not restraining the criminal elements of unchecked immigration has produced actual assaults and rapes which are in the 10's of thousands. Really some people living in glass mansions should not throw stones and in a way it is good that all the rats can all come out of the woodwork. Billy-boy's victims were until recently consigned to the back burner but now, finally they can all come out en masse as a good reckoning for him and his wife.

[drogulus]

     

Of course, it's horrible and despicable. It would help if Trump himself could come out and restrain these dogs because they are not obviously helping his cause.

     They are his cause. His cause is fear (including fear of what Trumpists will do if Repubs "betray" him) and hatred. So the most fearful and hateful are drawn to him. This isn't an unfortunate byproduct of a campaign that wishes to focus on "the issues". The fear and hate are the issues.

     Evangelicals Without Standards

The prominent evangelicals sticking by Trump believe that he would be better on the issues—especially Supreme Court nominees and religious liberty—than Hillary Clinton would be. This is a reasonable position, although very few Trump supporters can remain clear-eyed about him. Subtly and often not so subtly, they find themselves defending the indefensible because forthrightly acknowledging all of Trump's faults makes backing him so awkward. They lower their standards and cede ground to the culture in a way they never would have imagined even a year ago.

And they are doing it for a campaign that is sinking, more than anything else, from the character flaws of the candidate. It would be a perfect morality tale for the religious right—if so many of its leaders weren't implicated in it.

[Brian]

While we're all posting articles, today the NY Times published a review of a series of anti-Hillary books. Pretty interesting comments:

"I've been bingeing on a lot of anti-Hillary Clinton books lately. Some of their gripes are legitimate and verifiable; some are halfway down the six-lane expressway to bonkersville. But of all the unlikely themes to emerge from them, of all the conspiracies they propose and the outrages they cite, the strangest of all is quite straightforward: that Mrs. Clinton is a potty mouth.

"It's hard to convey how pervasive this notion is. Some of these books are as obsessed with her supposed coarseness as they are with Travelgate, Benghazi, Vince Foster and missing emails. In Edward Klein's "Guilty as Sin," which came out last week, roughly two-thirds of the anonymously sourced quotations attributed to Mrs. Clinton are salted with obscenities. It's enough to make you wonder if the woman has David Milch on monthly retainer, generating her dialogue."

"...these blue outbursts wouldn't necessarily distinguish her from her male peers. According to Jesse Sheidlower, the lexicographer and author of "The F-Word," most studies show that men and women curse more or less the same amount. Women are plenty in touch with their inner Cartman."

-

"Most politicians have front-stage and backstage personalities, to borrow the language of the midcentury sociologist Erving Goffman. But the more consistent they are — either by being permanent backstage types (like John McCain, who tends toward informality, no matter what the setting) or front-stage types (like Ronald Reagan, who always seemed to be performing, no matter what the setting) — the more comfortable the public seems to be with them. The problem with Mrs. Clinton is that voters detect a huge gulf between her front-stage and backstage selves.

"You wonder whether this will be a problem for female politicians for years to come. They're obliged to hew to a much stricter set of regulations when they speak in public."

"As with Mr. Trump, the very traits that make Mrs. Clinton so unappealing to her detractors may make her immensely appealing to her fans. At one point in "Unlikeable," Mr. Klein has her putting her feet up on her desk, swigging a Michelob Ultra and doing impersonations of world leaders. Her haters will conclude from this image that she's sexless (beer-swilling) and disrespectful of her station. But her admirers will read it as pure Amy Schumer. And if Mrs. Clinton does indeed top her frustrations with a Tourettic garland of unprintables — well, then she's Selina Meyer on "Veep." And when Selina curses, it shows spine.

"Once again, our two cultures are talking past each other. And they probably will, right until the bitter end, when someone places his or her hand on the Bible and says a very different kind of oath."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/books/review-the-anti-clinton-brigades-four-letter-word-obsession.html

[San Antone]

Now that the Nobel Prize Committee defied literature elitists worldwide and chose the "outsider" Bob Dylan, I perceive a trend that bodes well for The Trumpster.

[Karl Henning]

Of course, it's horrible and despicable. It would help if Trump himself could come out and restrain these dogs because they are not obviously helping his cause. But with all due respect, the level of rhetoric is at an all time low everywhere. Broadcasting bloopers said in private conversations 11 years ago used to be considered muckraking and uncharitable gossip. It isn't as though foul language isn't the norm on the streets, on TV, films and even in schools. There is a difference between action and words, although, sure, there is a connection between the two, but they should not be confused. In fact, not being able to distinguish them is at the basis of thought policing, which is already rampant.

In line with Ernie's reply, El Tupé is his own biggest problem.  And you are absolutely right that the level of rhetoric is at an all-time low everywhere, and the level which it has reached this season, is the level to which El Tupé has led the rhetorical plunge.

I think you have made an error in judgement to call this bloopers.  Another point is, a conversation while wearing a mic is not exactly private;  but let's say it inhabits a kind of grey area between private and public.  That said:  on one hand, El Tupé had every right to take the high road.  He could have.  He had the opportunity to take the high road on the matter of how he treated Alicia Machado.  If he had been suitable presidential timber, he might well have weathered those irruptions.  The trouble is always (praise God in the highest) that he is himself, and he almost never has the discipline to be at all oterwise. So, in the case of Alicia Machado, there was no hint of remorse, but his default of lashing out.  And in the case of the conversation which you suggest ought to be disallowed, well, it was consistent with his behavior and remarks in public media (in the first place), and when he played his typical push-back routine, he opened up the microphone for those he has abused in the past.

For those who are all in for El Tupé, none of this makes any difference to their support.  But to the majority of the country, his character is the issue, and these revelations are completely relevant.

[Karl Henning]

I'm not sure I can forgive you, Brian, for making me aware that there is such a horrid thing as Michelob Ultra.

[zamyrabyrd]

I think you have made an error in judgement to call this bloopers.  Another point is, a conversation while wearing a mic is not exactly private;  but let's say it inhabits a kind of grey area between private and public.  That said:  on one hand, El Tupé had every right to take the high road.  He could have.  He had the opportunity to take the high road on the matter of how he treated Alicia Machado.  If he had been suitable presidential timber, he might well have weathered those irruptions.  The trouble is always (praise God in the highest) that he is himself, and he almost never has the discipline to be at all oterwise. So, in the case of Alicia Machado, there was no hint of remorse, but his default of lashing out.  And in the case of the conversation which you suggest ought to be disallowed, well, it was consistent with his behavior and remarks in public media (in the first place), and when he played his typical push-back routine, he opened up the microphone for those he has abused in the past.

For those who are all in for El Tupé, none of this makes any difference to their support.  But to the majority of the country, his character is the issue, and these revelations are completely relevant.

In back of where I am sitting at a computer there has been on the TV at least 5 minutes of repeated "up my skirt", couched in racy and explicit language for which any action has yet to be been proven or verified. So one is at least by the media condemned precluding any possibility or presumption of innocence. Heck, there are no real problems in the world, more important to dwell on?

The point I was making in the last post was the utter hypocrisy of the stone throwers. Michelle didn't swish her butt on TV? Barack Obama didn't sit in Jeremiah Wright's "church" where he would preach Goddam America? If SO MANY of Hillary's staff say more or less the same about her trenchant mouth, why shouldn't what they are saying as a group be true? Still, her husband actually DID those despicable acts to women, which for me, is a big joke to hear that she is some advocate of her sex.

That poor girl, Kathy Shelton's life was RUINED from the age of 12 when she was abducted by two men, beaten and raped. Where was sympathy for the victim who was deprived of the possibility of having children, 41 years ago, no less? Instead, she was subjected to humiliating investigations and even had the incredible accusation slapped on her that she "fantasized" about older men. The rape and assault were bad enough but the knowledge that there was no justice for the perpetrators when there was plenty of evidence is still agonizing for her. One of them got only 2 months in jail and his lawyer to thank for who was none other then Hillary Rodham.

As for Machado, Hillary was the one to bring it up while on national TV no less. She never called anyone a name, sure. It turned out the lady was problematic, even threatened a judge in her home country. OK, he could have been gentlemanly about the whole thing but Hillary fights dirty. Alicia did make a sleaze tape and she only has to thank Hillary for bringing it out of the archives.

[Karl Henning]

Well, and now El Tupé, Jr. tells the wimmen, "If yez can't handle it, go teach kindergarten."

[Karl Henning]

snypsss, call your office, now.

[Karl Henning]

In back of where I am sitting at a computer there has been on the TV at least 5 minutes of repeated "up my skirt", couched in racy and explicit language for which any action has yet to be been proven or verified. So one is at least by the media condemned precluding any possibility or presumption of innocence. Heck, there are no real problems in the world, more important to dwell on?

Oh, but there is:  that this sexual predator might be in the White House, is a real problem.

You may say it's the media precluding any possibility or presumption of innocence, but it's actually his own words.  Blame the media for reporting the facts, I suppose . . . .

So, the Constitution provides that anyone being tried is entitled to representation in court, yes?  And lawyers who provide this service are doing public service and fulfilling a Constitutional obligation.  And lawyers have an obligation to provide their client the best defense.

The situation is (surprise!) more nuanced than El Tupé and/or the Anti-Clinton propagandists can be interested in portraying.

[Zeus]

That poor girl, Kathy Shelton's life was RUINED from the age of 12 when she was abducted by two men, beaten and raped. Where was sympathy for the victim who was deprived of the possibility of having children, 41 years ago, no less? Instead, she was subjected to humiliating investigations and even had the incredible accusation slapped on her that she "fantasized" about older men. The rape and assault were bad enough but the knowledge that there was no justice for the perpetrators when there was plenty of evidence is still agonizing for her. One of them got only 2 months in jail and his lawyer to thank for who was none other then Hillary Rodham.

This attack has no traction because Hillary was acting as a public defender. She was doing her job. Everyone with even a passing familiarity with the legal system will understand the moral dilemmas that sometimes arise when defending a client who may be guilty.

From wiki:

Clinton then requested to the judge to excuse her from having to represent the defendant, as has been corroborated by Gibson in a CNN interview.

"She contacted the judge and the judge didn't remove her..."
— Mahlon Gibson, CNN

As a personal belief of a client's guilt is not sufficient for a lawyer to be released by the court of the lawyer's duty to represent the client, and as Clinton did not have the legally required first-hand knowledge of the defendant's guilt and the defendant himself denied the charge of rape, the court did not assent to Clinton's request.

The court then ordered Clinton to represent the defendant as his criminal defence lawyer. According to CNN, "Once Clinton was assigned, Gibson said, she had a legal obligation to represent Taylor to the fullest, and she did."[3]

[drogulus]

This attack has no traction because Hillary was acting as a public defender.

     Originally the charge was she laughed at the victim. She asked to be excused from defending an alleged rapist, the judge would not excuse her. Naturally, under the circumstances, it follows like night follows day that she would laugh at the plight of the victim. Only a sadist would try to avoid defending a rapist.

[Gurn Blanston]

I'd be delighted to have her for a lawyer if I ever needed one. My lawyer better go to the wall for me.