From Madam Hoyt: Surviving the Cult

I must say however that even in my extreme of losing my cool, I never even THOUGHT of marching on Washington wearing knit representations of genitalia on my head.  I considered running for regional office, something that’s still on the books, if writing stops paying or doesn’t pay enough to justify the effort, only I’d make a very bad politician because “Are you out of your frickin’ minds” is a terrible campaign slogan.


I certainly didn’t start demonstrating against Obama the day he was elected.  In fact, even in 2012, I talked back from the ledge friends who thought his election would destroy the future they had planned.  You can’t live through several revolutions or in a seriously corrupt country without knowing “there is always a way around the rules” and “Most political changes are undone.  Some just take longer than others.”  (Yes, even Venezuela shall be free-er and prosperous again, but that’s a different case as their culture really lends itself to Caudillo regimes.)


But I confess that the behavior of the left, since November, has me breathless.
Having just had another encounter with "It's different when WE do it!" types, and "If you don't believe in man-cause climate change, you don't believe in science!" and the other crap, this resonated.

My adopted brother, Charlie Martin, says his problem is that Trump has opened the bag of idiots.  My real problem is that any republican winning would have done so — yes, even Romney.  Even Kasich — the only difference being that instead of pussy hats, the women-against-objectification would have worn whole body vulva suits.  With Trump it’s genitalia head gear, because he used the word “pussy.”  This is so much worse than Clinton being a serial rapist and his wife enabling him for… reasons. Don’t ask them the reasons, because that would force them to think, and they’ll just scream things at you like “my body my choice” and “you are afraid of vaginas.”  I demonstrably am not, as I haven’t done anything drastic to mine, but those are the things they say to avoid thinking. Mantras.

Which brings us to cults.
Yes, it does.

It brings us to people who thought President "I have a pen and a phone!" was just wonderful, but Trump using executive orders makes him a tyrant.  People who had no problem with Bill Clinton using an intern for sex, but "Trump is a RAPIST!"  And they really don't like being asked how they can say that when they ignore, or make excuses for, both sexual harassment and quite possible rape by Clinton.

And asking them about Hillary heading the Bimbo Eruption Squad to destroy women who had the bad manners to actually talk about their affairs with Bill, or him pushing them for sex, seriously pisses them off.

Because "That's DIFFERENT!"

Which leads me to this piece on a book by a Obama guy who had- has- problems with what Obama & Co. said vs. what they actually did.  For instance, on the same-sex marriage 'change of heart':
For cynics, it’s easy to conclude that President Obama is a liar, or that all of his statements come with an expiration date. But for Wear, a true believer, the conveniently timed, unpersuasively explained change of heart challenges the public persona Obama constructed during the 2008 campaign.

“I was forced to ask myself, would he really have used religious language to convince voters of something he did not believe?” Wear writes. “If the president did believe in and support same-sex marriage in 2007 or even earlier, his repeated assertions that he did not were a direct rebuke to the type of politics he said was possible. To let stand the claim that he supported gay marriage all along is to choose political gain over the integrity of the president’s own words.”
He's an Obama Believer, and can't simply acknowledge that either
The bastard lied, or
The bastard will say or do whatever he thinks will work best at the time.  Hell, he might eve make himself BELIEVE that whatever he says now is all that counts.
Because if he acknowledges either one, he won't be a Believer anymore.

This really got to him too, about choosing someone to deliver the invocation in 2009:
Wear describes increasingly tense negotiations that climax when a senior staffer at “one of our country’s leading LGBT rights groups” is asked what kind of religious leader would be deemed acceptable to replace Giglio. The reply was, “Honestly, if it is a Christian, we will find something on him, and make him famous.” Giglio withdrew.

Wear’s conclusion is succinct and disturbing: “In 2009, our diversity demanded we accept that there will be voices we disagree with in public spaces. In 2013, diversity required us to expel all dissent.”
Because the Cult demands sacrifice.  And real free speech, sacrificing it comes easy to some.

Which brings us to the encounter earlier today.  Some clown at the National Park Service(they're saying a former employee who still had access; frankly, I don't know if they can be believed) put up some political tweets, and the NPS got slapped down for it.  The people I was speaking with thought this was an attack on free speech by the Tyrant Trump; but I guarantee that if the NPS had put up tweets conflicting with what Obama believed in(or at least said he did), they'd have had fits.  There was also some of the now-standard "Man-caused change or you're anti-Science!" crap.  And a new addition: any news site that carries information they don't approve of is a 'alt-right mouthpiece'.
  And I'm really sick of all of it.

And where it'll all lead, I don't know.  But it might be really bad.  Because some of these people are doing real damage to our politics, especially in regard to dealing with other countries, and that never goes well.  But they don't care, because they're serving the Cult.