Well, this was inevitable
Democratic candidate Pete Buttigieg has been accused of sexual assault.
Is the accusation true? I have zero idea. But those who consider all such claims true must consider this one to be true. I’m not someone who considers all such claims to be true, so I’m under no such requirement.
I often wonder how it is that people who insist we consider all such claims as true think that it won’t come back to bite some favored candidate of theirs. Or does it matter that the accuser here is a man? Perhaps even a white man? Does that mean we needn’t trust him, according to the left? It’s so confusing.
Just to make it perfectly clear, I try to trust or distrust all accused people and all the accusers equally. I say: prove it (if possible, in a court of law), and I’ll believe it. Until then, all accusations are iffy, and although possibly true they’re possibly false. We simply lack any way to judge them, and I don’t believe we should make character assassination easy.
UPDATE 4/30: The accusation was untrue. No surprise there.
Even people I dislike should not be condemned without evidence. Buttigieg has been behaving like a self-righteous jerk since he launched his campaign. I won’t believe charges of sexual assault unless the evidence appears and is strong.
I believe the homosexual Buttigieg has been reported as being married to a gay “husband”, which would make him a gay “wife”. Since males, whether hetero or homo, are usually charged with sexual assault, the details of this horrible brutal obscene revolting (add your own hysterical adjectives) act require clarification. Maybe feminists will get on the matter!
Neo: “We simply lack any way to judge them, and I don’t believe we should make character assassination easy.”
Agree. However, the politics of personal destruction is SOP these days. If it continues, only monks and nuns will be able to run for office. (And some of them would be besmirched as well.) I see no way to stop it. In today’s mass communications milieu it is just too easy and very hard to defend against. The court of public opinion is also a fickle place and seldom just. Bringing back dueling would possibly slow it down, but that’s not going to happen. So, how do we stop or slow it down?
The prog narrative for Kavanaugh was, “Believe the accuser.”
The prog narrative for Buttigieg will be, “Believe the accused.”
As Neo says, one should withhold judgment until the facts are in.
Anita Hill- Clarence Thomas- and it goes on and on.
Cicero:
In male gay marriages, both spouses are considered husbands. There is no wife.
Not being entirely conversant with homosexual practices, I wonder whether when one speaks of a “husband” and “wife” that means the sexual activities within the relaltionship are one way. So to speak. If the wife had an extra-marital affair would the wife be expected to only play the role that a heterosexual woman would play?
If Buttigieg is indeed the “wife” and were elected, would he count as our first female President? Just wondering.
It really is getting confusing. That is why I try to ignore it all, except for the occasional inappropriate comment.
What goes around comes around.
Who would have thought the crocodiles they unleashed would come back so soon.
And given how nasty they have been to good people, costing them employment and savings, I no longer cut them slack when the iron arrow turns to point at them.
Karma, baby, Karma.
Not buying. At all.
Still, must see the yearbooks. And his 1998 appointment calendar.
Oldflyer:
See my comment here.
the details of this horrible brutal obscene revolting (add your own hysterical adjectives) act require clarification.
Smart money says if it happened it was a grope at Club Vortex in Kalamazoo.
I’m of two minds about this.
On the one hand I was once falsely accused of, something. Amusingly I wasn’t accused by the woman theoretically involved. It was shortly after Tailhook. I was accused by a two male department heads in the Navy. Who figured out that post-Tailhook the way to get promoted was to accuse some other guy of assault.
Which brings us to the second hand. I don’t think I need to go into all the ugly details of the accusation. She got drunk and wandered off from her own wetting down ceremony (the Navy is all about tradition and one tradition is that when you get promoted you spend the improvement in your first month’s salary on a party). After she wandered away from the party me AND ALL HER OTHER FRIENDS tracked her down and walked her back to her place.
Famous last words. I put a glass of water by her bed with some aspirin. She followed me out the door. “[Arminius] I didn’t make a fool of myself, did I?”
I said, “Don’t worry about it.” The thing is, I didn’t know how right I was.
Now, there are a couple of points to make here. I didn’t go by the handle Arminius back then.
And she is the brave one.
