What does a MAGA hat stand for?

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is my point. So much of the bad in the 50s and 60s was hidden, not talked about, and ignored, so those suffering suffered in silence or screamed at night. That is what appeals to the boomers who buy MAGA hats. Everything looked so perfect on the surface. That is what they want to return to. America #1 in the world, no trouble at home, everyone knowing their place and following the rules. Civil rights, broke that system, music broke that system, hippies broke that system, Vietnam broke that system, feminism broke that system. Half the boomers broke that system. The scab was pulled off and it still hurts for many boomers.

Looked perfect on the surface, and that's the draw? Oh bull**** bootstraps. Wages stagnant. Rentals increasing, the era of the gold watch dead. Yup, thats rasist. I mean, what they hell. My grandparents watched Queen for a Day. What a depressing ass show. My parents know damn well horsehocky sucked in the 1950s. They aren't Assclown fans, but that isn't the cause. That's just narrative about the outgroup talking. Clever in a way, because it's a horsehockyeating rhetorical approach that allows fecal breaths to actually blame the outgroup for desiring every single global ill that existed 70 years ago. It's really really freaking stupid.
 
Last edited:
How exactly is this a threat? If anything, they should be happy they now have an "easy out" to avoid getting shipped off to some battlefield across the globe.
While the pacifist in me loves the idea of the military being optional and perhaps even viewed with disdain, America has a fairly strong military culture and it seems fairly straightforward that everyone should be able to serve their country and enjoy the perks associated with that service. There's also a difference between someone being disqualified because they're incapable and someone being disqualified because the state has decided to stop supporting them. We're already aware that trans soldiers are acceptable and viable, so the arguments for cutting them out of contention are slim.
 
I think the problem with #MAGA is that he unrolled it at a time when there were many variant odious proposals he was testing with his base. This was in the "Muslim Kenyan" and "take the oil" days. We have to remember the way the base was seduced. First the outright racists joined the MAGA banner. THEN the more mainstream Republicans were seduced.
 
This administration has already banned transgender people from the military
I want to say, this is a very difficult issue to sort. Especially when dealing with a ponderous and old institution, and I think everyone is very aware on how hard it is to migrate a path to making the military more progressive as we learn new things as a society. The DoD rolled out a series of small changes and I think that they put some work into it to make sure it was not the complete screw-job that it could have been. It's hard, we all know that.

But this was #MAGA

Trump's Twitter said:
After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow......
....Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming.....
....victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you

Read the tweet again. That was #MAGA. Those tweets were sent to appease the base. The people who wear the hats and yell in crowds.
 
While the pacifist in me loves the idea of the military being optional and perhaps even viewed with disdain, America has a fairly strong military culture and it seems fairly straightforward that everyone should be able to serve their country and enjoy the perks associated with that service. There's also a difference between someone being disqualified because they're incapable and someone being disqualified because the state has decided to stop supporting them. We're already aware that trans soldiers are acceptable and viable, so the arguments for cutting them out of contention are slim.

I didn't say it was fair or right. I'm just questioning whether or not such a policy rises to the level of being considered a threat.
 
I didn't say it was fair or right. I'm just questioning whether or not such a policy rises to the level of being considered a threat.

When you joined the military what was your next best option?

I'd probably have gone to prison a lot sooner and for a lot longer and been much more debilitated by it if I hadn't been allowed to join the military when I did.
 
You cannot claim to be an ally whilst you vote for the same people literally doing the oppression on a legal and state level.

I'm not too worried about minorities losing their right in a major city where the mayor is a gay black female, so I can concentrate on other issues. It's not always about you. Try again.
I'll also bet that I've marched in more gay rights demonstration than you have.
Ditto for black rights and all the civil rights marches I did in the 70's.

If that's not worthy of being an ally to your community, that's your problem, not mine. Your hate blinds you.
 
I didn't say it was fair or right. I'm just questioning whether or not such a policy rises to the level of being considered a threat.

I think being denied a job on the basis of an inherent characteristic is, at the very least, malacious.

Maybe you disagree but minorities see it differently.
 
I'm not too worried about minorities losing their right in a major city where the mayor is a gay black female, so I can concentrate on other issues. It's not always about you. Try again.
I'll also bet that I've marched in more gay rights demonstration than you have.
Ditto for black rights and all the civil rights marches I did in the 70's.

If that's not worthy of being an ally to your community, that's your problem, not mine. Your hate blinds you.

Then you go and spoil it all by doing something stupid like voting for the party that STILL advocates oppression for those groups you claim to be an ally for.

Like, what about this do you not get? A vote even In good faith and conscience can still enable some pretty terrible things. You need to get it into your head that your ally status will be rightfully questioned if you still vote or enable a patry that is, at best, openly hostile and at worst doing whatever it can to roll back social and legal advancements.

If you can't stand that scrutiny don't make it public, don't talk about it, keep it to yourself.
 
Something a lot better than the military. I wanted to join though. I wanted to be a soldier since I was like 10.

Sure man. This claim doesn't stretch credibility at all.

Oh.

Wait.

Yeah, it does.
 
Obviously you don't get it. Your hate blinds you. I have never voted for anybody that campaigned on hatred of gays or other minorities. You judge people not as individuals but by their label. And you complain when people do that to you. Really sad.
 
I didn't say it was fair or right. I'm just questioning whether or not such a policy rises to the level of being considered a threat.

Singling people out based on their gender identity and banning them from jobs is not a positive, affirming move. It increases the legitimacy of other attacks and slurs and lowers the barrier to further anti trans moves since it obviously has blessings from the very top.

There's a whole onslaught of anti trans legislation being pushed by bigoted legislators, everything from creepy bathroom bills to broader discrimination carveouts, to school access, to the denial of healthcare. The trans military ban was very much part of the wedge to promote and normalise those kind of attacks.
 
Obviously you don't get it. Your hate blinds you. I have never voted for anybody that campaigned on hatred of gays or other minorities.

The entire party, top to bottom is saturated with it and base upon the implicit and explicit understanding that certain people are worthy of being discriminated against or must I remind you of the history of dogwhistling inherent within GOP political strategy?

Your vote, even for a supposedly non bigoted candidate still helps and enables that party who are hell bent on fudging the weakest in society and you don't seem to get that.
 
We're already aware that trans soldiers are acceptable and viable,

We are not aware of this. "Transmarine found beaten to death outside bar in Quantico" Does that sound like an unlikely headline? Or "DoD expresses fear for transPoW in Mideast".
 
Sure man. This claim doesn't stretch credibility at all.

Oh.

Wait.

Yeah, it does.

Not really when you consider my family is a military family. Just about every male has served and a good number of the women in my family have served as well.

Just because you joined the military out of desperation doesn't mean that's why everybody joins. There are people who genuinely want to be there. I was one of them and I'd still be in if I didn't blow out my knee.
 
@rah and @CloudStrife I'm gonna step in the middle here.

For a long time it was a 'generally accepted truth' in my town that democrats would destroy the economic well being of the town and everyone in it. That "protection of our own community" was what drove voting patterns, and the possibility that the GOP represented harm to other communities was by default a secondary concern.

Rah, I think you don't have a comparable experience either way, so you have a very hard time grasping what it is like being the designated enemy of a major political party.

Cloud, I think you would do well to consider that in many places the things that are obvious to you are deep undercurrents, at most, and in some of those places there may be very obvious currents flowing the other way.
 
Because the MAGA hat stands for this guy still being in his cabinet. One of the only people still there from the beginning.

White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller railed against Republicans he saw as too weak on immigration and suggested Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients would one day replace white Americans, leaked emails to Breitbart News between 2015 and 2016 show.

https://www.newsweek.com/stephen-mi...-replace-existing-demographics-leaked-1482174


"Jeb [Bush] has mastered the art of using immigration rhetoric to sound 'moderate' while pushing the most extremist policies," Miller wrote, adding that Bush wanted to use "immigration to replace existing demographics."
 
Rah, I think you don't have a comparable experience either way, so you have a very hard time grasping what it is like being the designated enemy of a major political party.
I've been beaten, thrown in jail, and fired from my job for my looks. So I'm just going to have to disagree with that.
This was the main reason I've always marched for minority rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom