Thursday, December 1, 2016

When are these pathetic, pacifier-deficient pantywaists going to get over it???


(For the benefit of foreign readers who may not know the term 'pantywaist', see here.  For 'pacifier', see here.)

I'm mind-boggled by the number of spoiled brats who are still hyperventilating over the fact that Donald Trump won last month's presidential election.  Here are two super-precious examples of the breed.

First, a gay university student who's feeling terribly, terribly scared.

Since the election, I haven’t slept in my dorm room once. I’ve slept on couches, futons, floors and unoccupied beds in my friends’ homes. At first, it came from a need to be with people who supported me and understood how scary this political moment is for young people who grew up under the liberal auspices of an Obama presidency and came of age politically in a time marked by progressive movements such as that of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). But after I went home for clean clothes to find an anti-gay hate message written on my door, right next to a set of stickers spelling out “Vote 4 Hillary,” my couch-surfing took on new urgency. I was no longer searching for comfort from my peers — I was trying to preserve a sense of safety.

. . .

Now, U-Va. is failing its students. The university is tasked with creating an environment in which all students can learn from some of the most accomplished faculty in the country. It is not succeeding. Our students are among the best and brightest, but the administration seems to think that we won’t recognize lackluster protection and response efforts for what they are: conciliatory at best, a dangerous precedent at worst.

. . .

The university must refuse to bend to any federal legislation that may be passed in the coming months and years that would directly harm its students. Female students deserve access to reproductive health services, undocumented students deserve access to education as well as protection from dislocation or deportation, and Muslim students deserve to learn at our university without fear. This school has the power to ensure these things, and it must take the side of student protection if it wishes to fulfill its mission of educational excellence.

. . .

I hope to return to my dorm, to sleep in my own bed and feel safe there. I’m not sure if that will happen soon. I’m not sure if my university really cares.

There's more at the link.

My solution for him?  Grow a pair.  Get tough!  Suck it up, buttercup!  If someone paints a stupid slogan on your door, either ignore them as beneath contempt (which, of course, they are), or make them stop.  Don't cower in fear - fight back!  The Pink Pistols are an excellent example of people overcoming stereotypes.  Learn from them!  As for telling your university to disobey laws you don't like, why, sure . . . just so long as you, personally, are willing to bear all the consequences - financial, legal and otherwise - of your recommendations.  If you're not, then kindly shut up!

Next, some New York City liberals can't stand the music.

Three days after the election, my wife and I were shopping at the Fairway Market in Red Hook, Brooklyn ... After getting our Brazilian Arabica ground for drip (I know, I should really use a French Press), Libby and I walked towards the organic maple syrup. That’s when it started. I suppose there had been music playing in the store, but I hadn’t noticed until a familiar guitar lick pierced the air and a soft voice said, “Turn it up.”

Libby and I both stopped and looked at each other. “Seriously?” said my wife, a very disappointed Clinton supporter. She started gripping her soft Tomme Crayeuse a little too hard. By the time Ronnie Van Zant’s drawl started in with “Big wheels keep on turnin’,” everyone in the store was standing in shock. Brows were furrowed, people mumbled to each other. The song seemed to get louder as one of those New York moments happened, when everyone was thinking the exact the same thing.

A woman in her fifties, wearing a Love Trump Hates button, turned to her Brooklyn-bearded husband and said loudly, “This is unbelievable!” She found the nearest store clerk, a young woman in a green apron who was staring up at the ceiling, looking for the invisible speakers blaring this message from the other America. “This is so inappropriate,” the woman said. “Can we turn this off?”

. . .

When the angry older woman with the anti-Trump button asked the clerk to turn off the song, the younger woman looked at her sympathetically and said, “I don’t know how.” In that moment, something seemed to click.

Of course, this woman thought that “Sweet Home Alabama” could just be turned off. After all, we can block out things we disagree with. We can unfriend people on Facebook, block them on Twitter, and decide not to let their negativity be a part of lives. For many progressives, this is the key to wellness.

But turning off Skynyrd doesn’t make it go away. Somewhere in the land where the stars still shine, it plays on, whether you hear it or not. The shock and despair in Brooklyn over Hillary Clinton’s unfathomable defeat comes in no small part because her denizens refused to hear the rumblings of an America they chose to ignore.

Just like a hillbilly band rocketing to the top of the national charts, Donald Trump has awakened the right sort to the fact that they do not control everything. For Trump and his supporters, the protests and challenges to the Electoral College should be seen as another victory. Not only did they win, they are being heard—even in Brooklyn.

Again, more at the link.

I'm left blinking in disbelief at the blinkered attitude displayed by those shoppers.  Oppose a song because it expresses a view, a perspective, with which you don't agree?  Oh, then what about all the leftist music I've had to listen to with which I don't agree?  (Take a bow, 'Imagine'!)  I may dislike it, but I've never felt, thought or believed that I had the right to shut it off when someone else plays it.  What about so-called, alleged 'music' - i.e. hip hop - that often expresses a 'culture' I can only describe as depraved, broken, and riddled with nastiness?  My instinctive reaction to its 'fans' is to regard them all as potential (if not actual) criminals until proven otherwise.  In particular, after years of experience with the criminals among us, if you play or speak up in favor of 'gangsta rap' in my presence, I'm going to look on you with dire suspicion - and that's putting it mildly!

Nevertheless, I can't stop those who like such trash from playing it, and I won't.  That's what freedom of speech is all about.  It's not optional, depending on my culture, or political views, or outlook on life.  Free means free - uncontrolled.  It's amazing how often those who pontificate about 'civil liberties' or 'human rights' really mean only those 'liberties' or 'rights' with which they agree.  (Yes, Twitter, Facebook, Reddit et. al. - I'm looking at you!)

I have no idea whether Donald Trump will turn out to be a good President or not.  I like some of his senior personnel selections so far;  I dislike others.  I'm worried that his populism may, indeed, drive an authoritarian turn in security and law enforcement.  (For all their good points - and they do have them - his selection of candidates such as Sessions, Mattis, Kobach et. al. does suggest that possibility.)  We've already got too much of that.  We don't need any further encroachment upon our steadily eroding rights and freedoms.  However, I'm willing to give Mr. Trump the benefit of the doubt, unless and until he proves he doesn't deserve it.  I did the same for Mr. Obama.

In that light, let's also admit that, for all his populist proposals, President Obama has done nothing whatsoever to dismantle the 'security state' - in fact, he's made it worse.  The Patriot Act (passed, you'll recall, by a Republican administration) is one of the greatest blows ever dealt against civil rights and constitutional rights in the USA.  Why did the present Democratic administration not improve or repeal it?  It's had eight years in which to do so.  It either couldn't, or didn't - so, if the forthcoming Republican administration chooses to abuse those powers still further, liberals and progressives have no right to complain.  They've got nothing coming.  They had their chance.  They blew it.

To all those liberals and progressives still living in denial . . . it's time to wake up.  Reality is about to slap you in the face like a wet fish.  You can either deal with it like an adult, and be part of the debate;  or you can hide under your bedding, while the rest of the country remakes itself in an image you may not even recognize when you eventually decide to come out.  Your call.

Peter

12 comments:

LastRedoubt said...

And they still don't get it.

And they're doubling down. While SNL was able to poke light fun at the liberal bubble, they've doubled down in every other regard, ruining a moment in honor of Leonard Cohen, and still insisting on a caricature of Trump and Republicans which, for all their real faults, is completely imaginary.

The ongoing violence against Trump supporters

and oh, yes, Levis publishing an open letter that gun carriers are not welcome in their store while carrying.

Roy said...

SNL hasn't been funny since the 70's so except for the rare snippet on YouTube, I just don't go there.

If this violence against Trump supporters keeps up, it is eventually going to cost some lives. Some of us are armed.

Not welcome in Levis stores? Well, okay then.

Anonymous said...

"After all, we can block out things we disagree with. We can unfriend people on Facebook, block them on Twitter, and decide not to let their negativity be a part of lives. For many progressives, this is the key to wellness."

That part is telling, along with the belief that you can tell institutions to ignore laws you don't like. If only they could accord people who believe differently the same courtesy.

The thing is, their so-called wellness, not matter how carefully calibrated, isn't actually something that leads to wellness. Their perception of wellness is a mirage that hides the fact that their inability to deal with anything that might not fall in line with their own beliefs only sends them spiraling down the rabbit hole. Are they so ignorant of history that they can't follow the quoted portion to its logical conclusion? The only way to truly live in that utopia they crave is to get rid of (usually by killing and "reeducating") anyone whose opinion is different.

And there's that tiny pesky problem that no matter how pure their ideology, someone, somewhere a step above themselves is going to disagree with something they believe at some point. What then? It would be a little late for mercy at that point.

Anonymous said...

Nope, nope, nope!!! Let them remain in their fantasyland. If you wake them up, then they will be added to the front line of dissent. They are mere cannon fodder for the intelligentsia. Waking them up means having to slog through another line of "true believers" before we can get to the "brains" behind the problem.
Steve

James Buchanan said...

I would disagree with you on one point. o couldn't get anything past pilosi. That b... Is scared of her shadow, and wants to shadow everyone, she's just as bad as every one that's for "homeland" security. I'm for security, but adding homeland to it still envisions the past attempts to overthrow our government. It reminds me of a neighbor's dealing with a "homeland" and my relatives attempts for freedom of religion.

Not at this time said...

They are a product of the modern educational-industrial complex, which uses a monolithic and rigidly intolerant leftist view point enforcing constant aversion-therapy towards disagreement, conflict, discussion of actual differences. It's an indoctrination of WHAT to think, not HOW to think. I did my best to fight that, but as soon as a special snowflake complained... the student was offended by facts, so by definition what I said was offensive, and guess who's not there any more? They are being trained, quite deliberately, to not be able to handle conflict of any sort by always stamping it out, being told to drop it, or get an adult, or report it, or walk away, or whatever. They literally have no experience in dealing with any actual disagreement - anything that isn't "acceptable" is totally shut down. Anyone expressing an opposing view is *defined* as stupid, ignorant, evil, or some combination. Uncomfortable or inconvenient facts are "hateful" and cannot be mentioned. I was, quite literally, reported for saying that men and women (boy and girls) were different, with men being on average bigger, stronger, and faster, then having the audacity to back it up; it was considered a "sexist statement."

The relief I saw expressed at my normal scientific skepticism of common leftist dogma (AWG, for example) was huge from some students, who finally heard a voice of reason supporting their views. The shock I saw from some of the well-indoctrinated students who couldn't conceive of any possible reason to be a "denier" who had an actual command of the facts was almost comical. That mankind, particularly high-energy-use western/white man, were bad and killing the planet was an article of faith for them (even if they were completely unwilling to give up any of the modern comforts it afforded them).

The schools are brainwashing factories for leftist dogma; if you repeat the right mantras you are untouchable. If you violate the narrative, you are a walking dead man. I gave it my best shot, but now I'm now looking at a career change.

Anonymous said...

When I was a teen, we had Nixon. As a very young man we got Reagan.
Both of these guys were seen as Evil Personified by the left, which included me in my younger years.
Well, Nixon opened up China, and Reagan helped tear down that wall.
Both men also did incredibly stupid things.
Hmmm, kinda like all guys everywhere, a mixture of great and derp.
Trump isn't even in office yet, but people act as if he has already destroyed the universe.
These weenies need to get together over a bucket of the Colonel's finest and a bottle of bourbon - they'll feel better after the hangover subsides.
- Charlie

Anonymous said...

And I think it's telling that the older leftist wanted the music banned, while the younger leftist wasn't interested enough in taking control of her life to even try to figure out how the music could be turned off.

The older one wanted everyone to fall in line with her beliefs, whether they want to or not.

The younger one is probably used to having things done for her with no thinking or effort required on her part (helicopter parent/government).

- Charlie again

Tal Hartsfeld said...

Lynrd Skynrd was very popular in the late '70s----when Carter was President.
Southern rock bands were also popular in the early '70s as well----alongside the concept rock groups and singer/songwriters.

So I don't know what the big deal is about a top-ten '70s hit like SWEET HOME ALABAMA getting played over a corporate satellite radio station.
Sure, the song has provincial connotations, but it was still an international hit just the same.

Tal Hartsfeld said...

And, on the '70s channel on Music Choice, you might hear both IMAGINE and SWEET HOME ALABAMA within the same hour alongside disco, James Taylor, Led Zeppelin, ABBA, Paul McCartney, Elton John, The Stylistics, The O'Jays, Gordon Lightfoot ....

...you get the picture.

TheOtherSean said...

SNL's opening sketch, the fake news, and the fake commercial have continued to be intermittently funny. Regrettably, it is very hit or miss, and the rest is often pretty bad. I seldom watch it any longer.

Anonymous said...

Anyone paying attention knows that government schools have been failing their obligation to their young charges for some time, and this furor over the election has been illustrative of it (and lest someone accuse me of being an old fart bitching about "kids today", I'm only 51. Oops--I just realized I'm an old fart).
The point of "freedom of speech" is to protect speech that is unpopular. If it doesn't bother anyone, it doesn't need to be protected. I abhor the idea of anyone burning the flag, but it's a symbol. I served in order that these fools have the freedom to burn the flag, although that certainly wasn't my object in serving. It's just a side benefit of freedom.
--Tennessee Budd