The drums had been beating for weeks about a major New York Times expose in the works that would demolish Trump once and for all by revealing his sordid lifetime of misogyny. When it finally appeared as a splashy front-page story this past Sunday (originally titled “Crossing the Line: Trump’s Private Conduct with Women”), I was off in the woods pursuing my Native American research. On Monday, after seeing countless exultant references to this virtuoso takedown, I finally read the article–and laughed out loud throughout. Can there be any finer demonstration of the insularity and mediocrity of today’s Manhattan prestige media? Wow, millionaire workaholic Donald Trump chased young, beautiful, willing women and liked to boast about it. Jail him now! Meanwhile, the New York Times remains mute about Bill Clinton’s long record of crude groping and grosser assaults–not one example of which could be found to taint Trump.
Blame for this fiasco falls squarely upon the New York Times editors who delegated to two far too young journalists, Michael Barbaro and Megan Twohey, the complex task of probing the glitzy, exhibitionistic world of late-twentieth-century beauty pageants, gambling casinos, strip clubs, and luxury resorts. Neither Barbaro, a 2002 graduate of Yale, nor Twohey, a 1998 graduate of Georgetown University, had any frame of reference for sexual analysis aside from the rote political correctness that has saturated elite American campuses for nearly 40 years. Their prim, priggish formulations in this awkwardly disconnected article demonstrate the embarrassing lack of sophistication that passes for theoretical expertise among their over-paid and under-educated professors.
My Russian friend, a widow in her early 50’s of middle-class means, who avoids politics (perhaps most Russians do) said of Putin — “I don’t agree with everything, but I think he is a normal man. He wants what’s good for Russia”.
The key word was “normal”. I’m not sure how this relates to Trump, but I’m reminded of it nonetheless.
Paglia published this in Salon? Holy crap.
I read the attempted hit piece in the NYT. It was pathetic. It was as though the mafia thought they had hired Murder Incorporated to whack someone and instead Mr. Rogers showed up at the wrong address with a Nerf gun.
The most sizzling piece was an episode in which Trump was holding a pool party, one young lady showed up without a bathing suit, so the Donald took her upstairs, supplied her with a bikini and let her get changed in the bathroom. She liked the bikini. Then she came downstairs and enjoyed the party. No oral sex in the office a la Clinton (Bill that is); no throwing the girl on the bed insisting she “release my inner chakra” a la Al Gore. Just a bikini at a pool party.
“I was off in the woods pursuing my Native American research.”
I have no idea what that means but it is a line I am going to use as much as possible from now on.
Hi SDA,
Camille, as almost always, nails this one.
It was like the NYT editors thought it would be better to send Mormon Missionaries (vs. trained Cultural Anthropologists) to study the Congolese in 1800s Africa (or, as another, more complicated, example, the Tahitian Islanders).
YT,
Niall from Winnipeg
Yeah, my first reaction to that was “a lot of Native Americans live in the woods still, do they?”
Never forget that although sensible things may fall from Paglia’s lips now and again, she’s still a left-wing loon.
Liberalism has been proven to be a mental disorder.
Ive got it.
normal heterosexual men who have an eye for attractive young women with some intelligence to boot, are passe.
’tis the emphasis on a spectrum (to challenge the electromagnetic spectrum in range) of sexual preferences displacing that established by biological and social norms with roots begun a million years ago. its all open now except what the left deems werboten.
in the interests of full disclosure, I admit to first dismissing Trump’s run as a candidate as another publicity stunt. I now keenly and eagerly await the crushing demolition of all things clintonesque.
in all seriousness, that woman is evil. dangerously ruthless having been ‘in the loop’ far, far too long. waiting in the wings to ambush true liberties and truth like some giant prehistoric alligator. put her in the oval office and there will be a frightening leap in assassinations and secret opps all over the world to coincide with her agenda.
Was this level of scrutiny given to Bill Clinton or JFK during their election campaigns?
Yes it begins. The MSM will go gunning for Trump but their record to date has been more than weak. Trump will actually shoot back unlike our Canadian versions of conservative groveling.
Given that the power elite support corruption over ideology in the Democratic Party and therefore after the riots at their convention, they will have to attempt at smearing Trump (another candidate who’s ego trumps ideology) while defending the most vile and evil candidate who’s sole attribute is that she is allegedly equipped with a vagina. In a republic with an electorate of minimal scruples and intelligence this should be a futile task. However………
Donald Trump likes good-looking women? [gasp!] Oh, the humanity!
Meanwhile, absolutely nobody wants to talk to Juanita Broaddrick. Or Kathleen Willey, or Paula Jones, or Gennifer Flowers, or the owner of a certain blue dress, or…
Yeah.
Sixteen other Republican candidates, most of them professional and highly experienced politicians with hundreds of millions of dollars, looked positively flaccid, unable to defeat Donald Trump.
Low energy Jeb. Little Marco. Lyin’ Ted.
The New York Times comes along, beating its chest, and tries the same. The “Paper of Record” ends up looking equally low energy, little, and lyin’.
She’s an old gay broad who’s smarter than most people, and she’s more conservative in her writing than any of the Republican presidential candidates were. She’s certainly more conservative than Donald Trump.
It’s been my experience that a lot of these older gay women really don’t have any time at all for the modern DemocRat and Liberal parties. It’s just that if they come right out and declare themselves Conservative, the Left will destroy their lives and livelihoods with implacable ferocity. Lefties don’t tolerate traitors.
The New York Slimes is your typical leftists news rag has’nt supported a single republican since eishoener its just another liberal leftists rag that covered up for stalin and castro and their war crimes and covers up for Obama and Hillary as well
According to them they must, because they claim ownership of most of it.
Don’t forget, to a New Yorker, the woods start just west of Newark. Or in Newark, according to some.
She’s planning on writing in a vote for Bernie Sanders. Q.E.D.
// My Russian friend,[…] a widow in her early 50’s of middle-class means, who avoids politics (perhaps most Russians do) said of Putin — “I don’t agree with everything, but I think he is a normal man. He wants what’s good for Russia”. //
Apropo:
[…]
// Successful fascism was not about policies but about the strongman, the leader (Il Duce, Der Fuhrer), in whom could be entrusted the fate of the nation. Whatever the problem, he could fix it. Whatever the threat, internal or external, he could vanquish it, and it was unnecessary for him to explain how. Today, there is Putinism, which also has nothing to do with belief or policy but is about the tough man who singlehandedly defends his people against all threats, foreign and domestic.
To understand how such movements take over a democracy, one only has to watch the Republican Party today.
[..]
What these people do not or will not see is that, once in power, Trump will owe them and their party nothing. He will have ridden to power despite the party, catapulted into the White House by a mass following devoted only to him. By then that following will have grown dramatically. Today, less than 5 percent of eligible voters have voted for Trump. But if he wins the election, his legions will comprise a majority of the nation. Imagine the power he would wield then. In addition to all that comes from being the leader of a mass following, he would also have the immense powers of the American presidency at his command: the Justice Department, the FBI, the intelligence services, the military. Who would dare to oppose him then? Certainly not a Republican Party that laid down before him even when he was comparatively weak. And is a man like Trump, with infinitely greater power in his hands, likely to become more humble, more judicious, more generous, less vengeful than he is today, than he has been his whole life? Does vast power un-corrupt?
This is how fascism comes to America, not with jackboots and salutes (although there have been salutes, and a whiff of violence) but with a television huckster, a phony billionaire, a textbook egomaniac “tapping into” popular resentments and insecurities, and with an entire national political party — out of ambition or blind party loyalty, or simply out of fear — falling into line behind him.
This is how fascism comes to America By Robert Kagan http://wapo.st/1TIdbhP
lieberals are always squawking that government has no business in the nations bed rooms, until…………………..
so has religion……….
And what about Communism, dizzy? How does THAT come to America? More to the point, when did it?
dizzy, ….the fascism, aka climate alarmism, has engulfed the world for a decade perhaps it’s days are numbered.
[ Donald Trump has signalled an end to the United States’ disastrous flirtation with green crony capitalism by promising to nix the COP21 Paris climate treaty if and when he becomes US president.
“I will be looking at that very, very seriously, and at a minimum I will be renegotiating those agreements, at a minimum. And at a maximum I may do something else,” Trump has told Reuters.
In further good news for the US economy, he has also assured his Twitter followers that he’s not remotely interested in introducing a carbon tax either.]
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/18/trump-vows-to-nix-paris-climate-treaty/
Don Trump: “Give me clean, beautiful and healthy air – not the same old climate change (global warming) bullshit! I am tired of hearing this nonsense.”
Camille Paglia is one of those old fashioned classic liberals. She is
a lesbian-feminist-academic, but being a classic liberal, she has one
virtue that modern liberals lack: Honesty. One day I got a call from
a friend of mine who told me to turn my TV to channel x. It was the
old short lived TV talk show hosted by the model/actress Lauren Hutton.
She was interviewing Paglia. Paglia made a statement about women being
fickle, and Hutton’s jaw dropped and she said “How can you say that!”
Paglia replied “I ought to know, I’ve dated enough of them!”
My friend fell in love with her mostly for her Albanian uni-brow look
which he said turned him on, but also for the fact that she was a
rare bird: an honest liberal.
Some young asswipe Gyno American liberal purposefully seated her at the
same table as Rush Limbaugh at some banquet, hoping to see some fireworks.
Little did stupid bitch know that Limbaugh and Paglia were old pen pals,
who often bounced ideas off one another. They spent the evening joking,
laughing and smoking Limbaugh’s fine cigars. In the end, the culprit
asked Paglia how she could get along with the enemy like that. Paglia
asked her if she had ever listened to his show, or knew anything about his
ideology. As with all contemporary liberals, she was clueless.
People like Camille Paglia and Tammy Bruce have earned an exemption from
people like me when I use the word liberal derisively.
I would expect nothing less from Paglia – she’s always been above and apart of the politically correct crowd.
I think Paglia should have included one of the biggest reasons the Lamestream Media will stop at nothing(even stupidity)in order to prevent a Triumphant Trump Prez.
Delingpole:
[If Trump does stick to his guns on climate change as US president, then the damage it will do to the climatist religion is almost incalculable. Global warming is the most expensive scam in world history, costing the global economy an annual $1.5 trillion.
If a significant chunk of those wasted resources were to be diverted to more productive sectors of the economy, the disruption would be enormous – hugely profitable to those in currently penalized sectors like fossil fuel and heavy industry, agonizingly painful to those crony-capitalist businesses (especially those in the so-called “clean energy” sector) which depend for their existence on handouts from the taxpayer.]
“I was off in the woods pursuing my Native American research.”
Ms Paglia was interviewing Senator Warren?
True to their Alynskiism, Dems or their proxies hit below the belt, but expect opponents to play by the rules by declaring Bubba’s serial predator past off limits, especially Trump using the big r-word, alluding to an allegation made against Bill Clinton in the 90s, signaling he won’t be playing by their “rules.”
The problems with the Dems’ use of political youngins for their dirty work has been amply demonstrated; idiotic bleatings about inviting a rapist to one’s wedding; followed by a pathetic reference to Trump being wounded so is now attacking. They overreacted and without proper massaging, pushed what they thought were witty talking points, instead showing their inexperience.
The war against Trump’s war on women is off to a rough start.
Successful communism was not about policies but about the strongman, the leader (Man of Steel – Stalin, or Chairman – Mao), in whom could be entrusted the fate of the nation. Whatever the problem, he could fix it. Whatever the threat, internal or external, he could vanquish it, and it was unnecessary for him to explain how. Today, there is progressiveism, which also has nothing to do with belief or policy but is about the compassionate man who singlehandedly defends his people against all perceived threats, foreign and domestic.
To understand how such movements take over a democracy, one only has to watch the Democratic Party today.
[..]
What these people do not or will not see is that, once in power, Obama owed them and their party nothing. He rose to power despite the party, catapulted into the White House by a mass following devoted only to him. By now that following will have shrunk dramatically. No matter, he believed that if he won the election, his legions will have comprised a majority of the nation. Imagine the power he wielded then. In addition to all that came from believing to be a leader of a mass following, he had immense powers of the American presidency at his command: the Justice Department, the FBI, the intelligence services, the military. Who dared to oppose him then? Certainly not a Republican Party that laid down before him even when he was comparatively weak. And was a man like Obama, with infinitely greater power in his hands, likely to become more humble, more judicious, more generous, less vengeful than he was at then at the onset his presidency, than he has been his whole life? Does vast power un-corrupt?
This is how communism came to America, not with a pen and a phone (although there have been orders, and phone calls) but with a teleprompter huckster, a two-bit race-baiter, a phoney “community organizer” “tapping into” popular resentments and insecurities, and with an entire national political party — out of ambition or blind party loyalty, or simply out of fear — falling into line behind him.
This is how communism to America By Buzzard
“Certainly not a Republican Party that laid down before him even when he was comparatively weak.”
Being “beaten by” does not equal “laying down before”. The GOPe tried their best to bring him down and lost abysmally.
Excellent reply, Buzzard. And the “laying down before” does actually apply to the GOP and Obama unlike the original version using Trump. Bravo!
Twohey,
Tooehy.
Twohey.
Toohey,.
Better. Sorry about that goof.
No, she was hunting with Dick Cheney.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying … but I don’t think that Trump will end up being the first dictator. The US (and by extension, Canada) have been incrementally “Sovietized” over the past two generations, with ever-increasing layers of bureaucracy governing and interfering with daily life, and, ultimately, beholden to no-one.
Obama was this generation’s first attempt to “elect” a strong-man. But far from becoming the saviour of the nation and President-for-life, Obama has proven to be a craven weakling in all his dealings. Adolf Trumpf? He’s certainly channeling the strong-man persona, but I doubt he’ll the first American dictator. If he tries even half of what he’s campaigning upon, he’ll be assassinated before mid-term.
But the lure of a quick fix from the government persist, and the new generation of “social justice warriors” will weep with joy when the legislative shackles are placed about their feet, in order to provide a just and secure future.
It’s just a question of time, now.
Trump could become a dictator?…
Trump also eats puppies for breakfast every morning, you forgot to mention that!!
Given the mere subtle differences between fascism and communism, Dizzy’s and buzzard’s analogy have merit.
Putin on a bear: http://www.amazon.com/Putin-Riding-Bear-Action-Figure/dp/B00X61MVE8
Who knows what’s next, Trump riding a Hillary in an orange jumpsuit?
Sadly, for the NYT, they couldn’t find a smoking gun in Trumps pants … and no gun shot residue on his victims blouse …
Nope … only the Dem’s and their sycophantic stalkers roll like that … the rest of the world has more class.
“Yes, here is all the sizzling glory of hormonal sex differentiation, which the grim commissars of campus gender studies will never wipe out!”
Brilliant!
Paglia is great!
I could give a rat’s ass about whether the Donald was a male chauvinist, or for that matter whether Bill Clinton was either. Others may disagree with me, but I think that Bill Clinton was a good president. So, what matters is what these guys have [had] between their ears in terms of telling whomever they need to tell, at any given time, to take a flying leap. Being a successful leader is as much a sense of who to say “no” to, as it is what to push for and to accomplish. Any moron can spend, spend, and spend in order to placate their base. It takes a true leader to develop a set of priorities, and then to drive them forward for the betterment and service of their country.