Trumpton - the rant thread

1353638404159

Comments

  • And now you-know-who is planning a fireworks extravaganza on Mount Rushmore for the Fourth of July -- amid criticism that there is a huge danger they may spark wildfires. And oh, there's COVID-19 spread too.

    I saw some concern online about desire to get rid of the faces of Mt. Rushmore, too. Mt. R is impressive. But IMHO it should never have been done, because you just don't do that to a mountain. I get the desire to take it down: Washington and Jefferson owned slaves; I'm not sure if there's reason to take Teddy Roosevelt down. But it would be ironic to take Lincoln down for BLM reasons.

    I hope someone finds some way to stop that fireworks display. Those things are very dangerous, and take a lot of careful planning by experienced, knowledgeable people. AIUI, they're often families who've done it for a very long time. I doubt that anyone really qualified would be available at this late date.

    Oh, and someone responded by putting Chief Crazy Horse on another mountain.

    ADDENDUM: I just checked online, and he announced it back in January.

    "Fact-checking Trump's announcement of July 4 fireworks at Mount Rushmore" (CNN).

    That gets into environmental concerns, among other things.

    If this were a movie, something would go wrong with the fireworks, and they'd hit and deface the faces.
  • Such a big disappointment -- Mike Pence has cancelled his upcoming trip to Arizona. Someone must have clued him in on the fact that we're in the middle of a pandemic. Or maybe "Mother" wasn't able to travel with him, and he didn't dare venture out without her.
  • I stand corrected:
    Vice President Mike Pence called off campaign events in Florida and Arizona this coming week as the states experience a surge in new coronavirus cases. Pence will still travel to those states, which have set records for new confirmed infections in recent days, the White House confirmed, saying he will meet with governors and their health teams.
    (The quotation is from our local National Public Radio station.)
  • EirenistEirenist Shipmate
    If Trump really believes what he says, he's crazy. 'What need of further witnesses?'
  • He's desperate for the mass approval that holds his psyche together (to the extent that it *is* together). I'm a little worried that he might do something much worse, out of either desperation or extreme anger. Like attack/bomb someplace.
    :anguished:

    Donald, it's time to take your toys and go home to Mar-a-Lago. You can build a nice, big wall all around it. Won't that be fun?

    :votive:

  • Golden Key wrote: »
    Donald, it's time to take your toys and go home to Mar-a-Lago. You can build a nice, big wall all around it. Won't that be fun?

    :votive:
    Maybe not. When he converted Mar-a-Lago from a private residence to a club, he signed legal documents stating that the guest suites could be used only by members for a maximum of three times a year for no longer than seven days at a time, and that those seven-day stays couldn’t be strung together consecutively. This agreement included Trump.
  • Yes, but would that bother him? He seems to be able to do just whatever he wishes...

    If the price of confining him in Mar-a-Lago (the name of which always reminds me of a certain building-block toy...) is the annulment of some legal agreements, wouldn't it be worth it?
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Golden Key wrote: »
    I saw some concern online about desire to get rid of the faces of Mt. Rushmore, too. Mt. R is impressive. But IMHO it should never have been done, because you just don't do that to a mountain. I get the desire to take it down: Washington and Jefferson owned slaves; I'm not sure if there's reason to take Teddy Roosevelt down. But it would be ironic to take Lincoln down for BLM reasons.

    Most of the controversies surrounding Mount Rushmore aren't usually connected to BLM (unless you're using that abbreviation to mean the Bureau of Land Management), but have more to do with blasting the faces of American presidents onto a mountain sacred to the Sioux. This is particularly irksome since the land was promised by treaty to the Sioux in perpetuity which, like most U.S. treaties with Native Americans, lasted right up until the land was discovered to have something on it that white people wanted.
  • Croesos--

    Thx. :) Sorry, I should've been more specific.

    "South Dakota governor on taking down Mount Rushmore: 'Not on my watch'" (Sioux Falls Argus Leader, via USA Today, via Yahoo).

    That is specifically in the wake of statues being torn down recently for Black Lives Matter (BLM) reasons--though it does go into the Native American issues quite a bit.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    So Pence would take over and stand - what are his chances in November?

    He'd likely get an automatic bump in the polls just because he's not Donald Trump, and some people would view dumping the Donald as a brilliant move by the GOP. The Democrats would need to work hard to frame Pence and Co. as "The Enablers."