I didn’t know about the snake in the grass. A Cryptologist who had the hots for her and apparently followed her into her place before she locked the door. My acting XO walked in on them. The snake who I would still like to meet in the fleet made up a story about he had just broken up an orgy.
They threatened her with court martial. Conduct unbecoming.
She didn’t break under the pressure. This is why I’m not in prison.
So I am of two minds.
Neo, you say: “But those who consider all such claims true must consider this one to be true.”
This claim is made by a male.
I doubt there’s any group in the U.S. which considers all sexual assault claims made by a male to be true.
In fact, I don’t think there are any groups in the U.S. which consider all sexual assault claims made by a female to be true. The closest such group is the American Left, obviously. But even they make exceptions according to whether believing a claim will harm one of their current standard-bearers. (For so long as Bill Clinton was an effective standard-bearer for the left, they deemed Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, and Juanita Broaddrick to be…what was that charming turn-of-phrase, again? Oh, yes: “Nuts and Sluts.”)
As for persons who describe themselves as “gay”: Granted that they have more pull on the American Left nowadays than women do (higher standing in the Victimhood Olympics) but their numbers are smaller as a percentage of the electorate. Hard to say what that means, but if even all women don’t get believed, I somehow doubt any group of males, even “gay” ones, will be deemed immune to political calculations. If Buttigieg does become a strong contender for the nomination, I think this accusation will, at best, be treated with great skepticism.
At worst, the accuser gets offered a choice between sudden riches if he changes his story, or being treated to an all-expenses-paid assisted suicide if he doesn’t. (Rather unwisely, the accuser’s already confessed to prior struggles with suicidal ideation. If Buttigieg’s backers and handlers include any former Clintonistas, I wouldn’t write that young man an insurance policy for all the tea in China.)
Those who are proven to have falsely accused another, should suffer the same consequence the accused would have suffered had the accusation been proven.
That said, the consequence of identity politics is to eat each other.
For no one can measure up to the perfection it demands. Most especially the “professional liberals” the Left attracts.
“Professional liberals are too arrogant to compromise. In my experience, they were also very unpleasant people on a personal level. Behind their slogans about saving the world and sharing the wealth with the common man lurked a nasty hunger for power. They’d double-cross their own mothers to get it or keep it.”
– Harry S Truman, pp. 55, American Heritage 7/8 1992, from a 1970 interview —
Not so gay. Perhaps a little sad. Transgender transgressions. That said, under the Twilight Amendment, he’s a warlock, who should be tried by the press, then waterboarded in the nearest sea, or behind clinical walls, for social progress.
The writer for PJM (Matt Margolis) is sceptical as well:
https://pjmedia.com/trending/pete-buttigieg-accused-of-sexual-assault/?utm_source=pjmedia&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=%5B-MAILING_REFERENCE_NUMBER-%5D%5B-CURRENTDATE-%5D&bcid=%5B-MD5-%5D&recip=%5B-RECIPID-%5D
Going to the original blog post that was then tweeted around and shown at PJM, this is the final graf, which Margolis didn’t show:
https://medium.com/@realHunterKelly/pete-buttigieg-sexually-assaulted-me-1a5c0aebae6d
I’m voting either “satire trolling” or Beto hired Fusion to do an oppo drop.
proven to have falsely accused another, should suffer the same consequence the accused would have suffered
That’s conservative doctrine, deprecated with progress, past, present, and, likely, future. The tomb of the unknown baby would be empty, indeed. And diversity would be a relinquished relic of a monotonically divergent minority.
In re “oppo drop” – in the internet age, every time I “invent” some nifty slang, or think I remember some, I try and check first to avoid foot-in-mouth syndrome.
So, I was interested to discover that it really is a known term, although the only thing on Google’s first page of hits (the rest are for a phone named, of course, OPPO) was a play-by-play of a debate from 2016.
I suspect this Hillary supporter was not amused when Trump won.
https://extranewsfeed.com/drop-that-oppo-like-its-hot-75d60783c6f1
Twas no the first or last time in history that women taking advantage of our extra care for them (and mens disposability taken for granted). Elizabeth Parris and Abigail Williams are one great example of such “womens issues” (where some start something and the rest do the same, even if they have to make it all up).
