|
Post by Christine on Jun 30, 2017 20:09:29 GMT -5
She made a nasty, personal comment by implying Trump has a small penis. She knew exactly what she was saying, no? And fair enough, a good chunk of her audience probably thought it was an hilarious comment, one that Trump richly deserved. But it is what it is. I apologize for quoting this again, but another point to address: "a good chunk of her audience probably thought it was hilarious" and Trump deserved it? As in, a good chunk of people relish jokes about Trump's dick size? Come on. Who on earth gives a flying fuck about the size of Trump's dick? No, this is and always has been about Trump's narcissism. See the John Oliver video I linked above. That's what's mock-worthy. That was the point. But I wouldn't be surprised if your version is what Trump thinks: everyone who watches the Morning Joe subsequently goes about their day, sniggering at the thought of Trump's tiny penis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2017 20:40:26 GMT -5
Do you want to know what's amusing?
Of course I have heard the (completely bogus) theory that the size of a man's hands and feet correlate to his penis size.
But I never connected that with the jibes on Trump's hands. I thought it was just a long-standing joke about his stumpy little hands. Perhaps it is that I'd much prefer to think about Trump's penis as little as possible.
And sorry, Trump richly deserved a joke at his expense. Her joke wasn't nearly as nasty as his comment, and SHE IS NOT. THE. FUCKING. PRESIDENT.
God knows Obama and W both had a shit ton of criticisms and cruel remarks directed their way. Did either of them ever respond like Trump does, or anything close to it?
No. Because they understood (as do most leaders who aren't tin-pot third-rate whacko dictators) that the president must be above acting like a fucking fifth-grade bully, whatever the media or his constituents might do.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 30, 2017 21:53:01 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm scratching my head over this whole idea that the harsh criticism, and even mocking, of a POTUS suddenly has something to do with the infantile behavior of a POTUS.
I'm fairly certain it's the current POTUS who is to blame for his own behavior.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2017 22:17:02 GMT -5
you know, if he spent more time getting briefed and, yanno, THINKING and doing actual president-y stuff, and less time on Twitter and watching cable TV, he'd hear less mocking and criticism -- both because there would be less to mock and criticize, and because he wouldn't be obsessively gorging himself on it.
But what do I know. I'm just another rude citizen, bleeding from my face and my pores and my whatever, most likely.
Pass the popcorn, will you? The collusion story is heating up.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jun 30, 2017 22:20:57 GMT -5
Who cares what she "really" meant? Let's suppose she just tweeted "Trump has a tiny penis! LOL!"
Vulgar and mean? Yes. A disrespectful way to address the POTUS? Sure.
You (Rob) have acknowledged that nothing about Trump's reaction is justified by Mika Brzezinsk's tweets, so what exactly is your point here? That people are being vulgar and mean to the President on Twitter? Okay. So, what, you want us all to join you in agreeing that people shouldn't be vulgar and mean to the President on Twitter?
I can only agree insofar as that I believe that in a perfect world, no one would be vulgar or mean ever. And that I personally would not Tweet vulgarities at anyone (unless I was really, really pushed over the edge, which has so far never happened).
But while you deny you are equivocating between the two, you seem really determined to keep coming back to how nasty and mean a talk show host was in snarking at a very powerful bully who has been incredibly vile towards her.
I just can't join you up on that high horse. And the conversation still reminds me of the adult punching a child in the face for kicking his shins.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jul 2, 2017 10:06:55 GMT -5
This crap on Twitter? This is Trump "unfiltered," to use his own word, without smarter, more savvy, or more civilized advisors in the way. This is WHO HE IS. This is HOW HE THINKS. But imo, this goes back to what I said during the election: one can choose to either follow Trump into the gutter or not (especially on social media), and I think that choosing to follow him down only gives him more power, only encourages him. And I think a lot of otherwise smart people know this, yet they can't help themselves. To make an example of you, Cass, I'm pretty sure I saw a tweet from you to Trump along the lines of "what the fuck is wrong with you." Did you think better of it and delete it? Apologies if I have this wrong. Regardless, there are people saying such things--and worse--to Trump on twitter, specifically tweeting these things to Trump. As awful as he is, he's still the POTUS. And saying such things isn't accomplishing anything. It is--imo, anyway--only empowering Trump and his defenders. Sometimes--usually, in fact--the high road is really hard. And that sucks. The problem is not with Cassandra tweeting "What the fuck is wrong with you?" about Donald Trump. The problem is Donald Trump does fucked-up shit which demands a response. God knows, you certainly aren't going to get one from the groveling eunuchs and sniveling bootlickers that currently make up the Republican Party. The problem is your assertion saying awful things about the awful shit Trump says about women, people of color, Democrats, U.S. allies, liberals, the media and anyone else that has pissed him off, is you are shifting the burden of responsibility from Trump's shoulders on to ours and I won't carry that weight. I'm a grown man and if I say it on social media, on a debate board or in person, you can be certain I meant to say it. Maybe I might have to explain it or apologize for it, but I don't delete Tweets and I don't censor myself. I own my own shit and I don't duck and cover when I get called out for it. When Trump acts like he's got some good sense, I'll say that. When he acts like he's off his meds and throwing his poo right, left and middle, I'll say that too. What I won't do is accept I am following Trump into the gutter by calling him on his shit. I speak truth to power and always have. What about you? If anything, the fact you actually follow Trump on Twitter puts you in a superior position to respond directly to his madness. Saying this is just Trump being Trump is missing the point. Yes, it is and No, it is not normal behavior for the supposed-POTUS. You seem to be more irate with the response to Trump bizarre vendettas and feuds than anything else as though we should be shrugging this off with another, " Meh. That's Trump. Whaddya gonna do?" That is enabling. That is normalizing. That is rewarding crude, rude and boorish behavior and like a naughty 9-yr-old who belches loudly at the family dinner table and giggles, that will and that should prompt a negative and critical response. It always will by me. Rather than call out Cassandra for asking about Trump "What the fuck is wrong with you?" why don't you share with everyone what it is you said when Trump went apeshit on Mika Brzeniski and Joe Scarbourough? Where's this "high road" you take, robeiae since you have a direct connection to the ertswhile Leader of the Free World? We're in a pretty mess when we get to the point in America where we can't say the president is being an ass.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2017 13:37:46 GMT -5
Something I was thinking about during my run this morning (and yes, I'm doing a shitty job at taking a break from news and politics. I'm just obsessed):
As I noted above (and posted a link about), it has always been the case that writers, artists, protesters, etc. criticize and lampoon their rulers, and much of it was not only harsh, but brutal and vulgar. Look at ancient Roman graffiti or Regency political cartoons. That really hasn't changed, only now we have the interwebz and such to spread it.
But rulers generally don't respond in kind, except perhaps such notable exceptions as Caligula and Duterte. Trump is putting himself in some pretty piss-poor company.
Even if you want to argue that Trump is being especially harshly mocked and criticized more so than past presidents -- I don't necessarily agree but let's assume it for the sake of argument -- Jesus Christ, look at the way he's acted in comparison to past presidents. Do any of the rest of them have tapes bragging about grabbing women by the pussy or any of the myriad of other horrific and outrageous examples of egregiously awful behavior I could list?
No. Not even fucking close. So if he's being lambasted and mocked more, it's because he has earned it a hundred times over.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 2, 2017 15:34:43 GMT -5
You (Rob) have acknowledged that nothing about Trump's reaction is justified by Mika Brzezinsk's tweets, so what exactly is your point here? I think I've expressed my point in this regard multiple times and it's pretty much crystal clear. But okay, one more time: Lowering oneself to Trump's level isn't helpful, if one's goal is about minimizing Trump's influence, is about pulling his teeth (so to speak) in way or another, is about making him weaker, is about somehow getting rid of him, and/or is about shutting up his sycophantic followers. Nowhere have I claimed her comments--or similar lowbrow ones from others in the media or elsewhere--are somehow illegal, should somehow not be allowed, that she or anyone else needed to be fired or the like. Go back ad look. Again, I can think Trump is awful, that some of his tweets are so nasty and inappropriate as to prove he doesn't have the temperament to be POTUS, and that he is--all by himself--steadily eroding the faith of, well, everyone but his supporters have (or had) for the office he holds. But at the same time I can also be critical of what people--especially those with significant platforms in the media--say to or about Trump, when I think they're crossing lines, too. I look forward to the next installment of "How can I spin this to make it seem like robeiae is supporting Trump"...
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jul 2, 2017 19:19:33 GMT -5
I don't think you're supporting Trump, and I'm not trying to spin it that you are. I think you are just so used to being the conservative surrounded by liberals that you feel obligated to play "Well, both sides are behaving badly" no matter how badly that Republicans are behaving, because it would pain you too much to just admit that sometimes the liberals who are being mean and nasty are not overreacting. Nowhere have I claimed her comments--or similar lowbrow ones from others in the media or elsewhere--are somehow illegal, should somehow not be allowed, that she or anyone else needed to be fired or the like. Go back ad look. I never claimed that you were in favor of censorship or even wanting people who criticize the President to be fired. But saying "It's not helpful" kind of misses the point when we're talking about a public personality whose job is to sound off like that. I'm sure Mika and Joe would like to diminish Trump's power, but telling them they'd be more effective by taking the high road is kind of like telling SNL they'd be more classy without the fart jokes. So you just come off as a schoolmarmish scold wrinkling your nose and wagging your finger at those darn liberals who won't play by your preferred rules even though Trump has already used the rules for toilet paper.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 2, 2017 21:51:10 GMT -5
But saying "It's not helpful" kind of misses the point when we're talking about a public personality whose job is to sound off like that. I'm sure Mika and Joe would like to diminish Trump's power, but telling them they'd be more effective by taking the high road is kind of like telling SNL they'd be more classy without the fart jokes. I disagree. It's not like that at all, imo. SNL performers don't claim to be serious-minded journalists reporting on/discussing/analyzing daily news and politics (and as I already noted, Obama and company had to deal with the same sort of stuff from the other ideological side of the media. Moreover, there's a big difference in insults and the like that are offered up as comedy (or attempted comedy) and those that are simply mean-spirited attacks. And for the record, Trump can't tell the difference imo and tends to engage only in the latter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2017 22:08:33 GMT -5
For the sake of argument, let's say that all the liberal, moderate, and neverTrump conservatives stopped doing what (we all seem to agree) media has always done and instead, in an unprecedented fashion, gave nothing but polite respect to Trump, who easily deserves it less than any past president.
Do you think Trump and his self-described deplorable bandwagon would become civil and moderate, behave with decorum, attempt reasonable compromise?
What do we gain if the media and the majority of citizens who find his behavior appalling limit ourselves to "Well, Mr. president, I'm afraid I disagree"?
I submit Trump would be not a whit better, that the Deplorables would beat their chests and crow about how thoroughly they beat the libtards (a group which now apparently includes many prominent conservatives. I have seen Ben Sasse called a Libtard). Moreover, many of our representatives, including some important conservatives, would fight him less than they do. As the Tea Party showed us, they listen to the people yelling. And finally, our allies would be less aware than they are that more than half of us find the guy appalling, which will help us regain their trust when this clown is out of office.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jul 3, 2017 7:40:02 GMT -5
Cass is right. Polite disagreement with someone who doesn't do "disagreement" is pointless. That doesn't mean that tweeting insults at him is necessarily effective, but it's certainly no less effective than fluttering your hands in dismay.
At this point, opposing Trump is more about emboldening and mobilizing the opposition than actually persuading him and his cronies.
Again, I am not saying that tweeting penis insults at him is an effective strategy, but I'd say it falls squarely in the "neutral" category - it probably does nothing either way, but if someone feels better after doing it, you're accomplishing even less by tut-tutting at them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2017 8:48:38 GMT -5
I'm following a number of conservative politicians and commentators on Twitter, all of them neverTrumpers, but unquestionably conservative -- e.g., Benn Sasse, Jennifer Rubin, Rick Wilson, Ana Navarro, Max Boot, Evan McMullin. Indeed, they're more solidly conservative (in the old-school way) than Trump and many of his hard-core followers, who, as far as I can tell, don't give much of a shit about federalism or small government, etc. I'm picky about who I follow -- I am not seeking universal agreement with everything I believe, but I like reason and, when I can get it, humor.
And holy Christ, you should see the self-described Deplorables go after them. Vicious, insulting, unrelenting, frequently threatening, and utterly impervious to reason and facts. They call these conservatives libtards and traitors -- they often get treated as badly as bona fide liberals. All because they criticize Trump (and do a pretty damn good job of it).
They've given up trying to reason with Trump and his followers. They've all been retweeting this fantastic 17-part rant by Tom Nichols, starting with this Tweet
and ending in this one.
and including, crucially, this one.
(you may or may not agree with him that Obama or Clinton had a "cult," but note what he's saying -- the Trump cult is a million times beyond it. This is a conservative talking.)
A liberal or moderate can sit down with the likes of Ben Sasse and have a civil, rational, polite policy debate. But Trump and his hardcore base? As Nichols notes, they are beyond the reach of rationality, even by principled conservatives.
ETA:
Seriously, read that whole Tom Nichols rant. It's marvelous.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 3, 2017 9:42:32 GMT -5
For the sake of argument, let's say that all the liberal, moderate, and neverTrump conservatives stopped doing what (we all seem to agree) media has always done and instead, in an unprecedented fashion, gave nothing but polite respect to Trump, who easily deserves it less than any past president. Sorry, but we all don't agree there at all. The media can't have always done what it is doing now--nor can citizens--because the tools have changed drastically across the last several decades, as I noted upthread. And honestly, I don't expect them to stop. They don't have it in them to stop. But assuming they did stop, no I don't think Trump would become more civil and moderate at all. We just wouldn't be wasting so much time talking about such bullshit. And then maybe people would actually start paying attention to policy, to votes, to the conduct of all of their elected officials. Seriously, what do you think this political game of the dozens is actually accomplishing? How is it helping? What results is it achieving (aside from helping twitter make money and keeping the cable news networks in business)? If talking heads and others stay in the gutter with Trump, what does that really get us all? Borrowing from Chrissy again, it's normalizing horrible behavior to a degree that we've never seen. People who used to complain about trolling are now trolls in their own right, imo. And this is especially true for political reporters, who insist on trying to start flame wars with Trump and/or his supporters. A quote from Pogo is going through my mind... Plus, this shit keeps Trump at the top of the news feed, at the top of the twitter and FB trends, every single day (which is what he wants, imo). Again people are paying even less attention to the issues then has usually been the case. Most of those wound up about Trump's bullshit on twitter don't have a clue about what's going on outside of this, imo. I'm 100% behind criticizing Trump's policy actions as President when they deserve criticism. But it seems to me that he is getting more and more of a pass on such things (or the lack thereof) on a daily basis, that such criticisms--when they appear--are getting drowned out by all this other noise. And fundamentally, I'm still an idealist in this regard: I think that if someone stays on point and doesn't get drawn into personal back and forths, they'll ultimately win out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2017 12:54:25 GMT -5
The technology has changed, yes -- equally so for the media, for protesters and for Trump and other government officials. But the substance of what the media and protesters do has not: criticize, dissent, and lampoon, sometimes harshly and vulgarly. Ancient Romans had to paint it in graffiti, cry it out in the forum, or act it out in a theater, Regency media was limited to what a printing press could put out and disseminate -- but what they were doing is the same. If the reach of the media has increased due to technology, so too has Trump's. Also worth noting that the technology we have today was pretty much available throughout Obama's time, no? The thing that has changed dramatically in a substantive way is the way Trump responds to the attacks. As far as "normalizing" goes, responding to Trump's poo-throwing insanity with exactly the same calm rational manner we might critique Bush's or Obama's policies is normalizing the poo-throwing IMO. Also, Trump's poo-throwing is not just a "distraction." It is the fucking most powerful man in the world acting like a monkey in the zoo, bringing down the image of the U.S. in the eyes of the rest of the world. IMO, our rising up to make noise about it -- to wail in condemnation, to howl in protest -- shows the rest of the world that we don't all think it's awesome. And frankly, yes, I think they need to know that if we are to keep some of their sympathy and eventually gain back their trust. (My conversations with European friends jibes with that view. I would be quite interested to hear maxinquaye's opinion, and for that matter, markesq's (who, though he now lives in the U.S., is a UK native and retains ties there).) I don't think it is Mika's meme or my howl of disgust that is the problem. I think it's Trump's idiocy, which would continue unchecked even if we were silent. Indeed, it might even get worse, given that his supporters love it and his advisers only manage to rein him back a bit when they think he's particularly damaging his administration.
|
|