More Moore as Wounds are Licked.

A well executed Alabama strategy by Doug Jones with a 30% turnout by black voters despite the supreme court crippling of the voting rights act with the help of educated white surburbanites,particularly women, brought down an accused pedophile’s senatorial aspirations.But lest the rejoicing becomes boisterous,consider that the Bannon hate machine is apt to accelerate its attack on government as a benefactor of the needy and unfit.
The haters,neo nazis,white supremacists etc will probably attack some poor black or Muslim people out of chagrin and rage.Trump the great divider will no doubt up the ante on his toxic pronouncements.His senseless,inflammatory endorsement of a Zionist Jerusalem and his promise to move the U.S. embassy there has reignited the middle east.Days of rage and violence seem unavoidable.
Sexual degradation and exploitation of women( and some men)is a hot item and one has to wonder if an evolutionarily directed impulse can be deterred by social exposure and disapproval? Certainly not without example setting and strong support by elected and appointed power figures.Hard times are ahead.

Categories:

16 Comments

  1. SB had me wondering if my memories about the plot of “The Crucible” were correct. My recollection of it recalled love potions, an affair with a married man, and a married preacher who was the subject of a single girl’s interest. But its primary social message was mostly about witchcraft hysteria gone awry – and yes, strongly equated with the Joe McCarthy hearings. Thank you SB for pointing this out. A better example of sexual-based hysteria is from real life and it started in my home town of Manhattan Beach, California. Virginia McMartin ran a preschool that my daughters attended in the late 1960’s. I knew her personally as a pillar of the community. Her few employees were also loving and respected caretakers of the children. In the early 1980’s charges were made that sexual abuse had taken place at the school and rumors grew wild even to the point where the ground beneath a classroom was dug up in search of tunnels thought to be part of rituals.

    The following is from Wikipedia:

    “Several excavations turned up evidence of old buildings on the site and other debris from before the school was built, but no evidence of any secret chambers or tunnels was found.[4] There were claims of orgies at car washes and airports, and of children being flushed down toilets to secret rooms where they would be abused, then cleaned up and presented back to their parents. Some interviewed children talked of a game called “naked movie star” suggesting they were forcibly photographed nude.[1][4][21] During the trial, testimony from the children stated that the naked movie star game was actually a rhyming taunt used to tease other children – “What you say is what you are, you’re a naked movie star,” – and had nothing to do with having naked pictures taken.” … “Arrests and the pretrial investigation ran from 1984 to 1987, and the trial ran from 1987 to 1990. After six years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. When the trial ended in 1990, it had been the longest and most expensive criminal trial in American history.[1] The case was part of day-care sex-abuse hysteria, a moral panic over alleged Satanic ritual abuse in the 1980s and early 1990s.”

    Demonstrated is the fact that we humans have a capacity to let our emotions run amuck. Once rolling, the drama can build as others join and magnify the hysteria. Today’s building focus on males being accused of behaving badly seems to fit that pattern. As Daedal2207 reminded us, “Sex is a hot item.” I say, rational minds need to be in charge.

  2. With comments dated 19 Dec 1:44 pm SB asked some questions that should be answered:

    I used the “Crucible” as it provides an illustration of sexual mores gone awry. Who wrote it doesn’t matter. In general, any truth presented by ANYONE (even if written by a leftist) remains a truth. Similarly, the Joe McCarthy episode gives us an example of “moral codes” gone awry.

    About “assault”: It seems overly sensitive and righteous if a statement of truth is taken to be an insult. The messenger is telling a truth about dilutions of a serious charge. Assault is terrible. Some things that many are calling “assault” are trivial. If the listener is “insulted” by my pointing out this truth, the problem is with the listener.

    Adults who have ACTUALLY engaged in violating CLEARLY DEFINED assault laws should pay the penalties. SB’s point about violating adults is valid to the degree that “Clearly defined” laws and “actually” violated them are the operative concepts. The rules of the courts should prevail, not the muddled and exaggerated outrages of those with political agendas.

    The Electoral College continues to have a number of positive functions. For instance, it diminishes the ability of a few states to overwhelm the interests of others, and it forces politicians seeking Federal positions to acknowledge and appeal ALSO to those living in states with small rural populations.

    The moral codes that Leftists would impose (if “Living Constitution” judges allow them a place in our Constitution) is likely to be a set of “standards” that would serve humanity less well than the original “standards” set forth in the Constitution. (Example: A “moral code” that protects equally each citizen’s Freedom of Speech would inspire us to fight for everyone’s right to voice even offensive opinions. Many with “leftist moral codes” are on record arguing that those who engage in disturbing speech should be punished. (Empirical evidence: When allowed to speak on campuses only conservative speakers need body guards and are shouted off stages. Facebook defriending is overwhelmingly instigated by leftists who when experiencing differences of opinion “righteously” feel offended, or insulted.)

    SB asks for empirical evidence as to Trump’s important leadership qualities. Most obviously, he won the Presidency. He has caused rates of illegal immigration to be dramatically diminished, thus for lower income groups economic pressure to raise wages is enhanced. He helped bring about tax changes that will stimulate the return of capital, create new business, and encourage US businesses to expand. The stock market is up for good reason. NATO members are providing greater support to that important organization. He helped bring about tax changes that will likely expand GDP. This means that more resources will be available (and thus less costly) for every citizen’s needs. He is courageously imposing clarity on international conflicts. He is finally drawing lines that are by our enemies and friends believably firm. The fact that these obvious achievements are not understood by those of leftist persuasion tells us much about the power of that mindset to inflict a state of blindness to that which doesn’t fit the set.

    SB says that I made a “fake” statement when I stated “Among other agendas, the leftist ideology seeks to alter our constitution by expanding its power to forcefully impose its “righteous-like feelings” about “morality” on the rest of us.” She accurately pointed out that the Evangelical Right has a similar agenda. The fact that many religions and dogmas would try to dominate our Constitution does not render my point “fake”. Republican Moore was thankfully defeated in part because he had a history of putting his religion above U.S. law. It should not come as a surprise that the Republican Party contains groups who advocate diverse interests. The existence of religious agendas in either party does not change the Constitution. It is true that it protects for all a right to hold faith beliefs. It does not allow any single faith-belief to dominate our governance. This does not change the fact that “Leftism and its particular code of morality” can be as much a threat to that document’s individual liberty value as is any other “embraced-by-faith” dogma or religion. Our original Constitution’s priority is BIGGER than any single noun-like answer. Its priority is to protect a most-important PROCESS, the verb-like “running argument”.

  3. Moore had baggage, his religion was more important than U.S. law and his early years were smudged by bizarre dating interests. “Pedophilia” is not an accurate description given that his sexual interests (as far as we know) were not pre-puberty, but close enough to raise concerns about his judgment. (Isn’t the use of this accusation an example of hyperbole? Isn’t this a similar kind of exaggeration for which Trump is condemned?) I don’t know of any research that establishes a strong (or weak) correlation between sexual conformance with prevailing expectations and leadership capabilities.

    As for enlisting government to be the benefactor for the needy and unfit, we need to ask what the options are. For instance, for many years private charities have done a pretty good job. And how can our government forcefully focus resources to that purpose without imposing additional, unintended negative consequences?

    Trump the divider? Just agree with his policies and we would no longer be divided. Why not say that Leftism is the divider? After all, those embracing that belief (faith) worship “diversity”. Diversity is the opposite of unity! But, agree with leftist agendas and we could all hold hands and hum contentment. That is, until objective realities are thrust upon us.

    Israel is probably the most “legally” created of all countries. Its small population is among the most productive of patented life-saving technologies in the world today. It is surrounded by true Nazi-like “haters” who repeatedly voice their desire for Israel to be destroyed. (It has been a constant wonder that those justifiably hateful of the U.S. versions of Nazism would be so supportive of it elsewhere!) Trump (actually carrying through on a campaign promise to move the embassy to Jerusalem) finally imposed another level of clarity that may, after so many confusing years, provide a stable stepping stone that leads to firm ground.

    Sex is a “hot issue”, and always has been. The challenge is that of enjoying the warmth that nature gave us without getting burned by society’s hysterical expectations (and its being “weaponized” for political reasons.). Fickle with its fashions of “burning” passions, even those with the best of character are not safe from its variations of wrath.

    1. I am not imposing a psychiatric largely psychoanalytic definition of a pedophile although DS is to be commended for invoking ICD 10 and / or DSM 5.The popular colloquial definition of pedophile is well understood.To agree with POTUS is to embrace the normalization of hate and derision with the usual recipients the weaker,despised or envied ‘other’.

      1. Who crawls out from under a rock to agree, let alone defend, the blatant amorality of POTUS? Is it birds of a feather flocking together? Or, snakes of a kind writhing in their slime? Insecurity finds comfort in victimizing the powerless. Let’s hear the critique platitudes one more time on misplaced passions.

      2. It may be that “the colloquial definition” of pedophile “is well understood”, but maybe this degree of sloppy understanding reveals more the nature of a problem than a solution. I think we can agree that sexual aggressions directed toward pre-puberty individuals generally inflicts a greater degree of harm to the victims and indicates a greater degree of dysfunction on the part of the aggressor. The power of the word “pedophile” to describe this degree of offense is weakened when we allow it to be applied to attractions between those having greater degrees of sexual maturity. If “pedophile” no longer refers only to those aggressively attracted to pre-puberty, what word in your opinion could we now use to make this important distinction?

        1. The degree of harm inflicted cannot be estimated merely by age when assaulted.If so the regional values would render many of the acts of pederasty,pedophilia etc. far more damaging than they appear to be.The law however provides for a degree of protection well beyond that accorded by regional values.Most of the legal proscriptions do not rely on psychiatric definition but are close to popular concensus re rape, pederasty etc.The kind of reasoning that says he did it but got elected anyway so who cares is another example of the kind of dangerous post hoc ergo proptrer hoc reasoning that characterizes norm destroying law breakers( including treason) like our trolling trumpeter.

    2. DS: “Sex is a ‘hot issue’, and always has been. The challenge is that of enjoying the warmth that nature gave us without getting burned by society’s hysterical expectations (and its being “weaponized” for political reasons.).”

      Really? Who makes sex a forboden subject? Assault is not seduction. And, consensual seduction is simply, deliciously delightful. Bring it on. In the meantime, here’s everyday reality … a follow-up on Fareed Zakaria’s column:

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2017/12/18/amtrak-train-derails-in-washington-state-rail-cars-fall-onto-interstate-5/?utm_term=.486f428b3e2a&wpisrc=al_news__alert-national&wpmk=1

      Your “empirical evidence” says …

      1. SB asks: “Who makes sex a “forboden subject”? Answer – Lots of people – in myriad ways (and often foolish ways). History as well as the study of current cultures provides many instances where various forms of sexual behavior are by prevailing norms judged to be abnormal, thus worthy of punishment (i.e. The Crucible). SB tells us that “Assault is not seduction”. The crux of the problem has to do with the often unreasonable, sometimes hysterical, definitions of “assault” (an unwanted kiss – a look or tone of voice that caused discomfort?). Learning the subtleties of seduction (for the vast majority of males) involves clumsy trials and confused communications. It is not reasonable to expect a history of perfect sensitivity and technique from all who make an effort to engage in intimate behavior. But, precisely because it is a hot issue, accusations of “improper behavior” can and are being used to harm those deemed to be enemies. Apparently a sufficient number of voters understood that Trump’s (even bawdy) sexual history does not signify that he lacks important leadership qualities.

        1. “The Crucible” as a sexual defense standard? Written by a leftist author? Talk about diversionary spin … worthy of another discussion. You DO know that the allegory of the play was the Joe McCarthy “witch hunts?”

          DS: “The crux of the problem has to do with the often unreasonable, sometimes hysterical, definitions of ‘assault’ … “

          Sir, you’re on notice to being utterly insulting.

          DS: “Learning the subtleties of seduction (for the vast majority of males) involves clumsy trials and confused communications.”

          Sir, are we talking about teenage, puppy love? While sympathetic to the challenges of growing up, this defense is laughable if, once again, not downright insulting. The accusations/charges have been lodged against Trump, Moore … both ADULTS.

          DS: “Apparently a sufficient number of voters understood that Trump’s (even bawdy) sexual history does not signify that he lacks important leadership qualities.”

          Firstly, “sufficient number” (well-chosen words) was not the majority … a considerable lower number of the majority vote, allowing for the antiquated Electoral College (before telegraph, before the pony express!) to once again ignore the will of the people.

          Secondly, accepting “bawdy sexual history” in the promotion of fear and divisiveness is a very high price to pay by our citizens, exploiting their frustrations. But, heck, why invoke a higher standard!

          Thirdly, please provide the empirical evidence as to Trump’s important leadership qualities.

          DS: “Among other agendas, the leftist ideology seeks to alter our constitution by expanding its power to forcefully impose its “righteous-like feelings” about “morality” on the rest of us.”

          Really? Talk about “fake” statements. Sir, have you heard of the Evangelical Right and their agenda. It certainly isn’t “live and let live.” Thomas Jefferson was one of the strongest proponents of separation of church and state. He had an aversion towards organized religion. I recommend a good biography on the Founding Father.

          Matthew 7:5 — Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye;
          and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.”

          Do you really not see that self-righteousness is your own mantle. Enough.

  4. daedal2207: “Hard times are ahead.”

    Yes, daedal2207. Nature’s challenge for order, pointing the way to healthy survival … as opposed to destructive predatory behavior, which has short-term “benefits” if not for the whole. Of course, there are circles that identify the self-interest survivor as deserving the prize of the specie. But, what if that survivor is all, individually alone? “Rosebud.”

    Trump’s personality disorder is so extreme that he lives in a perpetual hell of unhappiness. His ego is insatiable, thus fragile and insecure. All this could merit pity from empathetic minds. But, his cruelty opted to victimize our country (and the world) in the pursuit of transactional self-satisfaction without core belief or analysis of consequences. Yet, not only did he boast about his sexual predation, but he successfully conned us into believing that he possessed extraordinary business acumen (“I alone can fix it!”) to fix … what?

    daedal2207: “His senseless,inflammatory endorsement of a Zionist Jerusalem and his promise to move the U.S. embassy there has reignited the middle east.”

    Purely self-indulgent. Now, Tillerson says it will take at least three years to move embassy. Hmm. A walk back? In the meantime, in steps Putin … with statesmanlike gestures to fill in the vacuum created by a chaotic and rudderless administration.

    daedal2207: “… a 30% turnout by black voters despite the supreme court crippling of the voting rights act with the help of educated white surburbanites,particularly women…”

    Yes, unlikely Alabama exposed that the emperor has no clothes … stark naked. But, like a wounded animal, he becomes even more dangerous … downright vicious.

    daedal2207: “But lest the rejoicing becomes boisterous … “

    … we should not rest on our laurels? It would behoove our women to reread Euripides’ Medea to underscore ancient discoveries. Knowledge is power against the Trumps and Moores of the world. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, your boss’ mind is in the gutter.

    Yes … the crossroads guarantees hard times ahead. We’re in the search fir our integrity and self-respect.

    1. SB shared her feelings about President Trump. They are strong feelings, strong because she is enjoying the thrills of a righteous and deep conviction – a true believer. This feeling can easily be magnified just by attending regular services offered by CNN, MSNBC, reading Leftist scripture, and ignoring any logical or empirical evidence to the contrary. SB writes: “Trump’s personality disorder is so extreme that he lives in a perpetual hell of unhappiness. His ego is insatiable, thus fragile and insecure … his cruelty opted to victimize our country (and the world) in the pursuit of transactional self-satisfaction without core belief or analysis of consequences.”

      But what if she and they are wrong and the cruel devil has not come to earth in the form of President Trump? Maybe he is actually a talented, but sometimes crude, human with an accurate vision of what is needed to “make America great again”? This would mean that he possesses “core belief”, and he does “analyze consequences”. It would mean that he understands human nature and how to motivate the most talented among us to be most productive thereby benefitting all of humanity (Growth of GDP is empirical evidence that supports this judgment). It would mean that the winning numbers who voted for him likely share his core beliefs and do not identify with the emotional hysterics presented by the “organization of resistance” (Democrats). We are a country being divided by two incompatible visions for the future. I would hope that we could at least agree that judgments based in logic and empirical evidence should prevail over those of righteous, thus emotion-based, convictions.

      1. DS: “ … reading Leftist scripture, and ignoring any logical or empirical evidence to the contrary.”

        Tsk, tsk, tsk, DS. Would you identify conservative strategist/commentators Mike Schmidt, Bret Stephens, David Brooks, Max Boot, David Brooks, George Will as liberal snowflakes? Or, do they merit a smack down because they possess a moral core? A warped defense is being advocated as normal conditions. Trading decency for power is the equivalent of building a foundation on quicksand. You know about structural foundations. Here’s hardly a Leftist scripture writer:

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-gop-tax-bill-may-be-the-worst-piece-of-legislation-in-modern-history/2017/12/14/c1def814-e119-11e7-bbd0-9dfb2e37492a_story.html?utm_term=.536c3eb3ff70

        Disturbing projection for MAGA. Cheap, conning slogans are not the answer. They just have the capacity to mesmerize and obfuscate … both ways.

        DS: “I would hope that we could at least agree that judgments based in logic and empirical evidence should prevail over those of righteous, thus emotion-based, convictions.”

        Yes. Works both ways, DS. Time will tell … though the odds are against us as witnesses. (Wink,) But, our children and grandchildren …

        P. S. I guess we’ll keep hearing more of your “empirical evidence.”

        1. SB has illustrated the fundamental problem: She knows that she has and who has a “moral core” and “knows” which others do not. Step back and ask the question: Which of many possible definitions of “moral core” and “sense of decency” represents the best guideline for humanity’s path to the future? It is a delicious “feeling” to believe that it is your “deeper understandings” about what is “moral” and “decent” that should prevail. For others fear is justified when it is revealed that you intend to impose your “moral code” on them! When such believers strive to harness the powers of government to force “their moral feelings” on others, there is immense potential for growing a monster. The founders understood this danger and designed a government with LIMITED powers that resisted religious-like intrusions. The citizenry was given the LIBERTY to work out the nuances of what functions best while remaining relatively FREE of coercion. Among other agendas, the leftist ideology seeks to alter our constitution by expanding its power to forcefully impose its “righteous-like feelings” about “morality” on the rest of us. Understanding this nature of our divide is critically important.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s