Gossip was a powerful tool for the powerless in Ancient Greece
https://aeon.co/ideas/gossip-was-a-powerful-tool-for-the-powerless-in-ancient-greece
Since women didn’t (usually) die for it, they were kept out of politics and more.
Who wants people who can start immense trouble over literal nothings, and never have the bill come due mucking up and driving morally lower than muck?
not that anyone could see a threat through history post 1968..
the issue got so bad in the founding colonies someone invented the ‘The Gossip’s Bridle’ (more commonly known as a scolds bridle).
it was used to punish women who, in a kind of munchhausen by proxy and sociopathy would enjoy stirring things up and seeing how powerful they were by getting needed and decent people killed by forcing them to act decently.
a scold is a woman who would constantly belittle the man who was supporting her (and others), nags or constantly complains ruing everyone else’s drive and moral.
[some designs tortured, most just embarrassed and kept her from talking, and was a damn site better sentence than being in the stocks! today you can go online and order similar for the bedroom, go figure.. ]
and certainly this doesnt help:
Gossip Is a Social Skill, Not a Character Flaw
Those who can’t do it well may end up on the outside looking in.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out-the-ooze/201601/gossip-is-social-skill-not-character-flaw
[i await the author to get his own metoo moment for some reason and see what he says later… the universe has a funny habit of that]
someone should have telegrammed the feminists:
“Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.” ? Henry Thomas Buckle
“Never speak disrespectfully of Society, Algernon. Only people who can’t get into it do that.” ? Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest
unless the ladies change their minds, and fast (quite possibly too late), they are going to be really surprised where the train with no brakes brings them… and with no handle, there is no reverse either, you only have to lose once unless you figure out how to make a cucumber from a pickle…
Some years ago when I was debating the concept of gay marriage, one of the problematic points I mentioned and consequences of endorsing that particular bit of stupidity, was that first of all there was no general or distributive interest in regulating such a socially insignificant relationship in an institutional manner which stamped it with a seal of approval and legal status.
What Frick and Frack do with each other does not rise to the level of social interest as what Tom and Jane do with each other; which latter in the normal course of events produces offspring who need to be dealt with should their relationship end. Therefore legal recognition of it in an institutional manner makes sense … legal recognition which is in reality forced on Tom and Jane for the benefit of the rest of the members of the polity.
Second: What I predicted would ensue from the recognition of the “marriage” of Frick and Frack, was that we as “jurors” and members of the polity, would be dragged into the pointless and significant only to themselves squabbles of sexually disordered persons.
And here we are! Dragged into trying to figure out whether some particular instance of worthless same sex sodomy, a form of mental derangement in the first place, merits our legal attention.
What … a … miserable … waste … and … perversion … of … our … civic energies.
DNW:
So, you think that gay people are mentally deranged? You can be against gay marriage if you wish, but there is no evidence whatsoever that gay people are mentally deranged, and you say more about yourself than about them by saying so.
Here is a clue:
The last sentence of the accusers message was “In the days and weeks ahead, I will share my full story with the nation.” These are the words of a person relishing and looking forward their upcoming fame and public exposure. Yet, in the very beginning, he laments that this is a hard thing for him to do.
While withholding my final judgment, I am already doubtful about this one. Nevertheless, it will be enjoyable watching the lefties twist in the wind trying to figure out what is the politically correct thing in this case.
I hate to come to the defense of any Democrat candidate but this accusation makes very little sense. Was the young man assaulted, forcible sex involved, did he report it to the police? People who are assaulted should report the physical abuse to the police, perhaps it was seduction and remorse or something if no report was made. Why does the fact that the accused aggressor has now become a political figure mean that the victim must go public and is there now a police report?
I have had gay friends for a number of years, smart witty people, some who have ended up married, and a lot who were active as bunnies at times. The life style, at least years ago when I was in the arts and crafts business, was difficult for a lot of my friends and two of them died of aids in the 1980s. Now today with this accusation I am waiting for a whole lot more information because while I am still not comfortable with gays being married Pete Buttigieg seems to be one of the better Democratic candidates and were I of the Democratic persuasion I might consider voting for him.
R.C. on April 29, 2019 at 5:50 pm at 5:50 pm said: In fact, I don’t think there are any groups in the U.S. which consider all sexual assault claims made by a female to be true.
Not happy with just admitting you dont know? why?
Catherine Comins argues that men who are unjustly accused can sometimes gain from the experience.
Catherine Comins, assistant dean of student life at Vassar
lets just say that when its not a feminist doing the research, the number is way different…
one headline claims:
Your son is more likely to be sexually assaulted than to face false allegations.
The ‘ladies’ have a long history of stirring up a country and destroying lives with a complicit press, school system, legal system, AND our social systems who care for a her, but really dont give a flying Neotoma’s gluteus maximus and minimus about!
behind these things is a bunch of college courses, clinics, concousness raising, articles and more… all drumming mostly the same beat, rehashing the same words and phraseology if you care to take a look
WHY did tawana brawley get a free rolex?
Did you forget “Cornerstore Caroline”?
Brian Banks?
Duke University lacrosse rape frame-up case in 2006?
Jonathan Montgomery?
Hofstra University case in 2009?
accusations against the Virginia Alpha Chapter of the Phi Kappa Psi in 2014 (Rolling Stone debacle)
2013 accusation against singer-songwriter Conor Oberst
Tucker Carlson’s report that he has been falsely accused of sexual misconduct
hey, why dont we ask some questions… like how many of the women involved had womens studies courses and harboring hatred of people today based on false information about unrelated people of yesterday? how many are taking the idea that since this is the cause, then anything is ok (and where is that familiar from)?
hey… here are nearly 300 men who have been exonerated who served time in prison
https://www.innocenceproject.org/all-cases/#exonerated-by-dna,sex-crimes
its a multipart message that makes it come from the source
not a single one… combined, it enflames people to act and chose that subject
things ranging from myths of how you are allowed to regard women
taking back negative words
doing things for the cause
being told that such behavior is empowering
from the athenian article above (excusing cause, well, they had no power)
to others cranked out every year as part of education system like a factory
What happened?
Was it a hand on the butt with a squeeze and an offer? Which, once refused, the initiator looks for somebody else? Today, that can be (is?) a form of sex assault, but I wouldn’t vote to convict. (Tho this is my borderline case).
Perhaps after a “No”, that physical action or some other one is offered again? One “No” should be enough.
Was there any genital contact?
Or, maybe he was in a fine orgy, and finished & tired, and had one more unwanted session?
Was it possibly consensual half-drunk sex, which was not really wanted the next morning when sober? So now it’s assault?
I suspect there will be plausible connections, like a date, time, and place where Mayor Pete really was. The accuser is successful in getting me interested in more details, tho — so that does make me suspicious quite a bit.
BTW – I believe it’s NOT rape when a woman removes her own panties, unless she later clearly says “No”. Both partners have responsibilities to communicate.
It IS confusing. An algorithm is what’s needed, factoring the essential 64 (or is it 65?) human attributes we all have in varying degrees.
Neo. As you know, homosexuality used to be considered a mental illness. The difference in the diagnosis was political.
While there’s no reason to figure it is a manifestation of mental illness, the change in diagnosis as a matter of political and cultural pressure instead of research or honest attempts at definitions is not the way it’s supposed to happen.
And when this happens, conspiracy theories are reinforced.
by the way, one has to experience a bit what they are bathing in all the time..
everything, and anything they dont like, is blamed on the guys…
its unbelievable the contortions made and lack of even tinest introspection
there isnt enough better women who are not like that to even influence the vapidity and hate (and self hate for wanting to love what you hate and hating what you are)!!!
Poor girl, she thinks women are so easily programmed that the feminist magazines she is railing about, are putting images in them that women dont want and feel compelled to be… but, when those same mags tried to run things the way this youngin believes, they nearly went out of business, and got in bed with cigarettes and big alcohol and sold women out for money and power (ever since. now they make money on the red dress to try to cure the desease they gave women!).
beyond above, those mags are really patriarchal control points
good thing she can see through it and hate the sources… properly of course..
i would be remiss if i didnt point out that the kids and youngs are desperate to find some cause to put their mark on in some meaningful way to either give themselves meaning and feel empowered (whatever that means, it used to mean smoking slim cigs), and strike back against the people who have oppressed women for eternity and as you can see above, still do…
[edited for length by n]
Marriages between two men are not very often sexually exclusive. There may be some small percentage that are, and perhaps Buttigieg’s is one.
If his marriage is not exclusive, then there is a pretty strong likelihood that his accuser is telling the truth as he sees it, but that the others present at the occasion thought the activities were consensual. Perhaps they started out being consensual and too many people or too many drugs were involved too quickly.
Alternatively this is like Kavanaugh and Roy Moore, something that no one else can actually corroborate but that people choose to believe based on something else they know about the person that they don’t like.
How the media handles it will of course surprise no one: extremely reluctant coverage, if any, followed by “Republicans pounce” if they can’t keep the lid on it entirely.
He cheated on his husband? Allegedly. Why get married, dude?
I was curious to see the MSM take on this, so I googled “buttigieg”. And, guess what? There was not one hit on the sexual assault accusation. None! When I googled “buttigieg sexual assault”, I got the various articles.
Now tell me Google doesn’t manipulate their algorithms…
Roy, I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you.
But those who consider all such claims true must consider this one to be true
Only if they are by women.
A friend of mine, a well known Marine fighter pilot, told his sister-in-law, who I was dating at the time, to never go to Tailhook and never to go to the O club on Friday night. Both were well known for females in heat.
Another friend, another Marine F18 pilot, was in the O club at El Toro on Friday night having a beer before going home and a young woman came up to him at the bar and grabbed his crotch.
Neo:
DNW used the phrase “a form of mental derangement”.
That is not precisely the same as saying homosexuals are (in general) “mentally deranged.”
The former phrase is of limited scope, “a form of “; your accusatory rebuttal, the latter, is exceedingly broad, spanning the full spectrum of mental illness.
Your response to DNW thus says something about you also.
I do not like the word “gay” or “gays” in their present usage, and thus use “homosexual” instead. “Gay” meant happy and carefree when I was young, with a certain implicit innocence. Now it of course means anal intercourse and oral-genital contact by members of the same sex, still often anonymously practiced.
And now that the story is switching to two “Republican Operatives” who tricked the accuser into making this up, the story now suddenly appears in a Google search of “Buttigeig” news.
Jussie is at it again. Was a MAGA hat spotted?
Cicero,
1. Language changes over time. The only language that is static is a dead language, such as Latin.
2. I agree fully with Neo regarding DNW’s comments. Such commentary appears as a parody of how the Left would like to portray mainstream Conservatives.
3. While I don’t believe in identity politics, there is certainly no good reason to offend approximately 8-10 percent of the electorate.
Will Mayor Pete blame Mike Pence? Make accusations of a false fag operation? Entirely TMI. Or too much misinformation.
What Roy said above, appears to be some scam cooked up by a couple of knuckleheads who thought they could bring down the mayor.
Roy N.:
1) The change in use of “gay” is not a “change in language”, as you put it. The change was an appropriation, a seizure. I trained with a doc named Gay, back in the 1960s. How would you like to carry that last name thru the intervening years? And your kids and grandkids?
Fortunately Latin is not dead, if by living you require morphing. Might be for you, though. My three years of HS Latin proved a great asset in my higher education.
2) I’m glad you agree with Neo. That makes it 2:1!
3) You don’t believe in identity politics; so you say, but you do. Offending an electoral segment is in these times necessary, given the many segments, unless you don’t wish to offend anyone, and then you’re a squish. If you go with one segment, you will lose its opposing segment. Socialist? or Capitalist?
As has been pointed out, that is not precisely what I said. That is to say that I did not say that “gays” whatever that term is supposed to precisely and objectively denote, are “insane” across the mental processing board. Perhaps you would prefer the terminology that the impulse is “objectively disordered”. And the evidence is prima facie: The closest analogy I can think of offhand would be with pica, I think. And I further think that it is patently obvious that homosexual desire is at the very least not normal, though one may wish if one chooses reduce that to a statistical statement and then shrug. But you shrug away a great deal in doing so.
Because as I as I have pointed out numerous times, one can, if one chooses, toss overboard the entire notion of a natural kind which then further implies any normative imperatives.
However, most people, once they have thought through the implications of this, recoil from doing so; as the consequences are so vertiginous for the average man.
Nonetheless the options are plain: either those with homosexual desires are a fundamentally like moral kind which suffers from a derangement of sexual appetite, or an unlike kind having a fundamentally different life aim but representing an objective natural kind of some sort, or there are no objective natural kinds at all, and therefore no norms which can be developed from an objective category and waved around in front of others as if X owed Y some consideration or tolerance beyond what was minimally prudent to proffer until the costs of not doing so became tolerable.
By the way, not that anyone is interested, but I am not a conservative.
Well, this was almost inevitable…
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/fake-buttigieg-accuser-i-was-set-up-by-jacob-wohl-exclusive/
Might as well quote the actual passage which seems to be at issue here and which makes specific references and specifies the manner in which the fall out of these miserable acts now impinge on those who’ve no interest and need have no interest in these things. But now were are expected to accord some catamite the same status a a wife”?
Trust me when I say that I could not care less what these people do with their bodies. I – don’t – care. They can do whatever they like or not. They can insert lit road flares down their gullets and into their colons, and it would not bother me in the least; as long as I don’t have to hear about it, pay for the consequences of the imbecility, or be asked to affirm it as something respect worthy.
And asking me to have even the slightest, and most formal role in validating the lunacy – in the name of some specious solidarity and “equality” – is just plain crazy.
“Those inequalities are felt throughout daily life, she explains: “Magazines screaming at you to be thinner, more beautiful, and better at sex to ‘please your man,’… ”
From me and the rest of patriarchy. Ladies, I think you are fine just the way you are. I’m not the one writing the articles in Teen Vogue about toning up your nether regions to please your man. I honestly don’t know where this girl is coming from. She’s not getting it from me.
Mike K, I didn’t have a particular night I wouldn’t go to the O Cliub. I always knew when the carrier air wing had departed. I could hear the Marine Corps brethren flying up from Iwakuni to Atsugi. AV-8Bs are loud. They announce their arrival and I knew, OK, the meat market socializing is on tonight. And I would stay away.
Because of course the Marines were taking care of the Navy wives. I knew guys who were on the other end of situation. I never cared if their uniforms were blue or green. You come back from cruise to learn your wife has slept through the Pacific Fleet. Or your house is empty.
It hurts.
There are a lot of women in the world. Your wife may be the hottest thing in creation. But no matter how tempting a woman she may be, I’m not going to be the man who ruins it for you. And actually I had the opportunity. Something about a guy going to sea brings out the worst in some women. And I told her no blankety blank way do I betray a trust.
“AesopFan on April 29, 2019 at 11:30 pm at 11:30 pm said:
Well, this was almost inevitable…
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/fake-buttigieg-accuser-i-was-set-up-by-jacob-wohl-exclusive/”
I have no idea who Wohl is; and wish that I had no idea who Buttigieg, and about 80 percent of the rest of the Democrats are.
Our politics – our lives – should not be dragged down into the mire by this crap, or the people who generate it.
On more quiet nights I’d go to the O Club to grab a few beers and play fussball.
Kevin Spacey will vote for him.
BTW, who thinks like this?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/lens/sarah-lewis-racial-bias-photography.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab
“Sarah Lewis explores the relationship between racism and the camera. ”
I’m like, who thinks this way? Who wants to be this way?
I’m more like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oUtJxE4sjs
“MSG Roy Benavidez speech 1991”
Yeah, I know. It was before most of you were alive.
I love how Reagan mispronounces Benevidez’s name.
Cicero; DNW:
A form of mental derangement is a mental derangement, a type of mental derangement. I didn’t say that DNW called homosexuality the totality of all mental derangement on earth. But he called it a mental derangement.
The DSM is full of supposed “forms of mental derangement.” But they are all mental derangements. Mental derangements are not synonymous with insanity, by the way. Insanity is a a mental derangement, but most mental derangements are not insanity.
Nor does anyone here require that DNW approve of gay people or what they do, or spend much time thinking about them. But he’s the one who made his comments, and other people are certainly going to react to them.
Roy Benevidez had the given name of Raul.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvlAHUur5eg
“MSGT Roy Benavidez Message To America”
i don[t know if I’m messing up the term. Is the abbreviation for Master Sargeant MSG or MSGT? Help me out, Army.
This was from a guy who left me a note.
“LT,
PSM
VR
CTT1”
And my Air force girl friend (She was a friend, not a girl friend in the way you may be thinking) turned to me and said, WTF is that.
And I explained. “Lieutenant, please see me. Very respectfully. Cryptologic Technician First Class.”
In case you are wondering that’s the kind of note I respond to. No CTT needs to wait on me.
Cryptologic Technician, Technical. CTT. There’s more than one kind of CT.
Nobody is wondering. I learned this from experience.
Artfldgr:
You posted various things (April 29, 2019 at 6:47 pm), apparently in reply to my earlier post (at 5:50 pm). But, although you quote one line of what I said in my post, nothing you say after that appears to be pertinent to what I was saying.
In particular, you ask, “Not happy with just admitting you dont [sic] know? why?” …which is an odd question to ask in reply to my earlier post. There’s nothing in my earlier post which involves any kind of embarrassing admission on my part, or even a non-admission…if that’s what you were implying? The response seems so out-of-place, it makes me think you were reading someone else’s post, and then replied to me thinking it was mine…maybe?
Similarly, you spend most of your post listing factoids unrelated to what I was saying in my post. I’m not sure what to say about them, other than, “Yes; and…?” I’m unfamiliar with a few of the items you mention, but I’m aware of most of them. I just don’t know why you’re mentioning them in reply to me.
You seem to be trying to prove that men don’t get a fair shake on college campuses, especially in the area of women falsely claiming sexual assault. But…I agree with that already. Pretty firmly, actually. Nobody needs to prove that to me; I would never deny it! And nothing I said in my earlier post does deny it. (Indeed, my earlier post largely assumes it.) So why are you trying to convince me? What prompted this urge to preach to the choir?
I feel vaguely like a Christian evangelist who, having just preached a week-long revival series and having baptized a hundred new converts, now has someone coming up to me with a disapproving look saying, “How dare you imply that Christians ought not publicly profess their beliefs! Actually, they should, and here are two dozen verses to prove it to you…!” And I’m sitting there saying, “Uh, dude? I never said otherwise. Stop with the verses. I already know them. You’re acting like I said something I didn’t say. Are you sure you didn’t mistake me for some other guy you were planning to have an argument with?”
If it helps, I can sum up the gist of my earlier post as follows:
1. At first glance, it appears that Leftists grant automatic belief to members of their Specially-Approved Groups; but there are exceptions to this rule.
2. The exceptions prove that leftists don’t grant automatic belief of sexual-assault claims on the basis of membership in one of their Specially-Approved Groups; although it usually works out that way. Nor do they automatically disbelieve persons from one of their Specially-Hated Groups; although, again, it usually works out that way.
3. What leftists actually do is figure out which story is politically helpful to them, and they believe that.
4. Normally this means believing women who accuse men…but not if the man is Bill Clinton. It would normally mean believing people who describe themselves as gay…but not if they’re accusing Buttigieg. They follow their Group Identity preferences only most of the time. But they follow the scent of political power and advantage all of the time. If the Duke rape hoax had threatened leftists’ political power, it would never have made it into print. We’re only talking about it today because the accused were just male college students, not (say) a left-leaning SCOTUS nominee.
Does that clear things up?
It is very mildly satisfying that the story of the Buttigieg accuser being “set up” comes from a conservative website, the same one that published the Northam blackface photo. In general, conservatives have said, “Wait until we see the evidence.” When a conservative is the accused, leftists in general don’t wait for evidence, and don’t care if it never surfaces.
