Still thinking about Bill Maher’s use of the “n” word. (I hate calling it that. It appears cowardly).
I’ve always been of the opinion that the word, when used in a certain context, is not inherently offensive nor racist. That context is one where the actual word, its genesis, or its etymology, is being discussed, as compared to using it to describe another human being. I have never used it to describe any person, nor do I ever intend to. I used it extensively in my book Black, White and Grey, and, to date, have received no complaints.
But Maher was using it ironically, calling himself “the house n—–“. He was using the word as it had been used extensively during slavery and was doing so to describe himself in that context.
Yeah, I know, it’s always a slippery slope when you venture down that road, like when Don Imus tried to appropriate black speech by calling some women “nappy-headed hoes”. It wasn’t his place to try identify with another race by using their vernacular, and Maher is apparently guilty of the same thing.
When white people venture to show how much they “get it” by appropriating the language or cultural mores of black people, they always end up sounding like Al Gore trying to rap. It’s always a better idea to stop trying to sound like something with which you truly have little familiarity.
There is a black culture and there is a white culture. Leave them that way.
Remember those FB memes showing a picture of George Bush with the caption, “Miss me yet?”, during the Obama administration?
No, George, we didn’t miss you at all back then. But we sure do now.
Who would have thought that George “Cowboy” Bush would ever be considered a relative Whitehouse genius?
I guess it’s not always a matter of how good you are, but sometimes a matter of how bad the guy is to whom you’re being compared.
For whoever is wondering what, in detail, the entire Trump/Russian thing is all about, or has Repub friends who question its value, read on:
1. There is incontrovertible proof that Russians targeted and successfully hacked the servers of over 109 Hillary campaign operatives in 2016. This may or may not be a crime and is nothing that likely hasn’t been tried before, but never to this degree. Trump is not implicated in any of this.
2. This directly benefitted Donald Trump’s campaign, by disparaging Hillary with fake news stories (like Pizzagate where she was accused of running a child prostitution ring), but does not indicate that Trump, himself, did anything wrong. The Russians may have just hated Hillary so badly that they wanted her to lose. Trump is not implicated in any of this.
3. Now the question becomes, why. Why did the Russians pick THIS election to try to influence who becomes president of the United States. Now we start looking for correlation of occurrences.
4. Trump had, and currently has, billions of dollars of business in Russia. He has built golf courses all over Russia. His family wants to keep doing business with Russia. This still does not implicate him in any wrongdoing, but raises justifiable suspicions.
5. He owes $300 million to Deutsche Bank, which has recently been fined $6 billion by an American court for laundering Russian drug money. This still does not implicate Trump in any wrongdoing, but raises justifiable suspicions.
6. His cabinet is a who’s who of people who have done and continue to do business with the Russians. Every single person in his cabinet has a history of doing business with Russian oligarchs, Putin, and banks that have been well-known havens for Russian drug money, such as in Turkey and Cypress.
7. When you look at all of the above, Trump has been convicted of absolutely nothing yet, much as Hillary has never, after 8 investigations, been convicted of a single thing. But Repubs had no problem carrying the “Benghazi” and “Emails” banner for the last 4 years, accusing her of the most minor of crimes.
Trump has not been proven to have done anything wrong, yet. If you think that the facts I’ve stated above do not warrant thorough and on-going investigation of Trump and his minions, then you are simply the worst example of a partisan hack extant. Your opinion lacks any semblance of objectivity, and your opinion is irrelevant.
I am not in the “not my president” camp. You only get to decide who your president will be on election day at the polls. After that, like it or not, he’s your president, the proof of which is that he can sign bills that directly affect your life.
I will acknowledge, however, that he didn’t get elected in the traditional manner. Donald Trump is president as a result of what is essentially a constitutional technicality. It’s basically in the fine print. That doesn’t make it any less valid, but it does make it less palatable.
And so my friends, the only consolation that I can offer regarding a president who became so by virtue of a technicality, is that there are few of those technicalities which can make a person president, but there are thousands upon thousands that can end that presidency.
Let’s hope that the news media continues the wonderful job they’ve been doing by trying to find as many of them as possible.
This must be a tough time for Repubs:
A few months ago they hated James Comey for not prosecuting Hillary Clinton over her emails.
A few weeks later they praised him for releasing information about an on-going investigation to see if her emails were somehow tied to Anthony Weiner. Many think that that release of information contributed to her losing the race for the presidency.
And now they have to hate him again for saying, regarding Trump’s claim that Trump tower was wiretapped, that what Trump said was patently false.
It must be difficult to be a hyperpartisan when you get no cooperation from the FBI
Trump can’t win on this wiretap nonsense. Here’s why:
1. If it is true that Trump Tower was wiretapped, it couldn’t have been at Obama’s request, since presidents can’t put wire taps on the properties of citizens of the US. Only a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) court can do that.
2. A FISA court can only place a wiretap as the result of a justice department subpoena. The US Justice department would have to have proven to the FISA court that there was a potential threat to national security to secure a wiretap. This means that someone in the Justice Dept suspected that something nefarious was going on at Trump Tower. That’s an entire other kettle of fish that hasn’t been addressed yet.
3. If it’s not true and there was no wiretap, Trump has just demanded a “full congressional investigation” into something that exists only in his mind.
4. Finally, if it is true, and the FISA court DID authorize a wiretap due to national security concerns, Trump has just broken the law because all FISA subpoenas are classified, and knowingly disseminating classified information is a federal offense.
You know, like they kept trying to suggest Hillary did, but never proved it.
Have all either admitted or have been found to have had meetings with the Russians.
No one would care if:
It was multiple countries that they’d met with
The one country that they’re all meeting with isn’t implicated in an election hacking scheme in the US.
The hadn’t all lied or “forgot” about their meetings.
Mitt Romney, the last Repub candidate for president, hadn’t called Russia the “largest socio-economic threat to the US on the planet”
Trump didn’t have direct, traceable economic ties to Russian oligarchs, one of whom was trying to hide money from his ex-wife and so paid Trump $100 million for an estate in Florida that Trump had recently paid $40 million for, yet neither man had ever seen or stepped foot into.
Yeah, and Hillary’s emails matter, don’t they?
This ain’t goin’ away, buckos.