  • Pence, AIUI, is used to mostly obeying T. Would he be willing to decide things for himself? Could he do it?

    If he decided to quit before the election, would the Republicans be free to choose someone new to run? The ballots will already have been printed, so would Republicans just vote for Pence, and let the Rep. hierarchy sort it out?

    Of course, if Pence quits before the election, Speaker Nancy Pelosi would become president....
    :cool:
  • GK - I don't mean to be obtuse, but I'm not getting your comment on the phrase. If there is a racial component, I was unaware of it. And, language is my (meagre) bread and butter. Could you give me the background?
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    I’m guessing that since the full saying is something along the lines of “that’s like the pot calling the kettle black” (when both items would have been equally fire-blackened), it carries an implication that being black is a bad thing. That does now have racist overtones, even though the original proverb had nothing at all to do with race.
  • What BroJames said. Sorry I didn't explain further.
  • The Scottish version is "pottie cannae cry "black arse" to pannie" - i.e. the pot can't criticise the pan for being soot-blackened underneath. I wonder if that sounds less racist, when the "bad" aspect of blackness is confined to the arse (backside)?

    I'm trying to decide if I should stop using the expression.
  • Re pot/kettle phrase:

    I don't know what anyone else should do. I've tried to avoid it for a long time. Not sure whether I figured out the implication, or picked it up.

    Just FYI: I checked Duck Duck Go for "pot calling the kettle black meaning". Skimming down the list of results, looks like some have just the "hypocrisy" definition; and others also have the "sooty, with racial implications" version.

    FWIW, YMMV, etc.
  • Furtive GanderFurtive Gander Shipmate
    edited July 2020
    Crœsos wrote: »
    Golden Key wrote: »
    I saw some concern online about desire to get rid of the faces of Mt. Rushmore, too. Mt. R is impressive. But IMHO it should never have been done, because you just don't do that to a mountain. I get the desire to take it down: Washington and Jefferson owned slaves; I'm not sure if there's reason to take Teddy Roosevelt down. But it would be ironic to take Lincoln down for BLM reasons.

    Most of the controversies surrounding Mount Rushmore aren't usually connected to BLM (unless you're using that abbreviation to mean the Bureau of Land Management), but have more to do with blasting the faces of American presidents onto a mountain sacred to the Sioux. This is particularly irksome since the land was promised by treaty to the Sioux in perpetuity which, like most U.S. treaties with Native Americans, lasted right up until the land was discovered to have something on it that white people wanted.

    It would be good to not remove the faces but re-carving them, making a slaver into the face of a much respected black freedom fighter and another into whoever the Sioux would like to commemorate, presumably their chief at the time they were overcome and lost their land. Then you'd have a row of faces which better represent what modern USA is - racially mixed.
  • ISTM that if anyone has a right to decide what to do with Mt. Rushmore, it's the Sioux people.
  • Indeed. Have they made any comment about it (apart, perhaps, from a dignified silence...)?

    If ALL the Mad Emperor's words/deeds/actions were simply ignored (politely, of course, as TIACW), he might go away...
  • BF--

    The link I posted, several posts up, has quite a bit about the Sioux people and losing their sacred land to Mt. Rushmore. I think the article Croesos mentioned does, too.

    I don't know if the Sioux have specifically mentioned Mt. R in the context of recent de-statuing. I have seen some mention that some Native Americans are paying attention to the BLM project (hope that's an acceptable word), and are hoping they'll be next.

    Oh, and I mentioned the statue/carving of Chief Crazy Horse. I know I saw a TV news story about it, maybe three or four decades ago. I thought it was one guy deciding to do this on his own. I either misremembered, or didn't get enough info. So here's better info:

    Crazy Horse Memorial (Wikipedia).

    LOTS of info there. And the "External Links" section goes to both the official site (with pics!) and live webcams at the official site.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited July 2020
    Good heavens! What a magnificent, and truly monumental, work the Crazy Horse Memorial is!
    :flushed:

    Thx to @Golden Key for the heads-up (pun intended).
    :wink:

    I somehow doubt if The Mad Emperor will ever be remembered by such a splendid depiction of His Sacred and Imperial Person, and His Wonderful Works and Achievements...
    :naughty:
  • I'm surprised I haven't heard much lately about
    Stone Mountain
    .

  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    edited July 2020
    Golden Key wrote: »
    ISTM that if anyone has a right to decide what to do with Mt. Rushmore, it's the Sioux people.

    I second third fourth and fifth that.

    From Australia, it seems like indigenous issues don't get much of a run in the USA, perhaps because slavery draws all the oxygen. My impression is that native Americans are a justly proud and deeply wounded people. Here, indigenous rights are the major focus of efforts to redress the wrongs of colonialism, including the continuing wrongs.
  • Ok, a slightly specialized complaint: from today, it now costs me half as much again to post a parcel to the USA, because Trump's a dick. The Royal Mail (and presumably the rest of the world) have had to introduce World Zone 3, just to account for his irrational spat worth the International Postal Union.
  • Simon Toad--

    We do hear some things up here--mostly in travel shows and documentaries. Ayers Rock (/Uluru?) is the main thing. Too sacred for tourists to ascend, but they do. I've figured if I ever went there, I'd stay at the base and just look around.

    Native American issues do get more coverage than they used to. Partly, I think, because more NA people's books are being published--spirituality, fiction, and non-fiction. Native peoples are in professions. I think some have been elected to Congress. And, IIRC, at least one of the Native nations has gotten an observer status in Congress. And some tribes have nation status. I'm not sure how that all works. They're self-governing in some ways, and not in others. AIUI, only federally-recognized tribes get help of any kind. And there are many, many tribes that aren't recognized. I presume the gov't wants to put limit on what help they give out and on who has power. :(

    I've been trying, off and on over many years, to figure out what kind of reparations could be made. Maybe lots of money to tribal schools and colleges. Free tuition and scholarships to state schools. (Each state has at least one state college or university.) Giving land back is a quandary, because generations of other people have owned it in good faith. Maybe the federal and state gov'ts could buy it from the current owners, with the deed going to particular tribes in perpetuity. I'm not sure what else. Many folks on reservations don't have running water. I don't know if they would be comfortable having a bunch of outsiders going in to put in pipes. And, of course, there's the not-so-small matter of whether the pipes and/or water would be sabotaged. Or contaminated by people putting an oil pipeline through the area where their water comes from.

    You may have heard about the protest at the Standing Rock reservation, several years back (Reuters). They were being forced to receive an oil pipeline to be piped through their reservation--after a non-native town had refused to take it. There was a big, dedicated protest by the Sioux. (IIRC, I think maybe some individuals from other tribes showed up, too. And some non-Native folks showed up. It seemed that they had all sorts of reasons for being there. Some of them may have seen it as a "happening", to borrow a word from the 60s/70s. A Sioux woman who was leading the protest spoke to the non-Native folks, and carefully asked them to think about why they were there. The Sioux in the protest were taking a very strong spiritual stance, and peaceful. I found the woman very impressive.)

    Anyway, the Reuters article addresses facts and does that well. But if you want more people info, there's lots of info on other sites.

    FWIW.
  • EigonEigon Shipmate
    The 10pm news on Radio 4 last night did a piece on Mount Rushmore and managed to completely avoid mentioning anything about Native Americans.
  • That may be typical here in the US. Maybe Radio 4 wasn't aware? They may just think it's this big, weird American example of hubris--and kind of interesting and good looking, from a certain perspective.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Hell Host, 8th Day Host
    Golden Key wrote: »
    Re pot/kettle phrase:

    I don't know what anyone else should do. I've tried to avoid it for a long time. Not sure whether I figured out the implication, or picked it up.

    Just FYI: I checked Duck Duck Go for "pot calling the kettle black meaning". Skimming down the list of results, looks like some have just the "hypocrisy" definition; and others also have the "sooty, with racial implications" version.

    FWIW, YMMV, etc.
    I couldn’t manage to do a link on my tablet, but my DuckDuckGo search turned up a well-researched piece on Slate which concludes that the phrase has no racial overtones; those sentiments can be expressed in other ways.


  • RossweisseRossweisse Hell Host, 8th Day Host
    edited July 2020
    Pigwidgeon wrote: »
    I'm surprised I haven't heard much lately about
    Stone Mountain
    .
    Likewise. I’ve been waiting for someone to go after that particularly egregious example of monumental Lost Cause kitsch, but, so far...crickets.


  • Rossweisse wrote: »
    Pigwidgeon wrote: »
    I'm surprised I haven't heard much lately about
    Stone Mountain
    .
    Likewise. I’ve been waiting for someone to go after that particularly egregious example of monumental Lost Cause kitsch, but, so far...crickets.
    Not crickets exactly. Stone Mountain has been a focus of protest for a while, and I’ve seen stories in the last month of increased protests and calls to blast it or otherwise do something about it. Maybe I’m seeing stories because I’m closer to there, and they haven’t made it to the rest of the country.

    That said, the Mississippi state flag has definitely been getting more press than Stone Mountain.

    Simon Toad wrote: »
    From Australia, it seems like indigenous issues don't get much of a run in the USA, perhaps because slavery draws all the oxygen. My impression is that native Americans are a justly proud and deeply wounded people. Here, indigenous rights are the major focus of efforts to redress the wrongs of colonialism, including the continuing wrongs.
    The “American”—meaning colonizers, Americans of European descent, and the US government—relationship with Native Americans has been a complicated one, ugly and shameful in its own way as the history of the treatment of African Americans. White supremacy is at work in both instances, but the ways in which it has played out have been different. A book I have recommended to lots of people is Playing Indian by Philip J. Deloria. Deloria’s father, Vine Deloria, Jr., wrote Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto, which is also very good.

  • ArethosemyfeetArethosemyfeet Shipmate
    edited July 2020
    I've been reading In the Spirit of Crazy Horse for about a week. I'm around a quarter through and the situation just at the one reservation at the centre of the book is, to use a favourite phrase of mine, fractally awful. Look closer, and every bit of awfulness has within it the larger awfulness reproduced in miniature. You've got corrupt, racist, self-interested government at the federal level. Ah, you say, but there's state government too, right? Yes, yes there is, and it's even more corrupt, self-interested and - most astonishingly of all - manages to be even more racist. Ok, but there's a tribal government, they must be on the side of the angels? You'd think so, wouldn't you? Turns out enough money and booze, not to mention the power trip of being able to lord it over other folk, can turn the (federally imposed) tribal government into little more than mafiosi. It's just shitty all the way down. And of course you could cope with that if their opponents were conveniently saintly, neatly filling the role of the Noble Savage but of course they're not. They're real people struggling with alcohol, drugs, violence and despair. They don't even treat each other all that well. But you read the history and you realise that the reservations have had more or less no rule of law for a century, that every attempt to succeed within the strictures imposed by Washington is beaten down and then the rules changes. I hadn't realised, for example, that the Sioux had successful collective farming until it was broken up by the federal government and the land divided into lots, allowing them to be swindled away piecemeal from individual Lakota who'd fallen of hard times. Fuck, no wonder the whole community seems traumatised.

    I'm not sure I can finish the book because I know there's no happy ending here, just an endless torrent of shit. If I were Lakota and knew all that had happened I'd probably already have started blowing things up in the hope that someone might notice and something might change. That the Lakota have largely stayed peaceful in the face of extreme provocation is testament to their courage and wisdom.

    Oh and the church does not come out of this looking good so far either. “It has been said of missionaries that when they arrived they had only the Book and we had the land. Now we have the Book and they have the land.” The largest land owner on Pine Ridge? Holy Rosary Church. :rage:
    Edit: that quote is from Vine Deloria, mentioned above.
  • Golden Key wrote: »
    Simon Toad--

    We do hear some things up here--mostly in travel shows and documentaries. Ayers Rock (/Uluru?) is the main thing. Too sacred for tourists to ascend, but they do. I've figured if I ever went there, I'd stay at the base and just look around...
    You would be respectfully staying at the base along with everybody else as climbing it was banned in October 2019 and the chain to help you get up it removed.
  • Yay, Mr. Clingford, and thx.
  • Thanks very much for everyone's comments. They are really informative. I do think we get a skewed view from Australia, because so much other stuff takes our attention. It sounds like there is much going on that we don't hear about.

    Thanks especially for the book recommendations. I am particularly interested in the intersection between colonised peoples and the settler society that they are inextricably bound to. I want to understand better how indigenous people want to relate to settlers. I want to listen. I think we have done enough 'helping', of deciding what's best for indigenous Australians. Time to do the unthinkable: let them control the agenda.

    Is this worth a Purg thread? I'm not sure. I kind of want to shut up and learn, but I'd love others to talk.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Submitted without comment:
    A bunch of white Trump supporters chanting "Go back to where you came from" to Native American protesters in front of Mt Rushmore is probably THE most American way to celebrate the Fourth of July ever.
  • These fruitloops are no doubt related to the UK protesters who showed their support for Churchill by throwing Nazi salutes...

    One can only hope that they're all impotent, so that they can't pass on their fruitloopery.
  • These fruitloops are no doubt related to the UK protesters who showed their support for Churchill by throwing Nazi salutes...

    One can only hope that they're all impotent, so that they can't pass on their fruitloopery.

    A fair proportion of them are incels, so the issue does not arise.
  • I had to look up incel, so I now see what you mean:

    "involuntarily celibate", a person (usually male) who has a horrible personality and treats women like sexual objects...

    (A snip from Urban Dictionary)
  • Amanda B ReckondwythAmanda B Reckondwyth Mystery Worship Editor
    Speaking of which, there's interesting news about the junior fartletter's paramour.
  • I'm very much 'come in spinner' on this one Amanda, but on the down-low. I realise this is a mix of slang from different countries, and kind of like it. I just need to work in some Scots.

    Hmmm, it seems my use of 'come in spinner' is very specialised. I use it to indicate a keen desire for a particular outcome.
  • Amanda B ReckondwythAmanda B Reckondwyth Mystery Worship Editor
    "Come in spinner" is a new one for me. I think we'd say "Luck be a lady."
  • Hmmm...I would've thought "come in spinner" was equivalent to "come into my parlor, said the spider to the fly". IOW, there's some level of danger, and you'd better pay attention.
  • Amanda B ReckondwythAmanda B Reckondwyth Mystery Worship Editor
    Not in @Simon Toad's usage of a "keen desire for a particular outcome." But we digress.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    edited July 2020
    It comes from the gambling game two-up. The spinner is the guy with the paddle who tosses the two coins you bet on into the air. They spin the coins. "Come in spinner" is a call for the spinner to toss the coins. All the bets have been placed and everyone is keen to see the result of the coin toss. It used to be illegal to play two up except on Anzac Day, but they might let casinos do it these days.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Pigwidgeon wrote: »
    I'm surprised I haven't heard much lately about Stone Mountain.

    Funny you should mention that:
    About 1,000 heavily armed militia, all of whom were Black, marched through Georgia's Stone Mountain Park on Saturday, challenging white nationalist groups in the area to either come out and fight or join them in demonstrating against the government.

    Stone Mountain State Park officials said the Black militia group was peaceful, orderly and escorted by police as they called for the removal of the country's largest Confederate monument near Atlanta.

    Videos posted to social media show the group, the "Not F**king Around Coalition" (NFAC), meeting at the massive nine-story quartz sculpting that depicts former Confederate president Jefferson Davis and Southern generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson.

    <snip>

    "Our initial goal was to have a formation of our militia in Stone Mountain to send a message that as long as you're abolishing all these statues across the country, what about this one?" Grand Master Jay said, referencing the massive Confederate carving.

    Since there was no violence this event got less media coverage.
  • Hmmm. Surprising, if less media coverage. 1000 armed, African-American militia members (men?)...that alone would normally get attention, ISTM. That they were at that monument, in this current climate...and calling out white supremacists...is surely newsworthy--even if the coverage is just about waiting for the other shoe to drop.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Hell Host, 8th Day Host
    I had to look up incel, so I now see what you mean:

    "involuntarily celibate", a person (usually male) who has a horrible personality and treats women like sexual objects...
    ...and blames women for their being incels. A nasty lot all around.


  • Penny SPenny S Shipmate
    And believes that women should be made available for them to relieve their state.
    A booklet like those made available to soldiers during the war on how to get on in a different country might be more helpful.
    1. Women are people.
    2. Women have rights.
    3. One right is the right to choose partners.
    4. Here's how to get one to choose you......
  • 4a. Gifts of nylons and chocolate to potential sex partners, in exchange for sex, are inappropriate. (Well, chocolate... ;) ) Do the work to build some kind of actual, mutual relationship.

    4b. For both your sakes, use a condom!
  • I have a feeling this could turn into a Circus thread...
    :grimace:

    Just acknowledging women as equals (or superiors, in many cases) would be a start.
This discussion has been closed.