The Glade 4.0

You got the part of Trump rallies on CNN that CNN wanted to show you. Other people that are there tell other stories. Fake news problem on Facebook. Sure.

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Seeing as how there is a cottage industry now in suing people for not wanting to participate in gay weddings, there's a special need for that protection. Prior to the SCOTUS decision, the cry of the gay marriage advocate was always "but it isn't hurting you!"

Well, indeed, they were right. Gay marriage itself wasn't hurting anyone, so the gay marriage advocates had to go find some way to hurt people with lawsuits. It wasn't enough to merely merely allow gay marriage, it was really an inroad to force certain people to choose between their beliefs and their livelihood.

So, evidently those special protections are needed, primarily to protect religious people from people like you. Anything you'd term as "religious bullshit" is probably a good thing.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I get it. Left-wing media bias. Really. I do.

Donald Trump is not a victim. You are not a victim. The right are not victims.

The left-wing media did not invent a story about the KKK coming out and supporting Donald Trump because of his anti-Mexican, anti-Muslim, anti-black, and anti-immigrant rhetoric. That actually happened. That was not a lie. That was not fake news. That was real. Hillary Clinton tried put people in the basket who did not belong there. She did not invent it out of thin air.

This is sort of like how Russians did not send fake emails to Wikileaks. Hillary Clinton and the DNC actually did all that. Those emails were the real thing. It wasn't a vast right-wing conspiracy.

Donald Trump supporters threatening poor defenseless Muslim transwomen with knives and threatening to deport them to Mexico unless they spread their legs to be raped did not happen. That was invented by left-wing nutjobs who were butthurt that The Light Itself lost the election. Donald Trump supporters acting like asshats at Donald Trump rallies was real. That happened. They were harmless asshats, but they were asshats all the same. Maybe you attended a rally and behaved yourself. Maybe you saw other people behaving themselves. That happened, too. There were people at Donald Trump rallies who behaved themselves. There were also people who behaved like asshats.

Donald Trump's entire campaign revolved around appealing to the lowest common denominator of white trash. His message was about all of the people who are taking their livelihood away from them - all of the colored non-white non-christian people who are different from them that are taking their jobs and their money away. He based his campaign around low-skill laborers who's jobs are being automated out of existence because tightening the lug nuts on the wheels of a Chevy Malibu isn't worth $70,000 a year. He appealed to their most base and vulgar instincts, and it was a smashing success because the Democrats spent their entire campaign going after hipster SJW garbage with sexual fetish for generic brown people.

So now, because of the left-wing activists, you've got Billy Bob, Bubba, and Earl thinking all of the white men in America are going to be turned into trannies and faggots, and all of their jobs will be given away to the wetbacks, towelheads, and niggers. Meanwhile, you've got the Democrats cruising up and down the coasts saying, "Yup! That's what we're going to do!" Ray and Jimbo went to the Trump rally to express their discontent, and all the left-wing media had to do to catch some drunk and rowdy rednecks was make sure the cameras were on.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

We were talking about whether or not any of you have been to a Trump rally. I doubt very much that you have, your representation that you know what they were like because you saw a sound bite of one on CNN notwithstanding.

The real problem here is that you (and Taly, with her "rabid animals" comment) are looking down on people you are not in a position to look down upon. Yes, Trump appealed to the "white working class". That is not the same thing as "lowest common denominator." The LCD of either side consists primarily of people who can't really be assed to go to the polls at all - those rednecks you're talking about mostly didn't go to the polls, much like most of the fools in downtown Portland didn't trouble themselves to vote.

This fantasy that Trump voters resent trannies or people of different colors or whatever isn't about why people voted for Trump; it's about feeling that you are better than people that voted for Trump.

To the degree that people voted for Trump because of brown people or trannies or whatever, it wasn't because of resentment of those people - it was because of resentment of how issues surrounding those people have been presented. For decades now, once an "out group" has been identified, it's been given a national voice through the media - both entertainment and news - and politicians. Any attempt to respond to that voice has been silenced as <insert form of bigotry here>, regardless of how hypocritical, wrong-headed, or trivial the complaints by the victim group have been.

This is what motivated people to vote for Trump - the fact that he did not back down when the usual hate labels were applied. By the time they were applied, they were already useless from overuse. No one cared if Trump was racist or not because that label had been so overused. People knew damn well that Trump would have been called a racist no matter what he said.

The fact was that people got tired of the Left's attempts to force social change through media dominance and the courts without even troubling themselves to have a national coversation first. The "transgender rights" thing was a prime example; the issue exploded onto the scene out of nowhere, in less than a year. It went from not even being on the radar to people freaking out over bathrooms with the average person still trying to get a grip on what the issue was even about.

It took decades for the civil rights movement to turn from "legitimate force pushing both de jure and de facto equality for blacks and other minorities" to "crudely disguised hate group beclowning itself with its own hypocrisy". The transgender movement accomplished this in less than one year. The average person is still coming to terms with what "transgender" really even is - because it's been lumped in with gay rights, but doesn't belong there, seeing as how it involves taking drugs and having surgery and is pretty obviously a medical/psychological issue being presented as solely a social one. But we didn't even finish with "some people have gender dysphoria and need help" before we were on to "you can't perform the Vagina Monologues because some women don't have vaginas."

That's what really fueled Trump specifically - the Left felt it was simply entitled to force whatever social "progress" it wanted on the nation without even the need for a pretense of discussion. This had been accelerating for years. In reality, history indicates that the out-party has a strong advantage in a post-incumbent election (i.e. the end of an 8 year term) but the reason it was Trump specifically was that enough people in the right states thought - rightly - that not only could they not get a job tightening bolts for 70 grand, they couldn't even get a job at 17 grand a year, but no one gave a **** because they were white and more useful for scaring blacks, hispanics, gays, and transgendered people into voting for Democrats, and the Democrats figured those white folks would still vote union democrat even though the plant shut down and took the union with it.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

The only thing I can figure is that Coro is a deep Trump supporter and his posts are done to continue to add fuel to the fire that got Trump elected.

Deflect, reject, ignore, and insult. Repeat if challenged.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

All I know is, I once considered myself a left leaning guy, who mostly voted for Democrats. Nowadays, I feel I am no longer part of that group, as the Democrats and supposed left leaners appear to be just way too nuts for me to handle. I don't feel I am a right leaner. I just don't know where I fit in, anymore. Perhaps there is some middle out there I belong to?

I suppose on a lot of stuff these days, I would be labeled a bigot, or whatever. I just don't get it anymore. Dudes in dresses and lipstick wanting to be called ma'am? Sorry, that's just **** up IMO. There is no world in which I can accept that as normal or acceptable. I am not wanting to tell people they can't do it, but I can't accept it as normal. I don't get this whole gender bullshit, either. Is it all the soy milk? Hormones in the chicken? WTF is going on with people?

Today I drove my wife to town to do grocery shopping. I rarely go to town anymore. I almost got into a wreck 4 times. None of which was my fault. People were cutting in front of me, almost clipping my car and slamming on breaks, etc. I swear, I must be getting too damn old for this world. People are going nuts.

Baaaaaaah humbug, or something.

It's pretty disingenuous to say religious people need the protection when it's looking less and less likely that the gay marriage institution even survives Trump's presidency. If he gets to appoint a second Supreme Court Justice it's probably dead. Trump's right shift on social issues makes Bush look liberal. First he took Pence as a running mate, someone for whom, "actually hates homosexuals" would not be a baseless accusation. Now look at his cabinet picks. DeVos is even worse than Pence when it comes to anti gay views. You can't dismiss Pence as a paean to the religious right in order to get elected anymore. Trump is serious about walking back gay rights.

Yeah, so a lot of that screams of "i'm old". You need to get out more, seriously.

But yeah, i'm with you on most of the rest of the stuff. I don't care what people do, but that doesn't mean i have to do what you want me to do.

Most people are in the middle. We're just not crazy vocal about it. "I'M REASONABLE!!!!"

It isn't even remotely looking like it won't survive, except to people who want to suck their thumb and pretend so they can avoid confronting the fact that they lost because they tried to dictate social change through the media instead of actually convincing people like we did with every other major social reform.



Lol, that's ridiculous. DeVos's "gay views" are the imagination of the left that thinks anyone that ever set foot in a church hates gay people. This is right up there with "DeVos says schools need guns to protect against grizzly bears!" (She didn't. She was talking about fences, in response to someone else's comment. The NYT is also pretending Rick Perry didn't know what the DOE did with nuclear weapons - despite the fact that he mentioned it in his acceptance of the nomination and Pantex is in Texas.)

As for Pence, yes I can dismiss him as something to get religious votes. Trump literally does not give a single **** about reversing that Supreme Court decision. It's telling that you're mentioning Pence and DeVos who don't matter at all in that regard. The only cabinet pick that matters is Jeff Sessions who explicitly said he will respect precedent.

Conservatives have enormous respect for precedent. That decision is made - and unlike Roe V. Wade there's no equivalent to the crowd that thinks late term abortion is "women's health." Suing bakeries is small potatoes compared to killing viable, healthy babies well into late-term as some of these **** barbarians advocate.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I find the idea that anyone thinks gay marriage is not going to survive in 4 or 8 years absolutely crazy. There isn't any evidence of that and Trump, for SC advice, has met twice now with a prominent libertarian legal scholar. Libertarians aren't ones to undo gay marriage.

Pay attention to some news sources outside your bubble.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

I'm not sure why it would be crazy to consider that. Trump has shown himself to be far more conservative on social/moral issues than the Republican mainstream. His campaign was based around declaring that it is actually OK to use race and religion as statistical indicators and thus factor them into making major decisions. Even mainstream Republicans reject this.

Why is it nuts to suggest a socially conservative President, who picked basically the most socially conservative VP possible, and appoints socially conservative Cabinet members, will also appoint very socially conservative SC justices hostile to gay marriage?

Now, Trump's administration will definitely not involve itself in an effort to overturn Oberfell. You're right that Trump doesn't consider the issue to be very important. But it doesn't have to. If he replaces a liberal justice with a conservative one, don't you think one of the red states won't at least make the attempt at getting a reversal? Oberfell was a 5-4 decision. It could easily go 5-4 the other way. The justices that voted against it didn't make a "gays are bad" argument. The argument was over whether or not gay marriage bans violate the Equal Protection Clause, and the dissenting justices aren't likely to have changed their views regarding that.

http://www.thewrap.com/donald-trump-emb ... onvention/

You should pay attention to the world outside your bubble.

_________________

It was a meaningless ploy for votes. His appointees fairly clearly send the message that he cares nothing for LGBT rights.

I've seen that picture. Trump has done a full 180 on a lot of things. I don't judge him by his (quite frankly insane) 2012 tweets either.

I'm curious why you then bother to form any opinion at all on the subject. You don't listen to what he says, but you seem listen to what others say about him. You're assuming guilt by association. Just to be clear, that's a fallacy. It's really sloppy logic.

I gotta tell you, it sounds as if you let others form your opinions for you.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

For the right price, I am willing to form opinions for you. This is a standing offer to anyone.

_________________

The words of a pathological narcissist are less than worthless. But even ignoring that, it's judging him based on his actions, not his words. I seem to remember some idiom about that. It'll come to me.

The mouth is louder than the pen. /sagenod.

Or... wait. Is it "the loudest mouth wins the audience"? Yeah, I think that's it.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Then judge him on his actions, not the actions of others.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/23/us/p ... ights.html

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

What should my opinion be about environmental reforms that don't include solutions to environmental problems but address instead monetary redistribution vis a vis carbon credits?


Please quote a price before billing.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I think Trump is probably like a lot of cosmopolitan men of his generation - (i) doesn't have any particular antipathy towards gay people (as long as it's not *his* son), but (ii) instinctively feels like it's obviously fine and completely hilarious to make fun of "fairies" and "sissies", and (iii) doesn't particularly give a **** about "gay rights" one way or the other but feels like they've been pushing for "special rights" and he's sick of hearing about it. Based on that, I don't think Trump would take any deliberate action to overturn gay marriage, but he also wouldn't expend any political capital to prevent it from being overturned. Ditto on any other gay rights issue (e.g., military service, federal anti-discrimination rules, etc.). So, if the Republicans put forward a potential SC nominee or a bill to reinstate a ban on military service, or he gets pressure to undo the federal anti-discrimination rules, I don't think he'll resist it in any way.

On what other major social reform did we first convince people and then dictate change? About the only one I can think of is women's suffrage. Slavery was ended by war. Interracial marriage wasn't supported by a majority of the country until 40 years after the Supreme Court declared it a Constitutional right. Views on abortion rights have always been split but it was still not openly talked about and effectively banned in most of the country until the Supreme Court declared it to be a right. If anything, the triumph of gay rights and gay marriage has been the opposite - a widespread shift in public opinion in favor of gay rights and gay marriage was already underway before the SC finally made it official with Lawrence and Ogberwhatthef*ck. Yes, it was media driven in many ways, but that's how mass communication and mass persuasion works. Unlike racial equality and interracial marriage, it wasn't dictated to people; it was communicated and broadly accepted. And the fact that it took 40 years for a majority of the country to support interracial marriage and roughly 10-15 for a majority to support gay marriage is, in my view, a pretty powerful endorsement of the media persuasion strategy over the government mandate strategy.

TL;DR -
It's not a litmus test he cares about one way or the other. Pretty much mirrors my opinion... I don't care what you do in the privacy of your own home, equally, I don't hold it against you.

It's called being neutral on the subject. I know, many feel that being neutral about something is the equivalent of being against something, but I disagree. It's not something I care about and I don't make an issue of it. I'd prefer to get the government out of the job of deciding what marriage is and leave it to whatever social-religious category you belong to.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I can offer you a choice. There's a $10 opinion, or there's a $1000 opinion.

_________________