Skip to main content

The Moment It Was Curtains

 “Kamala Harris cares about they/them. Donald Trump cares about you.”

A couple things: I won’t cynically say that a politician doesn’t care about anyone; I don’t know that. Heck, I called George W. Bush the “Comforter-In-Chief” (before some jackwagon at USA Today stole it) and I wasn’t kidding.

That second sentence I don’t personally believe. I have to work hard to praise the man. But anyway. This was the crowning moment. Whoever wrote this deserves a place teaching in the Obama-Atwater School of Effective Political Destruction. Harris could recite “The New Colossus” whilst weaning a flock of baby bald eagles with Lee Greenwood singing “God Bless The USA” to no effect. It was over. And it was perfectly emblematic.

Normal people don’t spend time worrying about being transphobic. It’s essentially a meaningless word, coined yet again by people who talk exclusively to each other. If I promise not to say “progressive academics,” will you send me money?

This is distinct, by the way, from the age-old American tradition of letting people be who they want to be, and do what they want to do. I think it used to be called “tolerance.”

Tolerant people are able to build, join, and maintain political coalitions with a wide range of competing, even conflicting, interests. Other people claim America is not “ready” for who they happen to be. In political contests and in life, we call them “losers.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...