12

The Politics of Porcine Proclivities, Propensities, and Predilections, by Robert Gore

Posted by straightlinelogic 8 years, 2 months ago to Politics
28 comments | Share | Flag

So label males as pigs and Donald Trump as a prime porker. This is a fk you year in politics, and women, particularly those who want to make their way in this world based on their talents, brains, hard work, and merit, not their physical attributes, cannot be blamed for deciding: “If that’s the way he talks about woman, then fk him, I’m not voting for the bastard.” However, making porcine proclivities an issue, hoping to steer female votes to Hillary, the Clinton campaign plays a dangerous game.

Take every offensive thing the Donald has ever said or done and he’s still a piglet compared to Bill Clinton’s blue-ribbon, two-thousand-pound swine. Clinton has: been credibly accused of raping or sexually assaulting multiple women; allowed a star-struck younger women to have sex with him; demeaned the office of the presidency with his Oval Office sexual hijinks; had a semen-stained dress proffered as evidence against him; paid $850,000 to settle a sexual harassment law suit, and had to defend himself against impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice related to that suit. The release of the Trump video assuredly puts all that into play. Hillary brings a knife to this fight; Trump has a bazooka.

This is an excerpt. For the rest of the article, please click the above link.
SOURCE URL: https://straightlinelogic.com/2016/10/09/the-politics-of-porcine-proclivities-propensities-and-predilections-by-robert-gore/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 2 months ago
    I hope that Trump has the guts and the ability to accurately fire the bazooka with live ammunition.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 8 years, 2 months ago
      One hopes that we NEVER have to actually go to war. You do that in advance by having a strong country, which he is advocating. You do that by being a strong leader who sticks up for his country, but is willing to engage in relationships with other countries that are mutually beneficial. He will do that too.

      If its required for our defense, I think Trump would do what Kennedy did with the russians over cuba- and the russians would take him seriously. Hillary couldnt even defend a simple embassy, and would get no where with world leaders not respecting Obama or her.

      That said, its not going to be Trump who makes America great again. Its US citizens that will do that. What Trump can do is unshackle us psychologically and practically to be the best we can be. He certainly helped out with that in last nights debate. I , for one, feel energized today. i hope he wins the election.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 2 months ago
        Actually the comment was about Trump firing at Hillary.
        It appears his ammo was a dud provided by the biased media if the fiasco last night is any indication.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 8 years, 2 months ago
          Actually, the dud was Hillary trying to throw mud on Trump instead of showing what she can do for the country. Her tactic is to throw all the mud she can into the kitchen sink, hoping he wont have time or temperament to refute it. That didnt work last night. She is so full of shit. She may lose Sanders supporters and they go to Johnson, who knows. She treated Sanders pretty bad
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 2 months ago
      Last night Bad Hair Day's 11-year-old big mouth finally backed him into a tight enough corner.
      "Finally!" me dino was saying at the start of that debate.
      Half an hour later I turned off the TV and took a nap.
      Listened toi the last half hour of the debate on the radio while doing something.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 2 months ago
    The clintons are two peas in a pod. They both do bad things, hide them, go after anyone who tries to bring them to light, and are generally very disingenuous people.
    Just look at the face on Bill C at the debates. He was obviously shaken by his former victims being in the audience, as he should be.
    Hillary is just not presidential, and it came out clear as day last night. She had no achievements to back up her claims, and just tried to throw all sorts of daggers at Trump in a kitchen sink format, hoping he would get mired in the mud she was raking and not talk about what HE was offering to the country.

    It didnt work.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 8 years, 2 months ago
    After the offensive audio clip was played, I paused to reflect on our choices. On the one hand we have an impulsive, foul-mouthed, self important (if well meaning) tyro who's just learning the political ropes at 70, and on the other we have a calculating, experienced, merciless, vindictive, corrupt, unscrupulous politician. Oh, the humanity!

    Then my logical side took over. Looking at Trump's businesses, he has proportionally more female and minority executives than any other major commercial operation. Men and women in similar positions in Trump's operations receive equal pay, which Hillary loudly proclaims she supports. However, the Clinton Foundation pays female executives 30% less than their male executives, which means that in some cases, the women make less than their male subordinates. Hm.

    Trump makes obscene comments about women, but professional females who've worked with him for 30 years verify he's never been anything but a gentleman to them. Clinton, as a young attorney, got her rapist client off by convincing a jury that his 12 year old victim was just reaping what she sowed because she had fantasies about sex with older men. That doesn't exactly jive with her proclaimed empathy for victims of sexual abuse, nor do her efforts to destroy the women who were victims of her husband's sexual predation.

    Unfortunately, with all the money being spent, and the fervid, over the top effort by the media to stop Trump, we will likely wind up with a President who makes Leona Helmsley look like a saint. Clinton definitely is following the Helmsley credo "Laws are for the little people."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 8 years, 2 months ago
    Hi Robert,
    Thanks for your very well articulated piece. Those thoughts have been on my mind most of today. I was happy to hear Trump go after HRC last night and even though it was 3 against one I was pleased by Trumps focus on Clinton's lying, corruption and hipocrisy he was a little light on the pay for play theme(Clinton Foundation and access to State Dept) but that maybe forth coming.His stance on the reduction of corp. taxes and focusing on the disasters that are America inner cities also were right on. I am curious about your thoughts regarding the recent email leak that implies Clinton campaign's control of the media: for"the pied piper candidates tell the press to take them seriously".
    Regards,
    DOB
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 8 years, 2 months ago
      Dobrien,
      Thanks, I'm glad you liked the article. As for the recent email leak on the Clinton campaign's influence on the media, I think that it just confirms what we all know. The mainstream media has been in the tank for the government and particularly for the Democratic party since the 1950s (see Straight Line Logic, "The Day Zero Hedge Goes Dark"). Fortunately, we now have the Internet and an independent segment of it, which is proving instrumental in this year's campaign, showing people the other side of the story. The link to the article above:

      https://straightlinelogic.com/2016/09...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Dobrien 8 years, 2 months ago
        Thanks Robert,
        Another excellent article about the history of CIA's take over of mainstream media. The alternative media on the net is vulnerable and like most of collectivism it will be attacked for the good of the people (yuk).
        I saw a transcript of the NYTimes editor say that the CIA would have their jobs by morning if they published the truth.
        Good day.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 8 years, 2 months ago
    Choosing between these two is like choosing between Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gasey to come stay in your home. As one friend put it, 'send them both! I'll be cleaning my guns!'
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 2 months ago
    The difference between Trump and Wm. J. Clinton is the difference between a braggart and a villain. "By their deeds shall you know them." The bible has some usable quotes.

    By bringing forth these old missteps it wastes time that can be applied to the real issues. Clinton has no defensible record, hence the only thing she can debate is Trump's character, which is amusing since hers is worse than his.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 8 years, 2 months ago
      I am tired of this election thing. Trump should just be president and help us to rebuild our country.

      He can talk and convince people and inspire us- thats about it. But we need that now.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 2 months ago
    The debate moderators did a good job making Trump look sympathetic by saying Trump joked about sexually assaulting people. Trump clearly said the women let him grope them, so it's not assault. The moderators put him on the spot in a national debate accusing him of this. In that forum he cannot say, "No, I did not commit sexual assault or joke about it," because that will become the "I'm not a crook" sound bite. So he just had to say, "no" and "wrong".

    They said they were just following up on his failure to answer, but they didn't do that on the next question regarding whether Clinton deleted e-mails after the subpoena. I think the e-mail issue is bogus, but if we're treating Trump's private comments about an actress as a real issue, they should do the same for the bogus e-mail issue.

    I got a sense of Trump being contemptible from listening to those comments, but hounding him in that forum about "sexual assault" was wrong. I should stop following politics.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Dobrien 8 years, 2 months ago
      Hi CG,
      I am guessing the " sympathetic " description was in error.
      The 31000 deleted and acid scrubbed emails is bogus troubles me .Why such an effort to be rid of wedding plans and such. Could she be covering up her pay for play scheme? Records show access to her office was often for donors to the foundation. Maybe it was her involvement with the Arab Spring or the lies revolving around Bhengazi or who knows. Don't you find it a little weird that the FBI would require the Clinton staffers to destroy their laptops after receiving immunity.I imagine in those emails was some clear cut corruption that would expose the FBI's dereliction of duty by giving her exoneration.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 2 months ago
        "I am guessing the " sympathetic " description was in error."
        By sympathetic I mean it made me think about when I screw up and then someone takes advantage of it to make it look even worse. They followed up with Trump asking him about "sexual assault", making him say nothing or "I'm not a rapist." They didn't give the Clinton the same treatment.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by lrshultis 8 years, 2 months ago
      You should get out in the world more. There will be much speech that will bother you and most of it will have nothing to do with real actions among people. There was a good reason for the freedom of speech clause in the constitution so that government cannot stop speech against it and at the same time can not stop speech between the citizens. I would suspect that meant citizens were not to be punished other than for libel or slander for the content of their speech. Of course any individual is free to get on his high horse and judge others for what they say. Do not think of the founders as all having no sense of humor or having squeaky clean speech and writings. One example is Franklin's famous erotica such as his essay on farting. Limericks and dirty jokes were common. Women were not necessarily held highly, not as today even by those who joke about them like Trump did.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo