Words of Advice:

"Never Feel Sorry For Anyone Who Owns an Airplane."-- Tina Marie

"
If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

"
Flying the Airplane is More Important than Radioing Your Plight to a Person on the Ground
Who is Incapable of Understanding or Doing Anything About It.
" -- Unknown

"There seems to be almost no problem that Congress cannot,
by diligent efforts and careful legislative drafting, make ten times worse.
" -- Me

"What the hell is an `Aluminum Falcon'?" -- Emperor Palpatine

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Hooray for Trump (Seriously)

The White House sought Tuesday morning to calm fears that President Donald Trump will roll back protections for the LGBTQ community, issuing a statement saying he will keep in place a 2014 executive order that bans anti-LGBTQ workplace discrimination.

“President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election,” the statement reads. “The President is proud to have been the first ever GOP nominee to mention the LGBTQ community in his nomination acceptance speech, pledging then to protect the community from violence and oppression.”
Bravo, Mr. Trump.

Of course, the Mouth-Breathing Caucus is not happy. Fuck them.

15 comments:

B said...

Wow.

Who are you and what have you done with our hostess?

(actually, this is no surprise. The "Anti LGBT" crap was always just a red herring put forth by the Clinton campaign...made up from whole cloth...and y'all bought it.)



Congratulations on being able to say something nice about TheDonald. It is a good first step.....


Comrade Misfit said...

Have no fear, I still think he's crazier than a Hatter.

Oblio said...

This is a head fake, just you watch.

Gary in Bama said...

He has followed through with his promises .

bmq215 said...

B, you're correct that Trump's LGBT record isn't bad, albeit very short given his lack of time in politics. That's something I don't hold against him in this case as it certainly doesn't take political experience to be a decent human being.

What I do hold against him is his choice of Mike Pence as his VP, a man whose record on LGBT rights is abysmal. Given Trump's lack of a record, Pence's past decisions are the best indicator I have of this administration's views and the signs aren't encouraging.

B said...

BMQ:....He was my Governor before the VP....And his record wasn't bad. What he DIDN'T do was give special treatment to the LGBT folks...
They got the same shake as everyone else.

Got something specific in mind that he did? 'Cause I (a straight white male) haven't seen anything bad. You might see it differently. I'd like to know....details please.

CenterPuke88 said...

2000, opposed Federal funds for AIDS/HIV testing...

2006, said gay couples indicate "societal collapse"...

2007, voted against adding LGBT to anti-discrimination laws...

2010, opposed repeal of "don't ask, don't tell"...

2015, supported and signed a bill allowing discrimination based upon religious beliefs, and only accepted a change to prevent discrimination on race, religion, disability or sexual orientation after businesses and others threatened to boycott Indiana...

2016, opposed the transgender bathroom directive...

The New York Crank said...

As for Trump, he'll piously say he has nothing against LGBT rights. Then he'll appoint enough Supreme Court justices to find that laws prohibiting discrimination against LGBTs are unconstitutional. "Right of free association," or some such judicially creative crap. Thus Trump gets to have his LGBTs and, uh, screw them too.

Yours very crankily,

The New York Crank

B said...

"2000, opposed Federal funds for AIDS/HIV testing...

2006, said gay couples indicate "societal collapse"...

2007, voted against adding LGBT to anti-discrimination laws...

2010, opposed repeal of "don't ask, don't tell"...

2015, supported and signed a bill allowing discrimination based upon religious beliefs, and only accepted a change to prevent discrimination on race, religion, disability or sexual orientation after businesses and others threatened to boycott Indiana...

2016, opposed the transgender bathroom directive..."

So, again, no "special privledges". just get treated like every other person.

Isn't that equality?

bmq215 said...

B, looks like CenterPuke has pretty much hit the high points. The only thing I'll add is his stance on "providing funds for those wishing to change their sexual behavior" which has widely been seen as referring to conversion therapy, something he has not denied. It could be interpreted as going toward safe sex resources but given his stance on gay couples leading to "societal collapse" I think I'm gonna go with Occam here.

But I'm just a straight, white male myself so there may be plenty more bad that I'm not seeing either...

Comrade Misfit said...

When I read an argument that "saying that 'thou shalt not discriminate against XYZ' is equivalent to the granting of special privileges to XYZ", my presumption is that the complainer belongs to the group or class that was doing the discrimination.

CenterPuke88 said...

Er, no. Protection against discrimination is NOT special treatment, it's a legal means to ensure EQUAL treatment. This protection is required because, as we see again and again, the majority refuse to recognize that others may have a differing experience than them. In the Jim Crow days, the average white American could blithely pretend that the "colored" water fountain was just the same as the "white" one...the back door was the same as the front...the two schools were separate but equal. Brown vs Board of Education finally ripped off that scab, but there are still those that refuse to believe that any discrimination occurs in the US of A. Amusingly, these people are universally male and white.

B said...

And yet, he didn't really stop the legislation to prevent discrimination (I live in his state, and read those bills....you should too before you comment on them). They were, indeed, special privilege bills.

The names sounded all nice and all, but if you read 'em, actually read 'em, you'll learn what they really wanted to do.

Your resumption, dear hostess, would be wrong, at least in my case.

But you'd have to know me better in order to judge that, and I doubt that that is likely. So claim I am a bigot.

CenterPuke88 said...

So, when every major business in the state said don't do this, they were misreading the bill?

On to presumptions, you named yourself such (under YOUR reading of her definition) by admitting you viewed the current US of A as discrimination free. Our hostess didn't throw the first stone, she merely suggested we all remember the glass houses we live in. She also did not use the word bigot, but merely suggested that people who espouse such views are ones she views with suspicion of being unaware of the true state of the country.

Tod Germanica said...

Newsweek believes trump will attack gays through "right-to-life" means as he works his way through the list on his Enabling Act. http://www.newsweek.com/lgbtq-trump-executive-order-550424