Friday, July 24, 2015

Friday's Thoughts: Gawker & Rick Perry's Trump Speech

By Kit

Gawker & the Gossip Press

As Gawker continues to decline in the sights of our cultural elites, I happened to come across a passage in Theodore Dalrymple’s Our Culture —What’s Left of It, a book I highly recommend, on the British tabloid press that reminded me of Gawker, and various other gossip outlets such as TMZ and National Enquirer.

The boundless prurience of the British press concerning the private lives of public figures, especially politicians, has an ideological aim: to subvert the very concept and deny the possibility of virtue, and therefore of the necessity for restraint. If every person who tries to defend virtue is revealed to have feet of clay (as which of us does not?) or to have indulged at some time in his life in the vice that is the opposite of the virtue he calls for, then virtue itself is exposed as nothing but hypocrisy: and we may therefore all behave exactly as we choose. The loss of the religious understanding of the human condition—that Man is a fallen creature for whom virtue is necessary but never fully attainable—is a loss, not a gain, in true sophistication. The secular substitute—the belief in the perfection of life on earth by the endless extension of a choice of pleasures—is not merely callow by comparison but much less realistic in its understanding of human nature.

One of the most contorted passages in the Bible is Christ’s rhetorical question to the pharisees, “Whoever is without sin?” When referenced today, such as in the song “La Vie Boheme B” from the god-awful, pretentious, Shame of Generation X, hit Broadway musical Rent, it is generally used as a call for the permissiveness of any and every form of sexual vice (among other vices). If everyone has lusted at some point in their lives, then who can critique it in others. Who are you to judge me for having sex with every 20 people in one night?

Of course, in the actual passage that is not the meaning of it at all. If it was, then it would be strange for Jesus to immediately afterwards implore the woman “to go and sin no more.” Rather, like many other statements by Jesus it is a call for humility, for us to remember our own sins and not use the sins of others to deflect from them, something you saw in 33 AD and today as well, in many forms. I may have lusted at the pretty young girl in the Jewish market stand but at least I’m not selling my body for sex, I may have cheated on my wife several times but I’m no Homo-queer, or Yeah, I’m in prison now for beatin’ my girlfriend’s stupid son because the little brat attacked me while I was smackin’ his mum up for makin’ me soup too hot, nearly burned me face off, and, yeah, I do have a thousand or two pounds worth of back-payments in child support for 5 kids with 3 other women, each of who I’d hit a few times, but at least I’M NO GODDAMNED PEDO!

That last one is quite common in the prison systems of many western countries.

Evil may have standards, but often its just another way of deflection. And that, after all, is the purpose of gossip, whether in the pages of the National Enquirer or it’s the lady at the salon.

Gawker was a site that allowed people who thought themselves above the petty gossip of the vulgar masses to indulge in petty gossip while, due to the site's constant attacks against the “right” targets, stroking their sense of moral superiority. It cannot depart quick enough.

Rick Perry's Trump Speech

I was going to post something on Donald Trump but Rick Perry nailed it in a speech titled, “Defending Conservatism Against the Cancer of Trump-ism.”

A passage:

In times of trouble, there are two types of leaders: repairers of the breach and sowers of discord.
The sower of discord foments agitation, thrives on division, scapegoats certain elements of society, and offers empty platitudes and promises. He is without substance when one scratches below the surface.
He offers a barking carnival act that can be best described as Trumpism: a toxic mix of demagoguery, mean-spiritedness and nonsense that will lead the Republican Party to perdition if pursued.
Let no one be mistaken – Donald Trump’s candidacy is a cancer on conservatism, and it must be clearly diagnosed, excised and discarded.
It cannot be pacified or ignored, for it will destroy a set of principles that has lifted more people out of poverty than any force in the history of the civilized world – the cause of conservatism.
I feel so strongly about this because I believe conservatism is the only way forward for this country.

Read the whole thing:

Discuss what you wish. Gawker, Trump, or the Iran Deal. Have a nice weekend.


Anthony said...

It's tragic that a(nother) nut job has shot up a theater in Louisiana. The loser should have just offed himself rather than shooting a bunch of people and then killing himself.

Unknown said... Perry. Great speech and words, but it is irrelevant to Trump. Perry tried to wear the mantle of "true" conservatism by defending something that was never claimed by Trump. When did Trump deny he was a conservative or hated conservatives?

My understanding is that Trump is going after the issues that many conservatives believe the Repubs just give lip service to. When called on it, Perry cloaks himself as the true arbiter of conservative values. It's b.s.

I think what got to him was Trump's schoolyard taunt of Perry..."He buys some glasses and thinks that it now makes him smart!"

I think Trump is doing exactly what he set out to do. Create a scene, generate controversy, increase name recognition and divert the medias attention away from all the other issues out there.

It's a crazy hot summer and Trump is the carnival barker. Perry is the sad clown.


tryanmax said...

I sort of wonder whether Trump is playing the Pied Piper?

Anthony said...

Speaking of Gawker, the WWE has cut ties with Hulk Hogan because his sex tape with the wife of a fellow wrestler (which he is suing Gawker over) also contained racist comments.

I thought Hulk Hogan was one of the good guys. I watched his cartoon in the 80's. Perhaps all of my beliefs about the morality of professional wrestlers are wrong. Maybe some of the faces are actually heels and maybe some of the heels are actually faces? I have much to think about today.

If we can't expect morality from steroid inflated stuntmen, who can we expect morality from?

AndrewPrice said...

Anthony, If we can't expect morality from steroid inflated stuntmen, who can we expect morality from?

Isn't that the truth. :(

In all seriousness, I used to believe that Hogan was a good guy, much like his early persona. Unfortunately, everything I've seen about him in the past decade has been less than flattering... drugs, spouse abuse, suggestions of gay relationships, shady business deals, etc.

It's sad.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, I keep hoping that, actually. That he takes away the "genoooooine conservatives" to a far away place where they can form their own party to rail against Mexicans and gays and leave conservatism to the people who actually understand it.

The problem is with all these jokers is that they never actually leave because they know that means irrelevance. They know they won't win and that's not their goal. Their goal is attention. So they use that threat because they know people will respond..

AndrewPrice said...

Bob, Perry's actually done a very smart thing. Right now, the race belongs to Bush. The only way Perry can change that dynamic is getting himself noticed in a way that makes the Republican voting public think that he would be more likely to win than Bush. Sinking Trump will get him a second look.

Kit said...


"If we can't expect morality from steroid inflated stuntmen, who can we expect morality from?"

You win the award for best comment of the day. And it isn't even noon yet!

Anthony said...

Great Uber vs liberals article on CNN.

Last Sunday, de Blasio wrote an op-ed in the New York Daily News drawing his line in the sand. He declared that Uber, a company with a staggering $40 billion market cap and basically no formal workforce (it claims its "driver-partners" are independent contractors that it just matches with fares in exchange for as much as a 30% cut of each ride) had to be frozen in size for a year while the city worked out rules for it.

"I don't debate with private corporations," the mayor said Monday, holding his ground and explaining that new technologies meant that "the rights of consumers are now in doubt, the rights of workers are in doubt. There's all sorts of unintended consequences here. And government regulation hasn't caught up with the reality. So I think it's important that we do so."

But Wednesday, de Blasio surrendered, hours after Gov. Andrew Cuomo sided squarely with Uber and just a day before the City Council was to vote on that freeze. Instead, he agreed to a four-month "study" of transportation issues in New York. The company still won't give much of its data on rides to the city, citing "client privacy." To see some of what is shared, city officials may have to go into a secure, Uber-controlled room.

Incidentally, I know a guy who is an Uber driver who brags about all the money he is making (he is staying with our current employer for the health insurance). I know that sounds like a paid advertisement, but it is true :) .

Anthony said...

For clarity's sake, the last comment is mine.

Kit said...


A bit of trivia on the Uber-De Blasio fight;

At the end, though, it does not matter how much UBer employees earn, they are not only non-union, they are competition to union jobs, which means they are a threat to the big unions and therefore must submit or be destroyed.

BevfromNYC said...

More on Uber v. De Blasio...and this is hysterically funny in the "Liberals eating their own" department. Seriously, so The Blas made a deal with Uber for that 4-month impact study. Well, our City Counsel/Socialist/Feminist/Puerto Rican [her description, not mine] Speaker is livid....LIVID!!!, as SHE is the only one with the authority over these issues and SHE is the one who brought Uber to the table and SHE is Latina AND a woman with a vagina, and Cuomo and De Blasio are sexist/anti-Hispanic pig-dogs for not giving her any credit even though she wouldn't have made this deal becaue she gets lots and lots and losts of money from the inionized Yellow cab owners/operators [I paraphrase]

Translated from the Spanish (oddly, I thought our City Council would speak English for this kind of thing, but that's just me)

"I find it offensive as a woman, and as a Latina who is leading this legislative body that somehow the impression is that I was forced to my position, that I couldn’t possibly have arrived at this position on my own, that it was others — predominantly men in this case — that got me to this point,” she said. “That’s completely erroneous. She added that “the idea that somehow I can be influenced, or somehow that others are leading the charge in this conversation, I find to be sexist.”

tryanmax said...

I kind of always knew it was impossible to persuade a woman of anything, so I find it comforting that a self-avowed feminist has not only made it explicitly clear that such is the case, but also established that it is sexist to believe otherwise. ;-)

Kit said...

From my post:

"yeah, I do have a thousand or two pounds worth of back-payments in child support for 5 kids with 3 other women, each of who I’d hit a few times, but at least I’M NO GODDAMNED PEDO!"

On that bit of moral morass disguised as nobility (behavior which makes a child more likely to be a victim of sexual abuse), here is a case from the UK, about 15 years ago, displaying that very attitude, only dumbed-down to an insane degree.

A mob attacked a pediatrician's home in South Wales, forcing her to flee, because they mistook the word "pediatrician" for "pedophile."

Kit said...

Score one for Rick Perry!
From Reuters: "Texas appeals court tosses one count against former Governor Perry"

He still has a few others left but this is a good victory for Perry. LINK

ScottDS said...

I'd love to be an Uber driver to make some additional dough, but I've never been comfortable with the whole "caring for the safety of other people while operating a motor vehicle" thing. I'm a good driver, but transporting strangers? Different story.

As for the Hulkster... yeah, that's a disappointment. I've never been a wrestling guy but as an 80s kid, his was a near-constant pop culture presence. Suburban Commando, anybody?! :-)

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Wow, she caught me! The reason I thought she was on the take wasn't because she's a corrupt New York race hustler, it's because she's a female Latina. Boy is my face red. LOL!

BevfromNYC said...

The thing about Uber especially in NYC, is that the "outer boroughs" [translation: "not Manhattan"] do not have street-hailable yellow cabs roam around that service these areas or that are at all willing to travel from Manhattan to the outer boroughs. Uber has been a real boon for them. The same for NJ nabes across the Hudson. A few years ago, the yellow cab service conceded to start a new "green cab" service that is allowed to bring people in to Manhattan, but cannot do a pick up for a "outbound" trip. It's al a big Union issue...blah, blah, blah. Uber filled the void well, but we can't have that.

Joel Farnham said...

About Trump, like it or not he is in this to win. Perry, right now, has almost no points. Trump is the leader. There is a long road ahead and Trump is leading.

Trump is no conservative. Make no mistake about that. However, he is the only one who dared to call out about illegals in the United States. He has managed to bring it to the forefront. Which is more than any other INCLUDING Perry.

I wouldn't care for a Trump presidency. He is much to fascist for me to stomach. However, he has caught the imagination of many. And it is kinda nice to see a man who won't cower to the PC police.

Oh, Perry could have had Texas Rangers assist or control the border. Why didn't he do it?

One more thing, Trump frightens the MSM, the DNC and the Republican establishment. Is that the reason why you are against him?

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, First, welcome back! :D

Secondly, I don't think Trump scares the MSM or the Democrats at all. They love him because he gives the left about 5% extra they wouldn't otherwise get.

In terms of why I don't like Trump, it's simple.

1. He's a fraud. He's about as conservative as Hillary Clinton. He just picked the far right as his target audience because they've proven to be suckers lately for anyone throwing a tantrum. And letting him run under the banner of conservatism is like driving a strike through the heart of the word. What will that word mean to average voters after this except lunatics and bigots?

2. Even if I believed him, which I don't, Trump's history is to sell out his supporters once he makes his profit. He's done it over and over and over and he'll do it here too. Why would I ever want to pick someone like that to champion my side?

3. Trump has "raised" the issue, but he's done it in the absolutely worst way -- lies, demagoguery and demonization. Every day he continues just drives more normals away from the party.

4. I really really don't like Bush, but Trump is preventing a legitimate candidate from challenging Bush.

That's why I don't like Trump.

Joel Farnham said...

Thank you for welcoming me back. You might not like what I have to say though.

I don't see it that way. I see Trump ripping the hell out of people who shouldn't be in the contest in the first place. Historically, this is THE chance for Republicans to retake the White House with the possibility with having a solid majority in the House and the Senate. As it it is, every cousin and his friend has jumped in and wants to be President.

I don't trust Trump on much of anything. I do love that he won't back down. I do love that the MSM hasn't laid a glove on him. I do love that he brought up the illegal immigration with the spectre of rape and drugs. I love that he has shut down McCain in such a way as to emasculate him. McCain needed to be taken down. Perry should be taken down as well.

Throwing a tantrum. Well, you can call it that, but isn't that what is needed?

I already told you he was not a conservative. Make no mistake about that.

As for the fraud, he is worth 10 billion now. I would like to have some of that fraud thrown my way. Selfish? Yeah. Want to fight about it?

As for the banner of conservatism? Unless you have been hiding in some underground bunkhouse, Conservatism is dead under this administration. It has been co opted by the likes of McCain, Graham and a host of others. It has been attacked by the IRS on numerous occasions. As it is, you don't like conservatives any way. You think they are the enemy.

Legitimate candidate? Can you be more specific? No one is legitimate, not yet anyways.

Also, time will tell. I think he is in for the long haul, and unless you are better that the master marketer, you will hope for better but he wins.

Unknown said...

Joel....I mostly agree with your Trump assessment.
1) Why in the world is Santorum running again. Is that all this guy does? Every 4 years convince evangelicals to vote(throw away their vote) for him once again? Christie, no way any con will vote for a fat, antagonistic suck-up to Obama who doesn't even recognize he threw away his career as a repub when he was posing and hugging Obama right befor the 12 election.

2) McCain. The media still won't report exactly what Trump said about McCain. Actually, even McCain said that about McCain in his book. To paraphrase: "I was a lousy pilot. Got shot down and captured on my first sortie. I'm no hero." What was heroic was his ability to last those many years in prison. Helped to have a father and grandfather as Admirals. The VC knew who he was and what a propaganda coup they had with him. What bothers me is how many unknown regular POW's were broken and killed during that same time, while they kept McCain alive. His record in the Senate is a marvelous thing to behold too.

3) "I'm rich, bitch!" I love to see Trump flying in on his own "Trump" version of AF1. Except it's HIS, not for use only when President. I guess the trait I like about him most, which might be what has made him so popular in both business and media, is that he is a perfectionist. "Why isn't this right?" "Why are there errors in this document?" He expects his properties, with HIS name on them, to be run well, impeccable service, attention to detail, etc. If he brings just that trait to politics/WH then he'd be historical. If you've ever visited or stayed in any of Trump's hotels, or played on his golf courses, or see his plane up close, you'd appreciate the effort he puts into maintaining the "Trump" image. Imagine your last name on prominent buildings. Would'nt you care how they were run or looked or serviced? I sure as hell would and many people obviously do as evidenced by his success (in the private market I might add). And, name one billionaire who doesn't play both sides of the corrupt aisle of politics. Both sides are being bought, and if you want to play in the big leagues you have to grease the skids (oh..sorry...make a political donation) to whomever is in power at the time. At this time, he's rich enough to not be bought. Everyone knows he's been divorced how many times. He's not a "nice, beta male" who says what people want to hear.

4) There's got to be some reason why he's polling so well. What ever could it be? How about his rhetoric against the cronyism and fraud in BOTH parties. Repibs can't stand the thought of being called out as weasels. Dems know they are and embrace it. So here comes Trump to call out the Repubs as the bought mistresses they are to the Dems and leftist media complex.

He won't be bought and paid for. He exposes issues both parties don't want addressed. He taps into the frustration and anger that many Americans have about how our society and the laws/Constitution it was founded upon have been corrupted over the years and says he will take a different approach to addressing those concerns.

Also, I guarantee that he would clean up the military procurement system (where much of the waste and fraud in the government happens). There's a few billion dollars right there for a fence, or entitlement reform.

So, would I vote for Trump? Against Clinton or any other Dem? HELL YEAH!! Over Cruz or Walker, probably not. My ticket today would be Trump/Fiorina or Cruz/Walker. Outsider vs. insiders.

Oh, and for a good look at how Washington and the Repub party works, check out Cruz's floor speech yesterday on how McConnell and the R leadership "leads." Disgusting, yet all too typical behavior from our so-called leaders.


AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I've always said you're free to disagree. Doesn't bother me. That said, I will speak my mind as well.

First, tantrums never help... ever. And not seeing that fundamentally misunderstands human nature.

Secondly, as for the media not laying a hand on Trump, that may be true on the fringe, but nowhere else. Trump has gone from joke to villain with the public... the people who actually decide the election.

Third, he's not worth $10 billion. Forbes rather kindly estimates him at being worth between $3-4 billion based on real estate values... which doesn't exclude debts, so he's worth less. What's more, when Trump tried to buy the Buffalo Bills a few years back, he couldn't prove he had a billion dollars and he had to back out.

Fourth, Trump hardly emasculated McCain. Quite the opposite actually. Trump managed to give a lot of people who did not like McCain a new found respect for the man and what he went through.

Fifth, I love conservatives, but the fringe is not conservatives. They are freaks and bigots who slithered over to conservatism (in name only) when they saw an opening in 2010. Most of those people have no idea what conservatism even stands for. They are people who claim to be constitutionalists but don't understand the constitution and want to ignore it at every opportunity. Their economic beliefs are conspiracy theories, not economics. They fundamentally misunderstand things like free trade, monetary policy, and capitalism, and they generally float back and forth between fascism and anarchy. And strangely, these armchair warriors equate conservatism with machismo. They are the children of Pat Buchanan's paranoia, not Ronald Reagan.

Joel Farnham said...


I am thinking Trump/Cruz or Cruz/Trump as more likely than Cruz/Walker. Or Trump/Fiorina.

I did see Cruz on the Senate Floor. Cruz caught McConnell in a lie and called him out for it. Cruz might not be on any committee now, but it is invigorating to see someone who is willing to call out that turncoat.

Make America Great Again is kinda nice to hear, but America was great because of its people. Not because of one man. Reagan knew that the American People would be great if government got out of their way. I am not so sure with Trump.

You are right about Santorum. Didn't he get thoroughly discredited last time he ran? Christie, you nailed it about him. I was totally disgusted by his actions.

On McCain, there are a LOT of questions unanswered about his time in a POW camp. About how McCain said no to an exchange because he was an Admiral's son? McCain didn't have any say so on it. How could he? He was a POW with almost no rights. And one other thing, why did McCain gain weight while being a POW and the rest of the POW's didn't? Questions unanswered and may never be answered.

Joel Farnham said...


You are the one who started using the word tantrum. Well, you may be right. The next level of tantrum is riots. After being lied to by the Main Stream Media, the DNC and GOPe for years if not decades, don't you think the "normal people" would be a little peeved?

The usual operative mode with the MSM is to get some small soundbite from a politician they don't like, expound on it in the worst way, then get some person like McCain to comment on it then run back to the first guy to get his "take". When I say not lay a hand on Trump, Trump usually calls them out on it and forces their hand. He doesn't even have to refute the question. This generally stops the "journalist" in his tracks. That and the insistence on the interview being taped live. Makes it extremely hard to "edit" Trumps actual words.

Trump gave out his net worth after handing the information over. Trump says he is worth 10 billion. Forbes says he isn't. Why isn't the MSM trumpeting it all over? TRUMP LIED! PEOPLE CRIED! I mean it would be so EASY to refute Trump on that. Make him eat his words.

Well, Trump didn't take a rusty knife and make McCain a eunuch. I only heard one thing from McCain since he called the people who wanted to hear what Trump had to say in Arizona crazies. This is after Luntz interviewed Trump which brought about the POW flap. McCain said, "I'm no hero." Nothing else. From announcing to all and sundry that people who listened to Trump in Arizona are crazy to humble is kinda shocking. Maybe McCain realized that if he fought against Trump, it would come out about his shameful treatment of POW's after the war. I am not hearing much from McCain now.

Right now, the conservatives are considered the fringe. Even by the Republican establishment.

Koshcat said...

For all of those who like The Trump just remember Trump only works and cares for Trump. He has always been this way and there is no reason to believe he wouldn't continue.

Post a Comment