.
.
Posted on 10/08/2016 12:49:56 PM PDT by Talisker
I’m going to link an article as an example of the point I want to make here, even though this article is probably already a FR link. It’s from the LA Times: Transcripts: What the mics caught Donald Trump saying in 2005 and what he said in his taped apology. And it’s very nasty - not because it doesn’t tell the truth, but because of how it lies with the truth.
It slams the transcript of Donald 11 years ago directly in to the transcript of his apology, same text, no visual or layout breaks. In other words, it very carefully strips out all context, and then creates a new context of the two incidents together, forcing the reader to choose between the two contexts to apply one context to both transcripts.
This is heavy duty, CIA-level mind control, folks. Seriously, no exaggeration. What you’re seeing is the deliberate creation, through the seamless presentation of two different emotional situations, of cognitive dissonance. The mnd doesn’t like cognitive dissonance - the mind seeks a way to resolve that dissonance, that friction. Eleven years ago, Trump was joking with Betrayal Bush. He was obviously in a very positive and energetic mood, getting ready to go onto a show. So he was letting himself get into a powerful state of mind. From that state of mind, he started reflecting on women.
News flash: that’s not a crime, nor is it immoral. And he was talking to someone, Bush, who shared his state of mind, so he wasn’t imposing his dominance attitude on anyone. In fact, the dominance attitude had nothing to do with women - it had to do with getting psychologically prepared for the show. FROM THAT ATTITUDE, he started speaking about women. Important distinction there.
And why would he do that, why would he speak about women at that point, from that mental alignment with power? Because, as the Left says, he likes to dominate them? Because that’s his inner white male rape attitude towards all women?
Nope. In fact, it’s the opposite, as it usually is with the Left. In his work, Trump often has to get into the alpha male state of mind, which is fine with him because he happens to actually BE an alpha male, which in turn is a hint as to why he’s chosen alpha male-type work. He finds it easy and natural. he’s what America used to call a natural leader.
And so, when he assumed that natural state of mind for him, getting ready for that show, walking with Bush, and seeing beautiful women in the area as a part of that show, he started thinking about how women respond to alpha male energy. In his experience, they are very attracted to it - VERY attracted to it. Which he then proceeded to describe to Bush, in non-PC terms.
And THAT is what has the Left so upset - not his terms. Because what WOMEN on the Left are hearing is Trump validating how THEY REALLY FEEL about alpha males - the sexual attraction they naturally have for the dominant males. The attraction that is FORBIDDEN by feminists like Hillary from even existing. The natural attraction that is literally the number one enemy of feminism - the very root thing feminism exists to stamp out in all women, and certainly destroy from even developing in boys, and against which feminism has unleashed laws, courts, drugs, lawsuits, political correctness, lies, aggression and constant raw hatred for at least two full generations and forty years now.
THAT is what Trump was talking about.
And he was pointing out the simple truth of it, in his innimitable non-PC way. He was pointing out his direct experience that that entire feminist theory and all of its efforts to cram it down the throats of every human being, every boy, every man and especially every woman - is a lie.
And not only is it a lie, it has totally failed. Because Trump’s personal success with women proves it’s a lie. After a lifetime of programmng, Trump reflected in a totally unguarded moment - which women actually recognize as him speaking the truth, not being offensive - that women still instinctively respond to alpha male power.
That’s why no sane woman is offended by what Trump said - because 1) he was speaking not only the truth, but a deep, profound truth that women agree with, that they’ve had to hide from the hags of feminism, and 2) because sane people don’t believe offense happens in a vaccum - there has to be an actual person he intended to harm by those words, and there simply was none. All he was doing was reflecting on how WOMEN ACT, not on how he intends to treat them.
So only the ideologically offended feminist Left is outraged by that - because like the little boy in the story pointing out that the king wasn’t wearing any clothes, Trump pointed out that in actual literal fact, in his repeated personal experience, speaking in an obviously totally unguarded moment and therefore truthfully, the root claims of feminism about the attraction that women have for men is WRONG.
And because that is what liberal women are hearing in this, that’s also why the feminist LEFT is enraged. Only that - not the use of sexual terminology.
Therefore the bottom line, at the end of the day, as we turn the page, is that Trump shattered the most fundamental liberal lie of all: he pointed out that quite simply, feminism is wrong - and all the WOMEN prove it by their own sexual preferences.
And that’s why the LA Times tried to destroy your awareness of context by slammng the two situations together identically - so you’d miss the difference in emotional attitude, the alpha male attitude, and try to resolve the cognitive difference by applying that same alpha male attitude of the original transcript to the conciliatory words of the apology - and therefore reject the apology as seemingly insincere. That’s why that technique is so incredibly nasty in this context - and remember, the LA Times knew exectly what it was doing - and why.
The Left is evil. Knowingly, deliberately evil. They turn people against each other and create hell on earth through careful, calculated and cynical lies. Click the link and see for yourself - and remember, what you find yourself experiencing is exactly what the bastards intended you experience when they created it.
And then marvel, because what you experience is a lie they created on their own - with the truth itself.
That’s what “journalism” REALLY is these days - not merely dishonest. They want to own your mind - and they intend to get it. And they intend to get it through political correctness - that's why they demand more and more PC. Donald is able to expose their lies precisely because he's not politically correct, because political correctness exists to deny the ability of people to speak the truth. There is NO SUCH THING as "politically correct truth" - it's an oxymoron.
Trump knows this, and that's WHY he won't change. Because changing means living a lie, and he refuses to do that. And that's also why concern shills and trolls twist their panties into knots trying to get him to become "a little" more PC - because there's no such thing as "little." Once you start to accept political correctness, you're doomed. The Left knows that - but so does Donald Trump.
He won't change. Thank God.
He was joking around, and for anyone to say he seriously claimed to grope women, is totally dishonest.
That’s an interesting theory. It was common in WWII for warplane pilots to have sexy babes painted on their airplanes. If it was part of the “getting into a macho mindset” thing, it could be understood.
It even kind of harks back to the family role of the man. If the guy is hot with passion about his wife, he’s going to defend all the more fiercely.
Still, it’s not a place where Donald now needs to be.
Seemed more of a fantasy than any real statement of purpose.
I’m sure Bill & Hill’s victims (Hill wreaked vengeance on those who complained) would have preferred that Bill only fantasized about groping them....
It was niether fantasynor a statement of purpose. I I tried to say, it was his honest, un-PC reflection on how he's personally seen women respond to alpha male power.
Translated from his jocular crudity, it does not mean he thinks all women want him to grab them - and even then, he indicates that the only ones hes referencing are those that want it, not that he'd impose it on them. But generally speaking, he's observed that women are naturally sexually attracted to alpha males, in whatever expression.
Aw! Trump said something bad, but Bill stuck a cigar up Monica’s you know what! And Monica was about the same age as his daughter!
I thought Bush was worse, verbally pushing the woman to hug them both and asking who she would rather date. Trump was there for a performance, not a date, and Bush seemed to be upset that this woman wasn’t groping him.
I like your alpha male take, too, and that Trump’s thoughts were in the abstract, not directed at any female specifically. I hadn’t thought of it that way. Trump’s quip that it was locker room banter—I couldn’t think of a better phrase to explain it. And Trump was totally the gentleman when the woman was present.
Excellent post!
I disagree with you about the LA Times formatting. There is a break with the apology video, and a bolded sub headline indicating the apology transcript.
Your other analysis has some interesting points, but . . .
Men do a lot of things without thinking. Completely mindless action. No forethought, no during thought, no afterthought.
No deep meaning. No ulterior motives.
There is too much analysis of every move made and every word uttered.
1. There's no break between the incident transcript and the apology transcript.
2. There's no embedded apology video.
3. The bolded subhead is used for both transcripts, further falsely equating the two subject matters emotionally - it's what mostly reinforces the visual cognitive dissonance, as a matter of fact.
4. Your use of the word "men" in Men do a lot of things without thinking..., instead of "men and women" or "people" is blatantly biased, hateful and sexist, and indicates you are a feminist. What a surprise.
5. As for your argument of "nothing to see, move along," let's apply that to your post, shall we?
6. Thanks for playing (and say hi to the LA Times for me).
Yeah, I noticed that too - it's possible that Bush was on a mission to set Donald up. After all, why hold on to that video for 11 years at all? Not to mention why release it now? The whole thing stinks.
Except - they released it now, right now, to cover up the Podesta emails. So it had its use. But its got Hillary's fingerprints all over it.
Ooops - that was supposed to go to gnickgnack2!
To you, Extremely Extreme Extremist, I say, with humbled heart...
Thanks!
You are an angry woman with tech that is not rendering the LA Times site correctly.
Do not put words in my mouth.
“After all, why hold on to that video for 11 years at all? “
Seems to me the West Coast has a habit of retaining things for a timely release..THEN, otoh, they RETAIN certain things to PROTECT THEIR OWN..think back a decade or so......
LOL, then I invite all our gentle readers to simply click on the link and see for themselves. Which, of course, is exactly what you don't want them to do.
As for putting words into your mouth, try to remember to not specifically limit your list of hateful screeds to men - and men alone - the next time.
Otherwise people might assume you mean to apply those hateful screeds to men - and men alone.
Have a nice day.
.
.
Nevertheless, the cognitive dissonance was created and enhanced through the identical subheads, so my point stands.
And you slandered men - extensively.
Unless, of course, you're one of those "men" who, as you said, writes with "no thought before, during or after."
Or you're a typical hateful slandering projecting feminist wyyyyymyyyyynnnnnn, Lol!
Good post Talisker.
The number of freepers having kittens over this non-issue is astounding—a lot of nothing served up by Hillary, kept alive by the MSM, and swallowed whole by resident slack-jawed yokels.
She must be laughing her massive buttocks off over the idiots on our side. And just before the 2nd debate.
Idiots or moles. I’ve seen a few threads started by screen names I’ve never seen and with a only a page or two of posts, and those just recently.
You said it with much more profundity than I.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.