Maybe I don't give Bobby O'Rourke enough credit. Dude seems to be entirely willing to publicly say what other Democrats are already thinking and apparently have been for quite some time. The most prominent member of the Fake Indian community comes out against Christianity.
7 comments:
The notion they've been 'harmed' because others don't hold them in esteem is integral to the gay activist worldview. It's nonsense, of course, and intelligent people don't put validation stickers on other people's nonsense. The Democratic Party isn't run by intelligent people. Or by people with a shred of decency, either.
I too notice that the gay activist has a real bad dose of "Look at me." I guess that is why all the gay pride parades. If straights tried that, they would be laughed at & deservedly so.
There was a straight pride parade in Boston recently. A few hundred participants and many more protesters.
Elizabeth Warren and all the Dem candidates seem not to realize that black Americans are often religious and less all-in on this gay and transgender idea. They need their votes, and may not get as many as they need.
Elizabeth Warren and all the Dem candidates seem not to realize that black Americans are often religious and less all-in on this gay and transgender idea.
Among professional-class types, your attitude toward sexual disorders delineates in-groups and out groups. That's not typically true in other segments of society. As for the black population, Quentin Crisp had a story of moving to New York and renting a room on the Lower East Side. He goes out one day in drag (makeup, I gather) and a black man near him began laughing uproariously. "You got it all on..." guffaw guffaw. That was in 1969. My impression was then and now that blacks have tended to regard homosexuality as burlesque. The language of 'gay rights' does not compute.
Katherine, I can think of 4.7 million people, mostly black and Hispanic, who might not vote Democrat this time around. Their religious beliefs may form a part of it, but having the best job of their lives, and finally being lifted out of poverty will probably be the real reason for many.
TLM, I agree. Why on earth would those minority voters choose Warren, whose policies would destroy their jobs and prosperity?
TLM, I agree. Why on earth would those minority voters choose Warren, whose policies would destroy their jobs and prosperity?
Because they use certain cues to tell them how to vote. Most people don't have elementary training in economics or much business sense because they know their own job, not someone else's job. The cue for black voters is the (D) next to the name. Also, remember the photo of Malcolm Little with his upraised middle finger; a candidate who taps into that sentiment can get some votes, net. See the careers of Maxine Waters and John Conyers, neither of whom was fit to be in charge of a Chia pet.
Warren's a law professor with the vices of a law professor who also taps into inchoate sentiments people hold of the 'we-wuz-robbed' variety. (The late Shana Alexander wrote about this 40-odd years ago. Worth a re-read). The irony is, the political economy of this country is awash with cronyism and rent-seeking behavior, but the purveyors of the 'we-wuz-robbed' discourse don't say much about it, because their whole shtick is stoking sentiment against approved bogies, not actually repairing the damage done by the rent-seekers. (Who are, quite generally, Democratic Party clients).
I should note that Sanders is of similar kidney. Sanders has two advantages over Warren. (1) He is neither an academic nor a lawyer, so tells fewer lies. (2) He's actually run a municipal government, and was a seminal figure in local politics in Burlington. He wasn't a business-as-usual failure like Booty-gig. Except that he's just too old to be holding such a demanding position, Sanders is the Democrats best option.
Post a Comment