Demoncrats were given promotions in buying up child sex slaves overseas and other shenanigans in the US, as a way to blackmail them and create the Unified Party of the Army of Demoncrats, run by and for demons.
Petraeus and Roberts got a little bit of that blackmail magic too. Petraeus was brave enough to fall on his sword. 99% of you humans would refuse to do that and just cave in and try to keep it secret.
I also find it a tad ironic that Westerners want to proclaim that Islam should reform even as they have ignored the corruptions of the Vatican and Church of Rome for hundreds if not thousands of years.
That institution isn’t particularly all that good even now, after persecuting and burning the saints of the Most High, the Almighty itself.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/nuns-as-sex-slaves/
That automatic knee jerk response of “Ymar is X” is the circle the wagons rationalization defense that people also use by slinging around Islamophobia whenever a truth about Islam is revealed to the masses. I’ll just cut it off at the knees since I know it will happen.
It’s a shame that this garbage pollutes the public spaces at all.
And when two clownish, obviously incompetent, self-promoting “right-wing” opportunist provocateurs (who I doubt anyone knew existed before this fiasco) begin plotting, there is sure to be a double helping of offal thrown in the public’s face.
This seemed like a false flag from the start. No details, and considering who was promoting it.
I’m way more concerned with MAYOR PETE’s views and policy positions.
This tweet about his meeting with race baiter Sharpton is telling:
“where we discussed inclusion in politics and a policy agenda for black Americans that includes economic, social, and political EQUITY.”
EQUITY is not achievable in a society that values LIBERTY and the INDIVIDUAL.
The question is, if this is a false accusation (and my gut reaction is that it probably is), then why is being made ?
1. It could be that the accuser has something to gain, even if it’s only attention.
2. It could be a plot by those evil racist homophobic Republican Nazis, because they’re afraid that the candidate is a threat to TrumpHitler.
3. It could be that it’s a plot by one or more of the God-only-knows-how many other possible Democratic candidates.
My suspicion is that it’s most likely option 1, but between the other two I don’t think 2 is very likely.The Republicans don’t take this candidate seriously and would probably welcome the chance to campaign against him. So if it’s a “false flag” operation, it’s more likely that there’s a Democrat behind it.
zenman,
I read that he also wants to get rid of the electoral college. He might get good grades on college papers, but I don’t think he understands the real world.
I appreciate DNW’s last, long and highly logical comment.
Cicero,
Exactly so. This is not some “organic change” in the language but rather a deliberate corruption of it, a taking-over of a valuable word with pleasant connotations in order to make homosexuality seem a downright fun thing.
If some of y’all care about reclaiming language from the Marxists, take a look at this website and start calling yourself “liberal” without resorting to “classic liberal”
http://www.lostlanguage.org/introduction
@expat – yeah, he seems to have the required list of “progressive” positions to be electable by the Democratic activist base.
R.C. on April 30, 2019 at 2:03 am at 2:03 am said:
…
I feel vaguely like a Christian evangelist who, having just preached a week-long revival series and having baptized a hundred new converts, now has someone coming up to me with a disapproving look saying, “How dare you imply that Christians ought not publicly profess their beliefs! Actually, they should, and here are two dozen verses to prove it to you…!” And I’m sitting there saying, “Uh, dude? I never said otherwise. Stop with the verses. I already know them. You’re acting like I said something I didn’t say. Are you sure you didn’t mistake me for some other guy you were planning to have an argument with?”
* * *
A very nice response, and a great metaphor. I do think that art vents here because he knows the “other guys” won’t ever hear or see his arguments. I try to scan through his screeds for the “verses” I didn’t know — and in his historical recaps, there are quite a few gold nuggets.
Your taxonomy of leftist belief-worthy victims is very accurate.
“3. What leftists actually do is figure out which story is politically helpful to them, and they believe that.”
I note that Virginia’s Democrat governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general are still in office. Even if Democrats do believe the negative stories, they don’t exact punishment, depending on what is best for them politically — or what they can get away with.
Why is ymarsakar on April 30, 2019 at 1:20 pm at 1:20 pm said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
held in moderation?