Friday, December 15, 2017

Political clarity

The Tea Party/Trump wing of politics wanted honesty -- no more prevaricating, shillyshallying talk. Funny how they cannot tell even a simple truth. However, it's clear enough what they are saying.

During World War II, a German linguist living in Dresden, Victor Klemperer, devised a "National Socialist Lexicon." Although he considered himself to be a German and a Christian, the Nazis rated Klemperer a Jew, so he lived in a "Jews' House" and was tightly restricted. Nevertheless, he thought, correctly, that he could assess the temper of the German public by carefully following linguistic cues. For example, early in the war with Russia, death notices from soldiers' families usually used the phrase "in proud sorrow." By early 1942, the pride was vanishing from the obituaries.

Rightwing watchers, such as RtO, can do the same with our nazi politicians.

For example, in defeat Roy Moore said, "there's not a dime's worth of difference" between the Democrats and the establishment Republicans.

Now, where have we heard that before? Oh yeah, George Wallace in 1968, the last time a big name candidate ran for president as an open racist.

I was wrong about Moore's chances, but not by that much. He's not an open racist like Wallace but he's a racist, he knows it and everybody who voted for him knows it.

He still got nearly 49%.

And if there hadn't been 22,000 write-ins , almost all probably protest votes against Moore's pedophilia from racists who coud not bring themselves to vote for antiracist Doug Jines, he'd have won.

I wonder what it's like to go through life telling yourself: "If I'd been a racist but not a pedophile or a pedophile but not a racist, I could have been elected to the United States Senate."


  1. The bit of political clarity you're missing, or at least not bothering to mention, is that while Roy Moore may be a racist (and is certainly a "racist" by your all encompassing definition), that's not the reason people voted for him.

    You let me know when you put up the perfect candidate, one who's never made a single mistake in his or her entire life and has absolutely no flaws, and indeed, let me know when you achieve that same perfection, and then perhaps, just perhaps, I'll be willing to pay attention to the stones you fling from your very, very fragile glass house.

  2. How do you know why people voted for him? In his same statement, he referred to "our religion," despite the fact that the US doesn't have a religion. Alabamians do, of course, an especially nasty, racist one.

    If you'll recall, the posters said "Roy Moore stands 4 God." It would be hard to find a more perfect candidate than God,you'd think.

    God lost, though not by much.

    I do not recall ever saying candidates -- or, say, economic platforms -- have to be perfect. But we should shoot for something better than stone crazy.

  3. Bret,

    Have you been hitting 14 years old as of late?

  4. Harry, unlikely that Moore is "stone crazy" except in your book, where everyone's a racist.

  5. He was removed -- twice --from the supreme court, something no one else has accomplished. Even Rose Bird was removed only once.

    In a political sense, Moore is crazy as a loon. His statements about the law are theocratic. That's nothing to do with race, but being a racist has always helped in Alabama elections.

    I would be interested to hear your explanation of why Moore is not a racist.

  6. Moore lost because the accusations of pedophilia, Bret. Are you implying everyone - including you and Harry - have a fragile glass house at that?

    One thing is not to throw stones on people who once dated a bunch of underage girls. Another thing is to throw them a vote.

  7. Clovis, I don't recall saying so here (though I have elsewhere), men in their 30s dating teen girls was not unusual or disapproved in that time and place. My grandfather, a widower at 51, married at teenager. That was in 1911, but Moore and I are the same age, and customs were only beginning to change around 1970.

    Moore seems to have been a creep, but the mere fact of dating young girls was not worthy of much attention. Liquoring up 14-year-olds, though, would not have been approved.

    I married girl barely out of her teens. Of course, I was barely out of my teens then. My son also married a teen girl.

    I cannot say, based on outcomes, that I am certain that Southern customs about early marriage were worse than what we have today.

  8. Clovis, I'm implying nobody is perfect, without sin. What our glass houses consist of is different. No, I'm not implying anyone glass house in particular is hitting on underage girls.

    BTW, as our definition of "child" has changed, so has the definition of pedophilia. Once upon a time, it meant being sexual attracted to pre-pubescent girls. Lusting after a fully developed 14-year-old would not have qualified. And in Moore's "time" it would not have been called that either, though it would still have been considered immoral, though nearish a gray area.

  9. Liquoring up 14-year-olds was disapproved in the Sout backmthen.

    As for labels of racism, it's hard to claim that Harry's labels are extreme when you've got this:

  10. I haven't seen a claim that he got a 14-year-old drunk. Do you have a link?

  11. And yes Harry, you were able to find someone that's racist by nearly everyone's definition. What makes your definition extreme is that nearly everyone is racist using your definition.

  12. Deason, 18 and underage for booze, is the one he liquored up.

  13. I didn't find 'someone,'I found a prominent Moore supporter.

  14. I am aware that in former times Moore’s behavior with girls would fall in a grey area. Nonetheless, I think people in present times are free to not vote for him, if that past behavior is seen as too borderline now.

    Your disposition, Bret, of not passing judgements, is a very healthy one at personal level. But it is a bit nonsense if the topic is political offices.