I got nothing. Seriously, nuthin'. The Harvey Weinstein scandal is proceeding as expected with the herd striking out with blind rage at those who don't conform to the collective's position. Trump gave Obamacare a death blow and only the Democratic leadership seems to get it. The GOP keeps attacking Trump because they are Hillary in drag. Hillary is having to deny that Bill Clinton told her the truth about her book and campaign. That's really about it.
So let me leave you with this. We are all made of atoms that are essentially immortal. Does that make us immortal in a sense? What do you think this means for the existence of the human soul?
So let me leave you with this. We are all made of atoms that are essentially immortal. Does that make us immortal in a sense? What do you think this means for the existence of the human soul?
35 comments:
All of that is definitely predictable, though what stands out to me was how Trump pretty much pantsed the GOP on Obamacare. That's going to leave a mark with a lot of people. Interesting thought on atoms... I'll have to think about that some more. Otherwise I don't have anything either; just waiting to get home to my games and kitten!
My favorite (and the strangest) Trump take of late is, "I'm angry because I voted for Trump to do the thing he promised, but not the other thing he promised!"
I see this a lot as pertains to both Obamacare and the border wall. Seems a lot of people thought it'd be easier to build a wall than to undo Obamacare. What does that tell you about entitlement legislation? Ha!
I see the brave comedians are trying to connect Weinstein to Trump because, remember, he said rude things on a bus. That's totally a confession, gaiz!
Lemme frame it this way:
Allegedly, everybody knew about Weinstein but were too afraid (for their careers) to say anything and many were actively covering it up. Now that the secret is out, the floodgate are open.
Conversely, everybody "knows" that Trump is guilty of "something" and many are actively trying to expose him. And yet the only thing they keep coming up with is the Access Hollywood tapes and the fake dossier. Either Trump is better than anyone at covering his tracks or—the unthinkable—there's nothing to cover up.
One more angle to consider: how many germophobes—as Trump is purported to be—do you suppose go around assaulting potential disease vectors?
Tryanmax - I have witnessed Trump for almost 30 yrs now. I don't like him personally, but you see, Trump has never been anything but who he is. Like him or hate him, believe it or not, he hides nothing. If only he did play his life/presidency a little closer to the vest as in not disclosing anything on Twitter, it might be better.
Larry Flint/Hustler, as usual, has an open call for any dirty dirt on Trump. So if you know of anything with proof, there's at least $250K in it for you!
Oh my nondenominational and possibly nonexistent God! Tryanmax, are you blaming the victims?
"too afraid (for their careers)"
How dare you, sir! These brave young actresses didn't sell their silence for mere careers and thereby doom hundreds of other women to the same fate! No, they lied and ignored this evil because sexual harassment is such a horrific crime that it makes women incapable of talking. It's like Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome and Stockholm Disease and Opportuna Nonveritas all rolled into one! No, this had nothing to do with careers, it was about predatory behavior somethingsomething power!
And calling women "disease vectors" is just horrific. Are you suggesting that women who are willing to trade sex for power, money or career advancement are to blame for the consequences of their bad decisions?!! Why, I never heard such a thing!! You monster.
Wow, Andrew, that is a fascinating question about the soul. Hmmm, I too, need to think about that one. Though I will start with this simple answer - Our soul is immortal and science will prove that one day.
Andrew, LOL!
Bev, I think Trump plays closer to the vest than it seems. It's just a matter of which game he is playing.
So...OMNAPNG: is the "OMG" for agnostics, right?
Actually "Om-naping" sounds like a great yoga/meditation mantra...I think I'm gonna use it!
Speaking of blaming the victim - Good friend of SuperLiberal/Super Feminist Barbara Streisand, fashion designer Donna Karan literally said women were "asking for it" by the way they dress. Oops...
Bev, "The Big Bang Theory"'s Mayim Bailik is getting whacked too for "blaming the victim" because she said that she's found it to be a good idea not to dress provocatively and not to flirt with men who aren't her husband. HOW DARE YOU BLAME THE VICTIM YOU MONSTER!!! Yep, heaven forbid that we acknowledge that flirting with a predator is a bad idea.
Bev, It is an interesting idea that all the things that make us up are eternal. Isn't it?
Mayim Bailik is famously an orthodox Jew, so I would expect nothing less from her. She can't show her skin at all to a man/not her husband. Look closely at her costumes on the show...never has her arms/legs uncovered.
And it's not that I disagree with that line of reasoning, but I am just surprised that was coming from Streisand's good friend, Donna Karan! I would think she would've been in the "BURN THE WITCH (or WARLOCK)!!" camp.
Bev, Bailik is right, but as usual she's being attacked for stating the obvious.
On Karan, I suspect that what we're really looking at here is that Weinstein prayed (mainly) on women who were happy to trade sex for success and that's the dirty secret why no one spoke up -- because they did it voluntarily, even if unhappily. And now that they are screaming how victimized they were, Karan is calling them out without being explicit. And they are firing back that she's blaming the victim.
That's my guess. That's my guess why they didn't complain (why those who did got a settlement), why they waited so long to speak up (even now), and why they are trying desperately to control the PR on this -- they have shut up the comedians, they push an "this is a worldwide crisis/epidemic" argument, and they've silenced any question of why they wouldn't speak up.
Keep this in mind, there are dozens of other film companies, many of these women are rich or connected to the industry or married to billionaires, and yet none of them spoke up for 30 years... and no reporter is asking them why not.
Andrew: BINGO! I am "amazed" at the number of women who have put themselves in the position of being assaulted by someone who everyone KNEW to be that...what were they getting out of it.
Sorry, but there is literally no reason to voluntarily go back to any man's hotel room alone.
Andrew, I'm a Christian and believe our souls are immortal, but I know that's not enough for some to go on, that logical and/or doubting minds need scientific "proof" of all things. I recommend the book "The Case for a Creator" by Lee Strobel. It's an interesting read.
Amazon's description says this: "During his academic years, Lee Strobel became convinced that God was outmoded, a belief that colored his ensuing career as an award-winning journalist at the Chicago Tribune. Science had made the idea of a Creator irrelevant - or so Strobel thought. But today science is pointing in a different direction. In recent years, a diverse and impressive body of research has increasingly supported the conclusion that the universe was intelligently designed. At the same time, Darwinism has faltered in the face of concrete facts and hard reason. Has science discovered God? At the very least, it's giving faith an immense boost as new findings emerge about the incredible complexity of our universe. Join Strobel as he reexamines the theories that once led him away from God. Through his compelling account, you'll encounter the mind-stretching discoveries from cosmology, cellular biology, DNA research, astronomy, physics, and human consciousness that present astonishing evidence in The Case for a Creator."
https://www.amazon.com/Case-Creator-Lee-Strobel/dp/0310242096/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1508196380&sr=8-1&keywords=the+case+for+a+creator
Stacy, Thanks for the reference. I will definitely check that out. This whole area fascinates me. And while I know that proof is elusive, I see reasons to believe. What's more, the anti arguments seem to be based largely on anger more than anything.
Another thought on the harassed starlets.
These are the same women who benefited from a looks based system and when they got older, they screamed about how unfair it was that Hollywood looks to use young, beautiful women and rarely casts older women.
Now, here we have the same women who remained silent so Weinstein could continue his predatory ways so they could have film careers. Now that they need cover for letting Weinstein rape his way through Hollywood, they all claim to have been victims.
You'll forgive me if I see a lot of cynicism here.
BTW, this #metoo crap is interesting. This is an attempt to create a crisis by showing large numbers of women who claim to have been harassed or assaulted.
Here's the thing though:
1. There's no definition of what it means to be harassed. This is a common tactic by feminists to increase the numbers.
2. There's not requirement that anyone tell the truth. Two women I know have already signed up to it despite neither actually being harassed. A third considers "men look at me" as harassment.
3. There is no way to say which accounts are real and which are doubled. How many fake accounts are there on social media? Millions.
4. They're happy they got 500,000 so far, but that's 0.15% of the population. Feminists claim 50%+ of women get sexually assaulted.
5. This time, I think they should wear hats shaped like Harvey Weinstein's genitalia.
Seeking dirt on Trump is like seeking dirt on Flynt. It's part of his image so the odds of damaging him with it are remote.
As for Weinstein and other Hollywood goons I laugh at all these weird secret strategies people cite to play down their inaction ('I once told a mean joke about him on tv to punish him for abusing my friend' ).
As for sexual harassment stories in the internet people lie all the time about every and anything if it makes for a better story ('Unlike some of my predecessors I call the families of dead soldiers ) so stories don't mean much without affirmation.
5. This time, I think they should wear hats shaped like Harvey Weinstein's genitalia.
So, THIS?
On the Weinstein thing, my wife is right there with you, Bev and Andrew, and I am too. I wonder what exactly dried up that these women feel like they're getting more by attacking Weinstein than covering for him?
Not trying to be conspiratorial, but part of me thinks that Weinstein is just being cast off to distract from something worse.
As far as #metoo goes, well, me too!
Men receive unwanted come-ons just as women do. By my estimation, women are a lot more likely to get up into a man's personal space to make their move. The difference is, it's just not in a man's nature to think of unwanted come-ons as harassment.
Unfortunately, I think the only solution—besides succumbing to Sharia—is for men to become more attuned to this behavior and respond in both of two ways. 1) Be very selective with your attentions, don't give harpies any cause to complain, and 2) notice when women get aggressive with their attention and call it out. The latter will rob feminists of the moral high-ground.
Tryanmax - It's the Trump effect. Actually, he is actually leading a sea-change knowingly or unknowingly just because his past with women it's not breaking news, but it is highlighting others who have been protected. Accusations about his sexual wrongdoings were always easily overshadowed by...Bill Clinton's. One can't claim TRUMP is an evil/hypocritical Republican without getting an avalanche of two-word responses...Bill Clinton. That's one of the reasons, Hillary had a hard time because she really, really wanted to hit him hard on his personal life, but...Bill Clinton. And if she even brought it up, she would have to explain why it is okay for Bill, but suddenly not okay for Donald.
She literally has said while in the UK this week
“After all, we have someone admitting to being a sexual assaulter in the Oval Office. There has to be a recognition that we must stand against the kind of action that is so sexist and misogynistic.”
How is she so self-absorbed that she did not see this as just insane for her to even say it? Though I guess the very legalistic gymnastics of "admitting to being" is one of those "the definition of 'is'" moments the Clintons are famous for and is their workaround for their own absolution.
Let me toss out one more thing that bothers me...
Now that it's cool to have been abused by Weinstein... and everyone in Hollywood is being so "brave" in naming him as their own molester... and we're told this is an "epidemic" that needs to be stopped because it happens to all women...
... why are so many starlets saying they were harassed by "a director" or "a different producer" or "a makeup artist" and yet none of them name any of these people?
If those things are true, why are they protecting those people now? Or is this perhaps just all bullshit and they don't want someone defending themselves against the charge.
Bev, Hillary is truly oblivious. She's a total failure.
Andrew - There is no doubt that Weinstein did what he did and others too. However, when the term "sexual harasser" is so undefined and broad then everyone, not just women, can join in. There isn't a human alive who hasn't been "looked at", touched, or talked to/about "inappropriately".
Ah, just read this...It’s Good Harvey Weinstein Was Stopped. But Let’s Not Start A Witch Hunt and with it a very fitting term "Sexual McCarthyism".
So it's back to "don't jump to conclusions" again. I can't keep up.
Well, Cathy Young has always been on the pro side of the "due process" debate. The same is happening with this as has been going on at college campus's. The "all men are pigs and all women should be believed".
Though it is true, women never ever lie about these things or anything ever...trust me, it's true.
Bev, It's an excellent article that breaks down the dangers here. And she's right. The problem is that the feminist movement is trying to turn the criminal acts of one man into a vast male conspiracy which requires legislation, original sin, perpetual guilt and affirmative action to correct.
I just reacted to the headline. Despite a few testy Twitter interactions, I do like Cathy Young.
Another thought. For those claiming that women don't do this, explain to me the massive number of female teachers having sex with their students. It's the same power dynamic being exploited. Whoops.
So maybe feminists should stop making generalizations.
So mocking the handicapped is either good or bad now depending on which side of the aisle one is on. I remember the halcyon days when it wasn't something done outside of the fringe and the comedy circuit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/17/cnn-reporter-mocks-mitch-mcconnell-for-needing-help-with-stairs-not-realizing-survived-polio.html
The fight Trump started over whether or not other presidents called the families of deceased soldiers continues to go on, being actively fed by Trump and a hard left Democrat in Congress. I'm sure Gold Star families really appreciate the use of their grief as cheap fodder in an stupid argument started by an offhand lie.
That sounds like an interesting book, Stacy. That's one thing that's always made being a Christian difficult, the whole nagging feeling that faith is completely irrational. I'll make sure to give it a read once I can fit it into my budget! I'll post my thoughts on the rest of discussion in the new thread.
Post a Comment