subscribe: Posts | Comments      Facebook      Email Steve

Stone trashes gay rights, then says he was “misunderstood”

2 comments

Oliver Stone, the filmmaker, said something pretty stupid the other day, when he told Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom he was meeting, that Russia’s anti-gay laws are “sensible.”

In their conversation, the two men wandered into what seems like a weird area for the leader of a nuclear-armed country and a Hollywood movie director: gender issues. It’s not clear from the reports how they got there, but Stone began complaining about “some of the behaviors and the thinking of the new generation…about gender.” What specifically galls Stone is, in his words, “people identify themselves [as] ‘I’m male, I’m female, I’m transgender, I’m cisgender.’ It goes on forever…It’s not a healthy culture.”

Putin, who has presided over increasingly harsh anti-gay laws in Russia, was quick to agree. “They live too well. They have nothing to think about.” Again, it’s not quite clear what Putin meant by this insulting observation (“nothing to think about”??), except that he was agreeing with Stone. Then Stone made his “sensible” comment. Their chat had reverted to Russia’s notorious 2013 law (pushed by Putin) that criminalized “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships,” widely known as the “gay propaganda law.”

Passed by a vote of 436-0 in Russia’s parliament, it banned “the spreading of propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations among minors,” and “made it illegal to equate straight and gay relationships, as well as the distribution of material on gay rights.” The law was heavily lobbied for by the Russian Orthodox [Catholic] Church, of which Putin claims to be a devout follower.

To understand the law’s impact, imagine such a ban here in the U.S. No gay magazines would be allowed to publish. No homophile films could be made (such as Bohemian Rhapsody, Call Me By My Name, or Brokeback Mountain). Schools would be forbidden to teach anything suggesting acceptance of LGBTQ people. Media commentators could be arrested for making pro-gay statements. Gay people would, in short, be “disappeared” from public discourse.

Why would Stone—born of Jewish and Catholic parents but a practicing Buddhist—be so fiercely critical of gay rights? It’s easy to understand why Putin is: in Russia, the Orthodox Church is just as hatefully intolerant as the evangelical churches are here in America. You would think that Oliver Stone would be more receptive to gay people, wouldn’t you?

But no. That conversation between Stone and Putin is best seen as a whine-fest between two aging, straight and rather angry white men, whose cozy, familiar world of heteronormativity is being challenged by a new generation of gender activists. This is hugely upsetting for Stone and Putin. They just can’t understand why everybody isn’t comfortable with the old roles: you’re either male or female, and that’s it. Why does anyone have to use non-gender-conforming pronouns like “we” or “it”? Why do transgendered people insist on using public bathrooms of the gender with which they identify? Why for that matter do people have gender-reassignment surgery? Why all the fuss?

Liberals and gay activists were quick to criticize Stone, who immediately went on the defensive. “Vladimir Putin is not anti-gay, nor am I,” he insisted just two days ago. Claiming that the whole issue had been “much misunderstood,” Stone trotted out the pro-gay themes in his films, including his 2004 movie, “Alexander” (a critical failure), which told the story (made famous by the writer Mary Renault) about Alexander the Great’s male lover, Bagoas. “I prominently featured Alexander’s love for the Persian eunuch Bagoas, certainly an example of a third sex and emblematic of Alexander’s world vision, which I much admired,” Stone argued. Then he added, “Do not bring American expectations to Russian life any more than you expect Iran, Korea, Venezuela, or China to follow our political or social demands.”

This is moral relativism of the highest order. Don’t tell the Ayatollahs that anti-semitism is bad, not unless you want them to lecture us on our racial problems. This false equivalency argument has never been productive. It lets oppressive regimes off the hook for muzzling their populations, and completely shreds the historic American ideals of equality and freedom.

If Oliver Stone can’t understand that LGBTQ members of “the new generation” are tired of being excluded by a straight culture that has never permitted them rights, that’s his problem. He ought to know better. One doesn’t expect anything from a man like Putin, but of an American who made Born on the Fourth of July, Wall Street, World Trade Center and Midnight Express, one should have higher, nobler expectations.

It is, admittedly, difficult to convince straight white men, who have never suffered discrimination based on their race or gender, that LGBTQ people might have a case. In this rapidly changing world, they feel the rug being pulled out from under their feet; indeed, this is why so many of them voted for Trump. But decent policies ought not be based on the fears and insecurities of bigoted people. The LGBTQ community and their straight supporters for many years have presented eloquent, detailed arguments for their positions. There has been no lack of information. Still, some opponents, including Oliver Stone, just don’t get it. It’s so odd. Stone has an entire body of work that critiques the American government for censoring truth and suppressing information. But when the Russian government does the same thing to gay people, suddenly that’s “sensible.”

I don’t buy it.


To impeach, or not to impeach

5 comments

That’s been this raging debate in the Democratic Party lately. The pro-impeachment side—which definitely includes me—argues that trump (I will no longer capitalize his name) is morally and legally unfit to be president. The other side—which apparently still includes a majority of House Democrats who follow Speaker Pelosi—argues that impeaching him now would hand the 2020 election to the Republicans—not only the presidency, but the Senate and possibly the House as well.

Frankly, this “debate” disgusts me. The time to begin impeachment hearings against trump in the House Judiciary Committee was last Spring, when we after the Mueller Report came out. We’ve earned very little since then. Yes, I realize that Pelosi and her supporters argue that we have to build up support among the American people before we can move towards impeachment. I have nothing against building up support; but it seems like the Democrats are simply stalling or, worse, bumbling. They look like a confused party, waiting for something to happen. Nothing will happen until they make it happen.

The white nationalists on the Republican side will never turn against trump. Never, ever, for any reason, because they’ve lost their minds. Evangelical psychosis and neo-nazi hatred have turned off their valves of rational thinking. They don’t want a free, diverse America, they want some ugly dictatorship of preachers led by a strong man, namely, their fuhrer, trump. There’s no way to convince them they’re wrong. They have to be brutally beaten.

I believe that a majority of the American people don’t want that crowd to win. The question is, will the American people be allowed to express their will at the polls? If they don’t vote, their will counts for shit. If they do, will the results be fairly counted? There’s no doubt in my mind that trump and Putin are working out some kind of scheme whereby the Russians manipulate the election results so that trump is re-elected even when/if he really isn’t. That’s what it’s come to: that’s the real meaning of “collusion.” The colluder-in-chief is trump, but the second in command is the Majority Leader, McConnell. In my long lifetime of studying U.S. history there is no doubt in my mind that McConnell’s name will stand with those of Benedict Arnold and Tokyo Rose as the domestic enemies of America.

When and if Democrats regain control of the U.S. Senate, if McConnell is still there they must expel him, and then bring charges against him—not only for colluding with trump and the Russians, but for what he did to Merrick Garland. It’s common to say that the Russians declared cyberwar against America in the 2016 elections. Let’s now be clear: McConnell declared war against America when he refused to allow the Garland nomination.

When I hear from people who are as disturbed as I am about this situation, I celebrate. I want to reach out and hug them. Thank you! I’m not insane! You see it too! I was watching T.V. over the weekend and there was a Democratic Congressman from New Jersey on one of the shows who was anti-impeachment. He’s from a swing district; his constituents aren’t ready for impeachment, he claimed, and he might lose his seat if the House goes forward on it. I thought: Good! Lose your goddamned seat. If you’re more worried about hanging on to your job than you are about our country, then be gone! No one who calls herself a “Democrat” should be undecided anymore. If you’re not with us—with freedom–you’re against us.

One of my favorite quotes in U.S. history is from Benjamin Franklin: “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” During the Revolution (and again, in the Civil War), Americans had to decide which side they were on: good, or evil. We’re in the same boat now. If you think you’re a Democrat but you’re against impeachment, I invite you to leave the party. Go join the Republicans. We don’t need your wishy-washy indecisiveness. We need strong, loyal, convinced Americans. The time for impeachment hearings is now.

Pelosi says she wants to wait—for what? Spell it out, sister. If Pelosi won’t countenance impeachment, I hope that some Democrat from her San Francisco District will immediately announce his or her candidacy for the Congress and challenge her in the primary. I respect Nancy for many reasons (I used to live in her District and knew some of her political and financial backers), but if she can’t get with the program, then it’s time for her to go.


The 2 groups I hate

0 comments

There are two groups in America whom I loathe and fear more than any others: evangelicals, and white nationalist neo-nazis.

Both are diehard Republicans. Both represent dire threats to the country I grew up in and love, and to me, personally, as well. And both are the staunchest parts of Trump’s base.

Let me explain why I think they’re both scum.

Evangelicals: Many years ago, early on a Sunday morning, I was driving back to San Francisco from Los Angeles. I was looking for something to listen to on my car radio and stumbled across what sounded to me like a big Christian revival rally: a fire-and-brimstone male preacher and thousands of cheering voices chanting “Amen” and “Praise Jesus!” Now, I’d long had a fascination with these people, sort of an amateur anthropologist interest in them. Who are they? What makes them tick? So I listened.

The preacher was saying something about “How are we going to convince the doubters?” Well, since I was (and am) “a doubter,” it was interesting. How are they going to convince me, I thought, with their narrow-minded bigotry and superstitions (the virgin birth, the resurrection, all that literal interpretation of the Bible nonsense)?

Then the preacher started screaming:

“We’ll preach to them and tell them the truth, but some of them still won’t listen. Do you know what we’ll do to them then?”

Tremendous cheers from the flock. They knew what was coming.

“We’re going to find them—and we’re going to surround them—and then we’ll drag them kicking and screaming into the tent!”

Huge cheers, a tremendous burst of agreement, and even some laughter. And that’s when I pulled over to the side of the road. I was so stunned, I couldn’t even drive. And I thought about what I had just heard:

Somebody—probably a group of men—is going to hunt me down, and surround me, and then they’re going to seize my arms and legs and take me forcibly into some ‘tent.’ And then, they’re going to—what?”

That was my moment. Prior to it, I’d thought that evangelicals, and Pentecostals, and all the rest of that crowd, were harmless crackpots. Now, I realize they weren’t harmless at all.

Ronald Reagan had just been elected, with the notorious help of fundamentalist bigots like Jerry Falwell. The country seemed like it was drifting rightward—no, not just “drifting,” but rushing headlong into some kind of rightwing, Christian theocracy. We already were familiar with what had happened in Iran just a few years earlier. Could the same thing happen here?

Then, there are the white neo-nazis. About the same time as the incident on the radio, I happened by chance to come across a used copy of the first volume of Winston Churchill’s “The Second World War.” I blazed through it, then went on to acquire the other five volumes. That prompted in me a great interest in the origins of World War II, especially the rise of the nazis. During the Eighties, I read as much as I could. The years passed, with the presidency passing from Reagan to H.W. Bush, Clinton, and W. Bush to Obama. I continued reading, and saw with greater clarity how similar the rise of the right in America is to the nazis’ seizure of power. By the time Trump was elected (with Russian help), I’d reached my conclusions—conclusions that have only solidified since 2016.

In this modern Republican Party we have something resembling a cross between Iranian-style fundamentalist fanaticism and the white rage of the working class dispossessed who elevated Hitler to power. This is a type of mutation that has never existed before in the world. But it exists now, in America. It has been gaining strength for decades; the rise of the tea party was its debut on the stage of 21st century politics.

I despise both groups; I despise the unholy spawn that has resulted from their unnatural union. I fear greatly for America if Trump is not defeated next year, and if the Senate doesn’t flip Democratic and the House held. I pray for Ruth Bader Ginsburg to live long. My only hope is that these white neo-nazis and these fundamentalist Christians make very strange bedfellows. Are there fissures that could eventually drive them apart? Have a great weekend


It’s Trump’s character, stupid

4 comments

He looked terrible, didn’t he? I mean Mueller. Not tanned and relaxed the way a retired guy ought to be, but tired, dragged out and mentally confused. Yesterday was not a good day for Robert Mueller.

Since I never thought the Special Counsel would be the White Knight who would save America by indicting Donald Trump, I wasn’t disappointed by Mueller’s non-performance. My take is that we’re going to have to leave it to History for a final judgment on why Mueller went so light on Trump and his cohorts, and why Mueller dodged 200 questions with refusals to answer, refusals that bordered on absurdity.

(By the way, having watched lots and lots of Congressional hearings in my day, I think that if any other witness had been so hostile, he would have been slapped with a Contempt of Congress citation.)

Republicans “won” the hearings in the sense that no new information came out. Mueller certainly didn’t say what many people wanted him to: “I would have indicted Trump if the Department of Justice guidelines had permitted me to.” So Trump took his little “victory lap.”

But Democrats are far from out. We still have the major conclusions: Mueller did NOT exonerate Trump. There WAS massive Russian interference in the election on Trump’s behalf. Trump DID try to obstruct justice on multiple occasions. What Democrats have to do now, of course, is to keep these issues alive before an American public that may be growing weary of this whole thing. They also have to keep the media interested, beyond the usual outlets of what Trump calls “fake news”: the New York Times, Washington Post, and MSNBC.

And House Democrats still have multiple hearings to conduct, although that’s going to be hard given Trump’s refusal to allow his stooges to respond to subpoenas and their penchant to lie when they do submit to questions. But I’d be lying if I claimed that any of the House hearings will result in anything substantial. I’ll be happy if they do, but I’m not holding my breath.

So where do we go from here? The overwhelming fact—which none of us can lose sight of—is that we must defeat Trump next year. We simply have to. I will urge every voter I know to not lose heart because the Mueller thing seems to have fizzled out. We still have something big going for us, and that is that a majority of Americans loathe Donald Trump and think that his personality is disgusting. You remember James Carville’s sign in Clinton election headquarters back in 1992? “It’s the economy stupid”? Well, in 2020 “It’s Trump’s character, stupid.” I’ve said it all along: Democrats should NOT focus merely on issues, as some candidates allege. They have to remind voters over and over and over again: “This is a reprehensible human being. A sexual predator, a pathological liar, a racist and a bigot. You wouldn’t leave your teenaged daughter alone with him for five minutes, and you know it!”

That argument won’t work with the knuckleheads who constitute Trump’s base. I don’t care about them; they’re a lost cause. They’ve sold their souls to the devil. They can go to hell.

But the Character issue will work with suburban moms, who care about decency and civility, and it may even persuade a handful of evangelicals, even though the majority of them have proven, by their devotion to Trump, that they love him more than they love Jesus Christ, and are willing to piss on Christ’s teachings. (Actually, the next time you meet a “Christian” who professes to support Trump, laugh in their face, remind them of their utter hypocrisy, and walk away.)

As for the issues themselves: climate change is not a winner for Democrats. Sorry. Neither is legalizing marijuana (sorry, Kamala). Protecting abortion is. Other winners for Democrats are raising taxes on billionaires. Democrats are going to have to handle LGBTQ rights carefully. I would not make a huge issue out of it. We’ve come a long way in the last ten years, but our victories are tenuous; a wrong move, or a series of wrong moves, could turn large chunks of the public against us. Immigration is also tricky. Democrats are going to have to come up with an answer to Trump’s accusation that we’re in favor of open borders. Democrat’s aren’t, of course; but if you can’t come up with an immediate answer to the following question, you can see Democrats’ problem:

What is the Democratic solution for stemming the flood of immigrants at the southern border?

This question should not require a long-winded answer. The public can’t deal with long-winded answers. The answer should be contained in a single sentence—and it needs to be persuasive.

Democrats also need to have a persuasive answer to Rust Belt workers, whom progress is leaving behind. Everybody—Republicans and Democrats—knows that the coal mines, steel mills and manufacturing plants aren’t coming back. They’re gone forever. Democrats sometimes tell the truth about this, and they go down to defeat. Democrats sometimes hem and haw about it. Trump lies about it, and wins.

But in the end, “It’s Trump’s character, stupid.” That’s how we’ll beat the bastard.


Joe Biden’s long history: fair game?

2 comments

It’s not fair to hold Joe Biden to things he said and did twenty, thirty, forty years ago.

Yes he worked closely with segregationists. So did John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and virtually every other Congressional Democrat of the 1950s-1970s.

Yes he was part and parcel of the 1990s crime bill that most experts now agree put far too many people in jail for such minor offenses as marijuana possession.

But he’s since denounced the segregationists and the crime bill and in fact just came out with his new proposal on criminal justice reform; it contains most elements that the Left is demanding.

Yet this won’t stop Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker and other Democrats running for president from bashing him.

As an older American, I know that people can change their views over time. Indeed, it is well and good that they do so. Bobby Kennedy, for example, went from being a pro-McCarthy Democrat to a leading voice for social justice. Bill and Hillary Clinton changed their minds on gay rights. So did Obama. Abraham Lincoln changed his mind bigtime on slavery. Republican isolationists in the 1930s changed their minds after Pearl Harbor. Intelligent people change their minds all the time when confronted with new information. As Ralph Waldo Emerson remarked, “Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

People say Biden should apologize for his support of the old crime bill. I suppose he could do that; it would be easy enough to mouth the words. But what’s the point—to satisfy some people who want him to grovel? What’s important is what he thinks now, not what he thought thirty years ago. I guarantee you there will come a time when Cory Booker has to reverse himself on something he once voted for. (Lord knows most Democrats have had to do that concerning their Iraq War votes!) It’s easy for politicians like Harris and Booker to jump on Biden; they didn’t have to take those votes way back when. Very few politicians who have been in office for any length of time can claim 100% purity or consistency. Most shift positions over time, not simply because they have their fingers to the political winds, but because some of these issues are truly complicated, and politicians have to do their best in deciding what position to take on an issue that is changing with each daily headline.

It’s all well and good for the Democratic candidates to debate all the issues vigorously. But I wish they would get off their holier-than-thou horses. Democrats had better be united going into the 2020 presidential contest, which is going to be the most expensive, dirtiest ever. The dirt will consist of lies, disinformation, misleading campaign ads and—likely—more Russian interference through fake social media posts. And almost all the dirt is going to come from Republicans and Trumpites, who understand that they cannot win a national election without resorting to smear and fear to drive down the vote.

Now, to Mueller’s testimony. As I write this (midway during the House Judiciary hearing), it’s all a big “Meh.” Mueller is doing exactly what he promised, or threatened: not going beyond the Report. You have Republicans, like the Arizonian Debbie Lesko, doing their best to undermine the Report by asking a series of misleading questions; and Democrats unable to pry anything out of Mueller beyond “The Report speaks for itself.” I will leave it to History to have the final word—but to me the outstanding question is Why Mueller does not feel it incumbent on himself to save the Republic? He has an agenda; we don’t know what it is; someday, we shall.


Even in an age of GOP lies, this one’s a whopper!

2 comments

Does social media engage in “systematic and discriminatory censorship of our conservative videos”?

Of course not. Twitter famously allows Trump to lie, slander his enemies and stir up resentment among his unstable followers. Facebook permits Breitbart—one the most infamous examples of extremism in America—to publish, including comments from readers that are shocking, defamatory and hateful. Google routinely puts Trump’s tweets at or near the top in “Trump” searches, while a “Trump” search at YouTube comes up with lots of Trump and Trump family videos.

Nobody can seriously say that social media is biased against Trump or the radical, white nationalist conservatism he advocates. But that hasn’t stopped the far-right fringe group, Prager University, from filing lawsuits against YouTube and parent company Google for “this censorship…of our conservative videos.”

What is “Prager University” (or PragerU, as they call it)? For starters, it’s not a university at all, but an online site featuring propaganda from some of the most scurrilous rabble-rousers in the English-speaking world. They publish screeds from the likes of Carl Benjamin, an “anti-feminist British YouTuber” and Brexiteer, who once taunted a female Member of Parliament by saying, “I wouldn’t even rape you,” which prompted comparisons to Trump’s calling women “dogs.”

PragerU also publishes videos from the arch-white supremacist Dennis Prager (PragerU’s founder) a Rush Limbaugh wannabe who is a leader of the anti-Muslim movement among Republicans. When Keith Ellison, a Muslim, was elected to Congress and wanted to use the Koran for his swearing-in, Prager lectured him that America is interested in only one book, the Bible.”

PragerU has offered no proof that YouTube or Google censor their ridiculous videos; in fact a “Dennis Prager” search of YouTube immediately results in scores of videos offered. Ditto for Google; search “Dennis Prager” and you get 5.4 million hits, led off by Prager’s own online “The Dennis Prager Show.” Clearly there is no censorship, no systematic effort to smother “our conservative videos.”

Why, then, does PragerU lie that there is? Aside from the fact that they have aligned themselves with the liar-in-chief, Donald Trump, the answer can only be that PragerU is hoping to raise money from credulous rightwingers. In this, they’re similar to those evangelical hucksters, like Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell Jr., who extort money from their [mostly uneducated lower class] followers by scaring the bejesus out of them with threats of Communism and Islamic terrorism. PragerU just send out a blast email (of which I am one of the recipients) screaming that “The threat here is not just against PragerU. It’s against ALL of us,” and claiming that they are “taking a stand…for America and for the freedom of speech.”

Of course, the right wing wouldn’t be what it is without attacking liberals, and in PragerU’s case, the object of their enmity is the Southern Poverty Law Center. Now I will confess my own bias: the SPLC is one of the nation’s preeminent trackers of hate groups. They perform an invaluable job of keeping tabs on the neo-nazis, white supremacists, anarchists, anti-Semites and camo-wearing, paintball-playing trash who constitute Trump’s army. But to PragerU, the SPLC is the enemy—and why “your immediate gift today (i.e. money) will help save conservative free speech in America.”

Far be it from me to criticize anyone for trying to raise money. Democrats do it constantly (and I’m getting a little tired of some of their pitches). But let’s recognize this for what it is: first of all, there is NO censorship of PragerU or its videos. Secondly, there IS a case to be made that not all ‘free speech” is permissible. Blatant lies, racial attacks, anti-Semitism, homophobia—these are beyond the pale in terms of decency. This doesn’t mean that Google and YouTube are “censoring” hate speech. But it does mean that their employees who are tasked with enforcing their Terms of Use must frequently use their best judgment as to what to allow, and what not to.

It’s true that Facebook—another object of PragerU’s scorn—banned the notorious Alex Jones and other propagandists (like Milo Yiannopoulos), but just what this actually means is unclear; Jones still has his public Facebook page, while Yiannopoulos maintains a vigorous Facebook presence through several sites maintained by his fans.

The question of whether or not to allow all speech, regardless of how false or inflammatory it is, is a good one, worthy of conversation. We’ll all reach out own conclusions. Mine is that certain forms of hatred—on the right AND the left—ought not to be published; and it’s appropriate to bring pressure against publishers (like Google and Facebook) through the Court of Public Opinion. That’s what many of us have done; it’s what PragerU is trying to rally on the right. But I think there are more of us who want to limit hate speech and violent provocations, than there are those Trumpites who want to spew it (starting with Trump himself); and, of course, the Right has no problem censoring news they believe is injurious to Trump (which is why Fox isn’t even broadcasting Mueller’s testimony tomorrow!). Besides, the Right already has the most widely-viewed media presence in America: Fox “News.” How they can complain about censorship is ridiculous.


From the Private Diary of Donald J. Trump

0 comments

Dear Dairy,

They say I’m a Racist. Well that’s just a dirty lie from the failing New York Times. I’m not a Racist, I just don’t like most Black people. Some are okay. Herman Cane is great. So’s Ben Carson. Did you know he’s a doctor? And that Clarince Thomas, what a guy! He was a great Womanizer you know although I don’t know what he saw in that Anita Hill. A real dog I’ll tell you.

You know who I also have a lot of respect for whose Black? O.J. Simpson. Great athlete, that I can tell you. I don’t know what sport he played—was it golf, or was that the other one, the one with the animal name? But I know he was famous and then he had that career as a movie star. As a T.V. star myself I can appreciate the hard Work that goes into success as an entertainer. I never met O.J. but maybe one of these days we can play a round at Bedminster. Memo to self: Ask Melania what she thinks of giving him a Metal of Freedom. That’s one of the things I’m entitled to do as POTUS. I was thinking of giving one to my friend Kim Jong Un. Maybe we could have them both together at the White House.

But this racist stuff bothers me. Just look at all those Demon-crats having a field day saying I’m Bigoted. Don’t they know the Republican party is the most Racially-integrated party in America? Just look at our House delagation. Many, many black, brown and yellow faces, that I can tell you. In fact Leader McCarthy, who I understand is part Black, was telling me that the Demon-crats are 99% white. Talk about Racists! I don’t know why these Blacks vote Demon-crat. Who freed the Slaves? Lincoln, a Republican! Who wrote the Civil Rights act? Newt Gingrich, that’s who. Who has appointed more Blacks to the Courts than me? Nobody has more respect for the Blacks. My father always said, “Donald, always try to rent to a Black in the slums.” That was good advice. We made a lot of money off renting apartments to the Blacks in New York, and I’ll tell you something else, they weren’t always screaming for new paint and carpets the way these Asians are.

Look, I kind of like AOC. I mean, she’s hot! Sure she has those big bug eyes but if you throw a paper bag over her head she’s not too shabby. A little older than I like ‘em, though. Poor Jeff Epstein. It’s a shame they got him. You know he’s just a surrogate for me, right? I’m the one they were after but they couldn’t get me because I’m too smart to get caught so they went after Jeff. I’ll tell you, we had some Hot times back in the day. Mar-a-lago in the 90s. We’d get 15, 20 girls, all under 17, the pick of the crop, the hottest, juiciest, sexiest pussy you ever saw, right? Just me and Jeff and buckets of Champagne, KFC and lines of coke Jeff got from his connection in Columbia. I miss those days. Of course, I can always have my Secret Service smuggle girls in to me wherever I am, but I try to limit that to 3,4 times a week. Melania’s been awful loyal and I wouldn’t want to hurt her.

I’m gonna win this election, that I will tell you. It will be such a landslide it will shock you. Most Americans agree with me when I tell them we don’t need those foreigners here. All those gooks and geeks and freaks, keep ‘em out! Send ‘em back to wherever the hell they’re from. Starting with those Sqaud girls. I think they’re from Somalia. Imagine, they come over here from their nasty little slums and all of a sudden start parading around putting down America and siding with El Qaida and helping the terrists plant bombs in Jewish places. I’m gonna remind the American people over and over what disgusting, horrible atheists those girls are. The fact that they’re all Black is irrelivent to me. By the way, did you notice they’re all Black?

But like I say I’m not a Racist! Here’s a list of the Demon-crats I’m gonna go after in the next few weeks. Elijah Cummings. Barbara Lee. Oprah Winfrey. Obama (Worst President Ever!). Corey Booker. Kammalla Harris. John Lewis. That awful James Cliburn. Most of ‘em white, right? Oh, and that Communist, “Doctor” Martin Luther King. I put the “doctor” in quotes because what the hell was he a doctor of anyway? Doctor of lies, that’s what. My F.B.I. showed me a file proving King hung out with Communist terrists. From what I understand lots of Blacks still do. That’s what I hear, anyway.

Well, the Secret Service just delivered my Cheeseburgers, so I gotta go now, Dear Dairy, but more tomorrow! That, I will tell you!


« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives