|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: US election aftermath
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Wes--
I think that the final electoral college result would go to Congress for approval...and, of course, Republicans are in power, so they'd *probably* vote it down. (Saw that mentioned in a relevant article.)
But...it could give any of the saner Republicans an out. "Precedent...will of the people...and we know how to deal with a Clinton", etc. Some of them said they wouldn't vote for Trump, and maybe they've begun to sense some of the repercussions of a Trump presidency.
I'd been hoping the electors might change their votes to Clinton. The petition is just a way to try to nudge them.
Worth a try, so I've signed it.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
This is not an entirely frivolous question, but supposing Mr. Catgrabber is prevented from being sworn in as President by (say) illness, imprisonment, natural death, assassination, or a final descent into complete insanity, who would fill the Orange-shaped hole?
Would you all have to go through the whole ghastly process again?
Would Mrs. Clinton take over, as being second in line with the votes?
If something happened to Trump between now and the Electoral College casting their votes, the republican electors would have to cast their votes for someone else. Presumably the republican party would nominate someone (may or may not be Mike Pence). If it was Mike Pence, they'd have to come up with a different nominee for VP.
If something happened to Trump after he became President, Mike Pence would become President, and
would nominate some other person to be VP.
If something happened to Trump between the electoral college vote and the inauguration, I don't think I know what happens. I'd guess you'd inaugurate Pence as President and he would pick a VP.
The only way Paul Ryan gets in the frame is if something happens to both Trump and Pence at the same time. Otherwise the new President picks a VP.
(When Spiro Agnew resigned as VP, Nixon picked Gerald Ford, who became President when Nixon resigned. Ford became both VP and President without being elected to either office.)
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
And the same goes for Melania Trump. Asking why she married him in the first place is one thing, but asking why she remains married to him is quite another thing. (And yes, this is Trump's third marriage. It's Melania's only marriage, and perhaps she takes her vows a little more seriously than her husband did.)
In general I agree. Marriages are complicated and personal things, we really can't speculate. I would speculate however, that the fact that Melania's affair with Trump is what broke up marriage #2 (much like #2 did for #1) that "taking marriage vows seriously" may not be high on either one of their lists.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I would speculate however, that the fact that Melania's affair with Trump is what broke up marriage #2
I don't think that's a fact. Whilst Trump didn't get a divorce until after he'd met Melania, he had been separated from Marla for 18 months or so, and dating other women, before he met Melania.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by John Holding:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Not because we hold an official position in any way, which would be hugely frowned on in a denomination that requires an official Call before you take leadership. Rather because they know darn well that people WILL impose these expectations on you and they don't want to see us fall apart under the burden of them.
WHat about pastors' husbands? (in whichever of the two ways a man could be the husband of a pastor.)
The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod does not ordain women, something a lot more sexist than condemning Melania Trump for selling herself. It is also homophobic. [/QB]
I dunno. I would think if anyone has a problem with misogynistic language or slut- shaming, they would be encouraged that people from traditionally conservative churches would call it out.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I would think if anyone has a problem with misogynistic language or slut- shaming, they would be encouraged that people from traditionally conservative churches would call it out.
It might be encouraging in some instances, but I find the comparison of the role of First Lady to the role of a pastor's wife in a conservative church weirdly apt, in that these are both highly gendered roles, and also evidence of the continued sexism in both church and state. They both do a hell of a lot of unpaid labor to which they might or might not be suited and they both occupy their positions because of their husbands' positions.
And Lamb Chopped, there are actually at least two threads on which your church can get bashed in Dead Horses, one for the sexism and one for the homophobia, and I don't consider bringing those issues up in this thread to be at all out of line. The sexism that continues to permeate our culture was in obvious display throughout the campaign, and the next VP thinks conversion therapy for gays is a good thing. Churches such as yours are promoting the backward kind of thinking that is going to "make America great again." If churches don't treat women and gay people like full and complete human beings made in the image of God, they simply drag the culture down until people figure out they're completely wrong about these things, whereupon they ditch the churches, which then become culturally irrelevant.
A further thought on the sexism evident in the campaign: I watched two hours of PBS news this evening, full of analysis of how Trump won and Clinton lost, and not one single word was spoken about even the possibility that sexism was a factor. This chimes with something I have long thought: sexism is so ingrained that it is normal and natural and unremarkable, and thus very hard to see, even for women.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I would think if anyone has a problem with misogynistic language or slut- shaming, they would be encouraged that people from traditionally conservative churches would call it out.
It might be encouraging in some instances, but I find the comparison of the role of First Lady to the role of a pastor's wife in a conservative church weirdly apt, in that these are both highly gendered roles, and also evidence of the continued sexism in both church and state. They both do a hell of a lot of unpaid labor to which they might or might not be suited and they both occupy their positions because of their husbands' positions.
Well, when you put it that way, I totally agree with you. But based on LC's post, I suspect she does, too. With a lot of it, anyway.
I left the LCMS church for a lot of the reasons you state, but I would have stood on my head with joy if I heard one of my former church mavens stand up for one of us girls the way LC just stood up for Melania. As it was, boy- coddling and slut- shaming went hand in hand at my old church-- the very boys who were turning the girls into sluts were being groomed for the ministry, every one of them. It doesn't matter what church a girl happens to be in, an older woman condemning her being shamed and supporting her being treated with respect can't but help. So I have enough respect left for my former church to be glad someone like LC, who doesn't brook that shit, is in it.
[ 12. November 2016, 06:08: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
There is such a deep divide on this-- breaking primarily, but sadly not surprisingly, along both racial and generational lines-- it's hard to even see us as being in the same tent anymore.
But if one simply accepts this, it seems to me it's handing Trump and his ilk more ammunition for their tactic of division, and retreating still further into an echo chamber.
We can disagree about lots of things, but it seems so important to me to keep conversations going across seemingly unbridgeable divides. I think this is the real, and really countrer-cultural, challenge.
Well, that's a good point, and well worth considering. Perhaps later, when the wound is less raw.
I take your point. But I wouldn't slam any doors in your pain.
This may sound needlessly dystopian, but consider how in soviet Russia the authorities constantly played off the registered, party-line-toeing churches against the non-registered ones as a way of neutering Christian influence overall.
(I have a book called Irina which claims to be the semi-fictionalised story of a group of Russian believers who want to challenge the communist system. In it, registered and non-registered baptists, Orthodox, and pentecostals learn to work together to achieve this aim. Of course they also end up in jail, and this cements their ties still further - but that relies on there being at least some back channels in place from the start.)
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Kelly: I think I see your point, but Melania Trump is not a girl, nor was she a young woman when she married Donald. It's a complicated thing, trying to figure out to what extent any particular woman is a victim of or a perpetrator of the systems of sexism, because it's frequently both.
Hillary Rodham took her husband's name to help his political career - in doing so she was both victim and perpetrator. Michelle Obama gave up her job to be First Lady. I personally think the whole First Lady thing is bullshit and that the President's spouse should be allowed to keep their regular job if they have one. So I see her as a victim of sexism, but I also think every woman who knuckles under the pressure to be the ultimate corporate wife while she is First Lady is perpetuating a very public sexist role.
I also think slut-shaming isn't exactly what Twilight was doing. Slut-shaming is criticizing a woman for having too much sex with too many different people, not criticizing her for selling herself. I think it's fine for women to have lots of sex with lots of different people, but both Twilight and Lamb Chopped would disagree.
Whether it's okay for a woman to sell her body in pornography or prostitution is a very different thing. Traditionally it's held to be a bad thing, but I think the victim/perpetrator dichotomy applies, weighted differently in different circumstances. The woman who doesn't have other good options I see as more of a victim. The woman who could have done other things - she's more of a perpetrator of a sexist system.
[ 12. November 2016, 06:57: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Kelly: I think I see your point, but Melania Trump is not a girl, nor was she a young woman when she married Donald. It's a complicated thing, trying to figure out to what extent any particular woman is a victim of or a perpetrator of the systems of sexism, because it's frequently both.
Hillary Rodham took her husband's name to help his political career - in doing so she was both victim and perpetrator. Michelle Obama gave up her job to be First Lady. I personally think the whole First Lady thing is bullshit and that the President's spouse should be allowed to keep their regular job if they have one. So I see her as a victim of sexism, but I also think every woman who knuckles under the pressure to be the ultimate corporate wife while she is First Lady is perpetuating a very public sexist role.( snip)
I also think slut-shaming isn't exactly what Twilight was doing. Slut-shaming is criticizing a woman for having too much sex with too many different people, not criticizing her for selling herself. I think it's fine for women to have lots of sex with lots of different people, but both Twilight and Lamb Chopped would disagree.
First of agll, yeah I know Melania is an adult, but I was assuming LC doesn't restrict her repulsion of calling women sluts to Melania, and I repeat, LCMS youngsters need to hear that that is not respectable.
Second-- precise definition of slut shaming aside, how is calling someone First Slut not misogynistic language ?
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110
|
Posted
RuthW
A tangent. As a West Wing episode pointed out a dozen years ago, the real security nightmare is the abduction by terrorists of a member of the President's family. There are real additional security risks associated with a President's partner continuing a career if that career involves substantial daily and routine contact with the public.
This isn't an argument against your criticism of the ceremonial supportive role. Some Presidential partners can carry that off with ease and do a lot of good, others not so. But the choice to continue a career may be a lot more difficult than we think.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wesley J
Silly Shipmate
# 6075
|
Posted
TFO 'appears to soften stance on range of pledges'.
--------------------
Be it as it may: Wesley J will stay. --- Euthanasia, that sounds good. An alpine neutral neighbourhood. Then back to Britain, all dressed in wood. Things were gonna get worse. (John Cooper Clarke)
Posts: 7354 | From: The Isles of Silly | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
A Politician gets into power and isn't going to do the things they said they would in the Election campaign. Well knock me down with a feather ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wesley J
Silly Shipmate
# 6075
|
Posted
Sorry, rolyn, this has caused a lot of fear, profound grief and even panic among some living in the USA, well-reasoned or not as these emotions may be. Some vulnerable (or perceiving themselves as vulnerable) people have to my knowledge committed suicide since the election.
Whether the fear is based on real events or on a feared, imagined potential outcome does not matter at this point.
Therefore, if the incumbent tones down at least some of his earlier statements, this may help some people perhaps to be slightly less fearful, and see what real change they can help with - which could of course be both with the new Prez and gov't, or in a clearly necessary (even grassroot) opposition.
Anything which somewhat softens the tone of the incumbent's campaign trail madness - which undoubtedly was there -, and its outlandish, even obscene propositions ought to be welcomed. The shock in America, and in parts of the world, has been too big to see any of the TFO's now apparently softening as 'normal', in my opinion.
It may be difficult to trust, but this here to me seems a (small) step in the right direction.
--------------------
Be it as it may: Wesley J will stay. --- Euthanasia, that sounds good. An alpine neutral neighbourhood. Then back to Britain, all dressed in wood. Things were gonna get worse. (John Cooper Clarke)
Posts: 7354 | From: The Isles of Silly | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
You have used it to blast her on the Internet precisely because you believe a slut ought not occupy the position of president's spouse.
How precisely do you expect Melania Trump to avoid your scathing criticism? What actions must she take?
Or is the answer "none are possible," in which case you are shooting helpless fish in a barrel?
This plus Kelly's vow to pray for poor Melania, make me wonder where this holier than thou attitude was when you were both "blasting [Donald] on the internet." Where were your sad prayers then? How was he supposed to avoid your scathing criticism? Where was your new rule that says if he can't change his past then he's a helpless fish in a barrel?
Trump looks over at Melania at the polls and he's an abuser, her round shoulders are proof she's afraid of him. I looked over at my husband when we were at the polls the very same way. He is tall, like Melania, and his shoulders were rounded over the low table. My look said, "Are you ever going to be finished?" just like Trump's.
I can't believe the double standard here. Oh yes, she isn't running for President, she didn't grab anyone's crotch, etc. but they are both in the public eye, part of the top establishment, happy to live their lives in front of the media when it comes to GQ and Vogue interviews with flattering covers on the fronts. So why, after 137 pages of Trump criticism,is one word against Melania so cruel?
It simply is not misogyny every time a woman is criticized. Misogyny has to be much more generalized than saying "I don't like Kristen Stewart's acting." It has to be "Women shouldn't have serious roles." We don't have to admire every woman in the public eye. We don't have to like our boss just because she's a woman. Feminism isn't supposed to be like the sort of blind patriotism that carries signs saying,"My country right or wrong." If women have the right to make their own choices then those choices should be as subject to criticism as any man's. I thought we wanted equality, not coddling.
Blasting Donald while praying for Melania. Treating grown women like children who must be protected from imaginary abusers. Writing imaginary, sympathetic scenarios to explain the women's actions while imagining the very worst where the men are concerned -- that's making special rules for the weaker set. That's misogyny in disguise.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
You have used it to blast her on the Internet precisely because you believe a slut ought not occupy the position of president's spouse.
How precisely do you expect Melania Trump to avoid your scathing criticism? What actions must she take?
Or is the answer "none are possible," in which case you are shooting helpless fish in a barrel?
This plus Kelly's vow to pray for poor Melania, make me wonder where this holier than thou attitude was when you were both "blasting [Donald] on the internet." Where were your sad prayers then? How was he supposed to avoid your scathing criticism? Where was your new rule that says if he can't change his past then he's a helpless fish in a barrel?
Trump looks over at Melania at the polls and he's an abuser, her round shoulders are proof she's afraid of him. I looked over at my husband when we were at the polls the very same way. He is tall, like Melania, and his shoulders were rounded over the low table. My look said, "Are you ever going to be finished?" just like Trump's.
I can't believe the double standard here. Oh yes, she isn't running for President, she didn't grab anyone's crotch, etc. but they are both in the public eye, part of the top establishment, happy to live their lives in front of the media when it comes to GQ and Vogue interviews with flattering covers on the fronts. So why, after 137 pages of Trump criticism,is one word against Melania so cruel?
It simply is not misogyny every time a woman is criticized. Misogyny has to be much more generalized than saying "I don't like Kristen Stewart's acting." It has to be "Women shouldn't have serious roles." We don't have to admire every woman in the public eye. We don't have to like our boss just because she's a woman. Feminism isn't supposed to be like the sort of blind patriotism that carries signs saying,"My country right or wrong." If women have the right to make their own choices then those choices should be as subject to criticism as any man's. I thought we wanted equality, not coddling.
Blasting Donald while praying for Melania. Treating grown women like children who must be protected from imaginary abusers. Writing imaginary, sympathetic scenarios to explain the women's actions while imagining the very worst where the men are concerned -- that's making special rules for the weaker set. That's misogyny in disguise.
First of all, Twilight, it would help if you got straight who was saying what. I never accused you of misogyny, nor am I saying that we ought to have special rules for either sex. What I object to is publicly shaming someone who is in the public eye NOT by their own choice for actions/situations they cannot alter. I don't give a damn if it's a man or a woman this applies to.
You bring up Donald. Donald is in the public eye PRECISELY by his own choice, which gives the universe a right to criticize him. He has offered himself up for that purpose. Anyone running for the presidency has pasted a big "CRITICIZE ME" sign on his or her forehead. You never heard a word from me criticizing the (very criticizable) man BEFORE he ran for public office.
You may have noticed that I have not been similarly protective of Hillary Clinton, although I voted for her. That's because she, too, is in the public eye by her own choice. Male or female, if you choose to paint a bulls-eye on yourself, you need to deal with the resulting shots. Including the unfair ones. The way to do that is through vigorous argument, not silence.
Melania is in the public eye because her husband (NOT SHE) has gained public office. She has not taped a bulls-eye on herself--a helluva lot of other people have done so, and she has no realistic way to avoid it. She cannot, for example, resign. She therefore deserves protected status regarding her past from anyone to whom fair play is still a consideration. And I would be saying the same damn thing right here were Trump married to a man.
This is not about gender. This is about justice.
I will make one concession. If Melania or anyone similarly circumstanced is fool enough to CONTINUE behaving in an obviously criticizable manner, go ahead, shoot at her. Because stupidity is not a status protected by decency.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Ruth, I'm surprised at you. Anybody would think that my role on this thread was to defend Donald and attack Melania. I can find no other reason why you think my church membership is at issue.
If you must know, I voted for Hillary. So did a damn lot of other LCMS Christians I know.
And I'm not bloody dragging this thread into another round of Dead Horse issues.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Melania Trump was in the public eye before she married her husband. Donald Trump was a public figure when she married him. I do think slut and bimbo are misogynistic terms, but I also think there is nothing wrong with Twilight's overall judgement of Melania Trump's choices.
Any institution which does not treat women and gay people as whole and complete people made in the image of God is perpetuating sexism and homophobia. Churches such the LCMS, the Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, and many evangelical churches are a big part of the reason sexism and homophobia remain normal and acceptable in our society. They are holding us back, and for this I hold them as institutions on contempt. I have zero interest in a Dead Horses debate here or elsewhere, because there is nothing to debate. However individuals have voted, these institutions are supporting sexism and anti-gay bigotry. In the aftermath of this horrific election, they have a portion of guilt for their roles in making it okay for some people to see women and gay people as less than fully human.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
In the poverty-ridden artistic circles I move in the burning issue is health insurance. There is always of course the hope that Trump will not follow through on his promises, but the GOP has been planning to gut Obamacare for years now, so I think it is going to happen.
I am blogging about this issue today, and am collecting accounts of people who were saved by Obamacare, or who cannot now survive without it and the other safety nets. It may be useful someday, to have all these in one place.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Melania Trump was in the public eye before she married her husband. Donald Trump was a public figure when she married him. I do think slut and bimbo are misogynistic terms, but I also think there is nothing wrong with Twilight's overall judgement of Melania Trump's choices.
Any institution which does not treat women and gay people as whole and complete people made in the image of God is perpetuating sexism and homophobia. Churches such the LCMS, the Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, and many evangelical churches are a big part of the reason sexism and homophobia remain normal and acceptable in our society. They are holding us back, and for this I hold them as institutions on contempt. I have zero interest in a Dead Horses debate here or elsewhere, because there is nothing to debate. However individuals have voted, these institutions are supporting sexism and anti-gay bigotry. In the aftermath of this horrific election, they have a portion of guilt for their roles in making it okay for some people to see women and gay people as less than fully human.
Again, I don't understand how individuals within a sexist/ homophobic institution basically saying no to those things is anything but really good news. When I was a kid, both the ALC and the ELCA held the same basic views on women/ gays that the LCMS did, then one day someone simply declared it was ok to disagree, and ten years later they were ordaining women.
HRC pretty much owned the Catholic vote, if my info is right, and even though Pope Francis is kindly about it, everything you've said about the LCMS can be applied to policies he has verbally reinforced in the Roman Catholic Church. What should we do, toss out all those votes on the grounds of institutional hypocracy?
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
In the poverty-ridden artistic circles I move in the burning issue is health insurance. There is always of course the hope that Trump will not follow through on his promises, but the GOP has been planning to gut Obamacare for years now, so I think it is going to happen.
I am blogging about this issue today, and am collecting accounts of people who were saved by Obamacare, or who cannot now survive without it and the other safety nets. It may be useful someday, to have all these in one place.
I've heard rumors that some where in Trump's sit down with Obama, Obama tried to talk him down off that ledge, and that Trump was holding off on changes to the ACA until further notice. A straw of hope to grasp.
In my personal life, I have noticed this is the dividing line between between " OMG please God let the electoral college turn on him! FML, it's all over!" Dems and "Be at peace and have faith" Dems, Although everyone is in favor of getting loud.
As a contract sub, I rely on the ACA. I am one of the working poor the Dems rail about. Here I am!
But I have had upper middle class, situationally well- appointed, white collar, 401K- bearing liberal Christian Dems say some pretty damn clueless things to me, and others in my position. There is a disconnect between the philosophical idea of the working poor, and a genuine understanding of what it is like to be working poor.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
RuthW
A tangent. As a West Wing episode pointed out a dozen years ago, the real security nightmare is the abduction by terrorists of a member of the President's family. There are real additional security risks associated with a President's partner continuing a career if that career involves substantial daily and routine contact with the public.
This isn't an argument against your criticism of the ceremonial supportive role. Some Presidential partners can carry that off with ease and do a lot of good, others not so. But the choice to continue a career may be a lot more difficult than we think.
I don't think I've seen that episode. But, of course, in The West Wing an abduction is the preferred scenario because it ratchets up dramatic tension and allows for the possibility of a happy ending. If one was a terrorist and wanting to make a dramatic point one could forego abducting the First Spouse and the complicated logistical arrangements that would and settle for something a little less complicated and a little more terminal. And if it's occurred to me, it's also occurred to The Secret Service and to the bad guys as well.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
At any rate, a First Spouse working at a "regular" job would be a security nightmare.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
HRC pretty much owned the Catholic vote, if my info is right
Apparently not.
quote:
In the run-up to the election, only the IBD-TIPP poll consistently pointed to a Trump win among Catholics, as CRUX noted last week. Almost all the others suggested a significant margin of victory for Clinton.
Now that the voting is over, however, preliminary results indicate Trump decisively won a majority of those self-identifying as Catholics, by 52 to 45 percent.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Ok, maybe just the Catholics I knew. California can be kind of a bubble, politically.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
Sure, Kelly. And, as with the population at large, many Trump voters amongst Catholics were probably shy of saying so out loud.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Good point. The "silent vote" was buzzed about pre election, but I guess the hope was "silent votes" for both candidates would cancel themselves out.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
My sis belongs to one of those huge con-evo megachurches, where they literally put little voting guides on the Bible Study tables during election time. Everyone in her family voted Democrat. These are folk who have voted Republican for years. Like I said, I'll take it.
Some blogger said somewhere that the failure of the lib/dems was to more actively take people's spiritual lives into account, to actually make some sort of active appeal to people from evangelical backgrounds. I think this goes hand in hand with what I said above about the social disconnect with the working poor.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Melania Trump was in the public eye before she married her husband. Donald Trump was a public figure when she married him. I do think slut and bimbo are misogynistic terms, but I also think there is nothing wrong with Twilight's overall judgement of Melania Trump's choices. ...
My hyuuuuuge problem with Melania Trump as First Lady is that this election sends a very clear message to girls and women: If you want to get to the White House, don't waste any time or energy getting a law degree and being an activist and running for office. That won't work, no matter how accomplished you are, and many people will hate you for it. Drop out of college, do some modeling and soft porn, and catch the eye of a megalomaniacal real estate heir instead.
And what about her recent, public anti-cyberbullying statement? Is she clueless? Ironic? Trying to communicate with the Cyberbully-in-Chief through the media? Or is she just tossing rocks from a hyuuuuuge glass tower?
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Y'know, I thought Trump would revert to type, and sure enough he did. He is, at his very core, a bullshitter and a confidence man, pure and simple. He promises everything and delivers nothing.
And his recent announcements that he would leave Obamacare alone are pure type.
The only thing to expect from him is never to expect delivery.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
And what about her recent, public anti-cyberbullying statement? Is she clueless? Ironic? Trying to communicate with the Cyberbully-in-Chief through the media? Or is she just tossing rocks from a hyuuuuuge glass tower?
The campaign wonks probably just told her to come out against cyberbullying in order to distract attention from her husband's own bullying, so she did.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
At any rate, a First Spouse working at a "regular" job would be a security nightmare.
I'm not so sure - after all, children of presidents attend normal(ish) schools alongside civilians without too much trouble. And setting up security in a single location (like an office) might be easier in some ways than doing the same in a multitude of different locations, as is currently required for a First Spouse with a busy travel schedule.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
There is also the point that other countries do it. Isn't there a Mr. Merkel, somewhere?
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
SPK wrote:
quote:
Y'know, I thought Trump would revert to type, and sure enough he did. He is, at his very core, a bullshitter and a confidence man, pure and simple. He promises everything and delivers nothing.
Yep. And I'm expecting him to have many other Road To Damscus conversions, under pressures from both the left, eg. Obamacare, and the right, eg. when the GOP corporate donors take him aside and say "Okay, Hair Boy, we don't care what the hell you got those lunkheads out in Michigan to believe, unless you wanna be back hosting Playboy videos in four years, NAFTA stays on the books."
[ 12. November 2016, 19:45: Message edited by: Stetson ]
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Frankly, that's his attraction for me. He's a RINO (Republican in Name Only): the party elites hate him, he doesn't get along with the GOP's corporate donors, and he has at least as many problems relating to his own party as he does with the Democrats.
I predict he'll settle for a cap on Obamacare rate increases.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Again, I don't understand how individuals within a sexist/ homophobic institution basically saying no to those things is anything but really good news. When I was a kid, both the ALC and the ELCA held the same basic views on women/ gays that the LCMS did, then one day someone simply declared it was ok to disagree, and ten years later they were ordaining women.
It is good news. But the institutions go right on being sexist and homophobic. Maybe the LCMS will change, but it seems more likely to me that Lutherans who feel strongly about sexism and homophobia have by this point defected to other Lutheran churches. The Catholic Church is clearly not going to change. So while I'm very glad for every vote against sexism and homophobia in the political realm, the fact remains that people's participation in and support for sexist and homophobic institutions also has an effect on our society.
In the wake of this election, with the hate crimes piling up every hour, I think people should ask themselves what they can do to ameliorate its effects and also make the outcome different next time. Churches that say women can't lead need to be called out for their bullshit. Every time I heard people wonder if the country was ready for a woman to be president, it reminded me of being on the rector search committee and listening to people wonder if our church was ready for a woman to be rector. When churches don't view women as able to lead them, it matters. It's bullshit, and it has real consequences. This was a close election, and just a few more people being comfortable with a female president could have put Clinton into office.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Frankly, that's his attraction for me. He's a RINO (Republican in Name Only): the party elites hate him, he doesn't get along with the GOP's corporate donors, and he has at least as many problems relating to his own party as he does with the Democrats.
I predict he'll settle for a cap on Obamacare rate increases.
My bet right now is that the worst things he will do(from a progressive perspective) are things that any Republican POTUS would have done. And, to the extent that he deviates to the left on some things(eg. the possible Obamacare turnaround), it'll be because of his idiosyncratic, RINO tendencies which you reference.
The big question-mark is foreign-policy, where, if Trump follows his campaign rhetoric, we should be seeing a dovish approach to Russia, fewer middle-east interventions, and the closing of overseas military bases. But I think that's ONE issue where he is likely to be over-ruled by Republican hawks.
[ 12. November 2016, 20:41: Message edited by: Stetson ]
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teekeey Misha
Shipmate
# 18604
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
There is also the point that other countries do it. Isn't there a Mr. Merkel, somewhere?
Quite so - that Mrs Blair managed to keep raking in the pennies as a lawyer, although I was quick to point out to several people on several occasions that she was not the "First Lady" - there's only one "First Lady" in the UK and she's the one in the sparkly hat on the big gold chair!
[I also once had a conversation with a pupil who thought that the wife of the Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury ought not to undertake demeaning work "like working at Costa or something."
"No, dear," I assured her, "Mrs Blair is a barrister. That's not the same as a barista."
"Ohhhh..."]
--------------------
Misha
Don't assume I don't care; sometimes I just can't be bothered to put you right.
Posts: 296 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
My bet right now is that the worst things he will do(from a progressive perspective) are things that any Republican POTUS would have done.
It's not just him. It's the neonazis and other hategemongers he has unleashed, who are spreading fear and injuries (no deaths we know of yet, although a shooting in Portland looks suspicious) across the country.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
My bet right now is that the worst things he will do(from a progressive perspective) are things that any Republican POTUS would have done.
It's not just him. It's the neonazis and other hategemongers he has unleashed, who are spreading fear and injuries (no deaths we know of yet, although a shooting in Portland looks suspicious) across the country.
Indeed. But I was talking specifically about the policies that he will actually pursue in governing.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Maybe the LCMS will change, but it seems more likely to me that Lutherans who feel strongly about sexism and homophobia have by this point defected to other Lutheran churches.
You know, thanks for fucking nothing. What am I and those like me, chopped liver?
Talk about the LCMS when you actually know something about us.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I've heard rumors that some where in Trump's sit down with Obama, Obama tried to talk him down off that ledge, and that Trump was holding off on changes to the ACA until further notice. A straw of hope to grasp.
I too was heartened to hear this development, and that a little sit-down-and-talk with Obama had let him see a glimmer of light. But then that was all blown apart when I remembered that Obama won't have his ear for much longer. if the President Elect is this easily swayed, then woe betide us when the likes of Newt Grinch and Gooliani are the ones barking their view of the world into T's confused little head.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
SPK--
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Frankly, that's his attraction for me. He's a RINO (Republican in Name Only): the party elites hate him, he doesn't get along with the GOP's corporate donors, and he has at least as many problems relating to his own party as he does with the Democrats.
I predict he'll settle for a cap on Obamacare rate increases.
Um...but is Trump emotionally/mentally stable?
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
My former church is full of women who have chosen to keep ties, stay in communion with their church family, and make a loud noise in Bible study. Gay women, feminist- leaning women, mothers of girls who have had abortions. Just because I ultimately decided not to inflict my contrary ideas on my elders, does not mean I don't respect those women's choice to stay with the people they have gotten to know and have formed attachments to. ( and it just happens to be mostly women, in my former church's case).
The least productive thing I can imagIne myself doing, if I want to encourage such women to speak up about the dignity of women, is to say their decision to do so means nothing because of where they take the Sacrament. I wouldn't say that to a Catholic woman, or an Orthodox woman, or an LCMS woman.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
I didn't say it means nothing. I said they are participating in and supporting sexist and homophobic institutions. It's not all they're doing, but it's important. You and Lamb Chopped both have additional values that come into play for you. I don't share them.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Fair enough. Out of curiosity, what values do you mean?
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Um...but is Trump emotionally/mentally stable?
The general description is that he is personality disordered. Narcissist who is the only person who matters, everyone else is an object to be manipulated or used. People are disposable like tissues or plastic bags. None of which explains his totally culpable behaviour. The sort who has left by age 70, probably thousands of casualities in his wake.
William Shakespeare as I misuse him:
quote:
Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown. in his simple show he harbours Treason...the welfare of us all, hangs on the cutting short that fraudfull man.
(Henry IV Part II)
No disorder spares the guilty from their execution.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
The value placed on an individual's attachments to other people and to their church, because to me in the case of homophobia they are sacrificing others' rights to maintain relationships in order to maintain their own, and in the case of sexism they are carving out spaces and making compromises that work for them that might make it possible for them to work from within but that also mean the sexism continues. If women all just walked out of all the voluntary associations where they are subject to sexism, we'd get change a lot quicker. The seemingly endless temporizing and compromising makes me crazy and angry.
I left a sexist, homophobic church. My parents were really not happy about it. But my self-respect mattered more to me than their approval. One minister there preached on Mother's Day about the evils of women working outside the home. My mom thought it was awful, but she stayed. The female church secretary employed there stayed. No one said anything to this jackass. They all just took it, and over 30 years later, they still don't have any female leadership, even on the governing board.
And I am banging on about this on this thread because after this election, I think we must be umcompromising. I am not going to smile to make people like me. I don't give a shit if people like me when respect as a human being is the real issue. We would despise a church that tolerated racism to the extent that some churches tolerate and even promote sexism and homophobia.
You wouldn't ask a woman to leave her church because it's sexist. I would.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
I see my self as encouraging every woman to do the best she can to support other women wherever she is, without requiring her to be where I am at. Meeting people where they are rather than where you want them to be. Bridge building. Network building. Finding common ground and going from there.
If you are a wired differently, so be it, but I'd like to believe I am wired the way I am for a reason.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
