The world is officially upside down.

[SpeedyChix]

No need to trust social media, as noted there is the incidents detailed in the NYTimes.
Locally there was this very real one just outside of Lansing in DeWitt (one of the newer 'burbs in the area)
Updated: DeWitt Junior High students formed wall to block minorities | MLive.com
Another one in Royal Oak (that's included in the NYT).

Racists, haters, more have been unleashed

A couple from my morning reads today:
History Tells Us What May Happen Next With Brexit and Trump
Farewell, America - BillMoyers.com

[Dallas Tex]

Not trying to be tit-for-tat, but local news in Texas ran a story today of a boy in public school that got beat by a gang of other students when he revealed he voted for trump on the classroom's mock election. He's took a solid beating & is still on crutches. News that doesn't fit the preferred storyline won't make it to the national media.

[Loknor]

Daltex, the problem is the vulnerable state of those who were singled out by the Trump campaign. It's very worrisome to see them already targeted by the public, knowing how Trump judged them during the campaign.

There is a reason that David Duke had a very clear message for the world.

Everyone poohpoohing Trump's impact on racial relations should think long and hard about that message. Intended or not, the far right wing sees this as their finest hour.

[Corso]

Idiots on both sides of the issue:

Video: High School Girl Viciously Attacked For Supporting Donald Trump >> Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

[j44ke]

I think what a lot of these incidents prove is that kids listen to their parents and internalize a lot of the emotions parents vent in incautious moments. And they pay attention to politics and feel the energy of political rhetoric and act upon it in ways that might even horrify their parents.

Kids are sponges.

[colker]

Idiots on both sides of the issue:

Video: High School Girl Viciously Attacked For Supporting Donald Trump >> Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

It´s not right or left wing; it´s cowards.

[Saab2000]

It´s not right or left wing; it´s cowards.

I agree with this sentiment. Anyone who would perpetrate violence upon another person in a nation that calls itself 'free' should be kicked out. Freedom of speech, thought and expression are basic tenets of any free society. Intolerance is not tolerance and must be condemned.

Earlier in my life I hung with the non-conformist crowd and prided myself on my non-conformist views. Then I saw that the "open minded" non-conformists were themselves some of the most narrow minded people I knew. Today I don't identify with any political party or movement because I think they all seem to foster a sheep mentality.

We need to think for ourselves and not let others think for us. This includes political leaders, media institutions, pop culture figures, etc. We need to see the world and come to our own conclusions. The better informed we are, the better decisions we will make. Ignorance is never bliss.

[colker]

Earlier in my life I hung with the non-conformist crowd and prided myself on my non-conformist views. Then I saw that the "open minded" non-conformists were themselves some of the most narrow minded people I knew. Today I don't identify with any political party or movement because I think they all seem to foster a sheep mentality.

I ´ve had similar experiences.

[jclay]

Re: Blame the Neoliberals: Democrats' Toxic Ideology Paved the Way for Trump | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community

It's an excellent summary and should be required reading. What puzzles me, angers me if I'm honest, is how so many well meaning democrats and progressives (at least in the abstract), particularly those who became adults during our Viet Nam adventures (but not limited to them) failed to figure that out during the last eight years. In my less capable but fundamentally similar missives I felt like I was trying to convince the wind. Hopefully everybody who voted for Hillary instead of Bernie has had the lesson embossed somewhere in their brain.

Sorry if that comes off as offensive or presumptions; I'm just not in the mood for pulling punches.

Like the home plate umpire said, "I just calls'em as I sees'um.

[woodworker]

Trump presents the focal point for the intersection of race and politics. He's played on the worst fears of disenfranchised or fearful white Americans and galvanized them into a movement. From my vantage point, this represents a huge step backwards for the country.

As to an earlier point, I think it's a diversion in the context of this thread to talk about the left stereotyping the right, and about political correctness, notwithstanding that the points may have some validity. The reason I say this is that one doesn't need to use those devices to infer that Trump is racist and to criticize his supporters in light of those statements. One only has to listen to what he's actually said, and, equally important, what he's done.

Context is critical. Take the "Black Lives Matter" movement and the conservative response to it: "All Lives Matter." The latter, "All Lives Matter," was brought out as a counter to "Black Lives Matter." In some other context, it might have been seen as a movement to ensure that there's better relations in all communities between the police and the people that they serve. However, as a response to the "Black Lives Matter" movement, I personally interpret it as telling blacks to stop whining. Its proponents have also implied, unfairly, that blacks are racist in focusing attention solely on their own problems. Thus, it wasn't the content of the message, it was the context or timing of it, and how it was used. It is not a movement or cause but rather an instrument for blunting one.

If, holding my bag of groceries, I walk past a homeless person looking for food, and respond to his request by saying, "there are lots of people in the world who need food," that has a different meaning than if I say this while starting a food bank. In the context of a discussion concerning Trump and racism, talking about the left stereotyping the right or bringing up political correctness seems like offering an excuse for Trump's faults. Of course, I could be misinterpreting the point (wouldn't be the first time), but, by context, that seems to be the typical purpose of those arguments.

[Todd Amunrud]

I think as we see him build his cabinet, we'll get a sense for his vision of America and how it matches the campaign rhetoric. So far he's not deviating from his plan. I don't see any consensus building "across the isle" with this list:

PRESIDENT-ELECT DONALD J. TRUMP ANNOUNCES NEW IMPLEMENTATION PHASE OF PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION TEAM

Jeff Sessions - Wikipedia

I don't have a good memory of President Obama working "across the isle" early on either, but I could be wrong.

[Dallas Tex]

I think as we see him build his cabinet, we'll get a sense for his vision of America and how it matches the campaign rhetoric. So far he's not deviating from his plan. I don't see any consensus building "across the isle" with this list:

PRESIDENT-ELECT DONALD J. TRUMP ANNOUNCES NEW IMPLEMENTATION PHASE OF PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION TEAM

Jeff Sessions - Wikipedia

I don't have a good memory of President Obama working "across the isle" early on either, but I could be wrong.

I think his choice of Peter Thiel is a positive indicator.

[murphy]

Re: Blame the Neoliberals: Democrats' Toxic Ideology Paved the Way for Trump | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community

It's an excellent summary and should be required reading. What puzzles me, angers me if I'm honest, is how so many well meaning democrats and progressives (at least in the abstract), particularly those who became adults during our Viet Nam adventures (but not limited to them) failed to figure that out during the last eight years. In my less capable but fundamentally similar missives I felt like I was trying to convince the wind. Hopefully everybody who voted for Hillary instead of Bernie has had the lesson embossed somewhere in their brain.

Sorry if that comes off as offensive or presumptions; I'm just not in the mood for pulling punches.

Like the home plate umpire said, "I just calls'em as I sees'um.

While that article has some points especially around big business and Bernie Sanders, I cannot help but think that it takes two to tango so to speak. I don't believe you can just blame the democrats for Donald Trump. Look at the republican party. For years they have been party of tax cuts which favor the rich and corporations but do not help the low man on the totem at all. This has created a huge divide in the party between what I will call the normal, average republican that you and I know, and the leadership. Trump sidestepped the leadership and in some cases was extremely antagonistic towards them while also courting the average republican. We saw how this paid off for him in the election. He didn't have many big names truly supporting him, and actually saw many in leadership shy away. Instead of top-down, he came from the bottom up.

tl;dr: The republican leadership practically molded this role for Trump and are just as much if not more to blame.

[Cookietruck]

surprised to see only three of his children in there

also i thought this was interesting, not really surprising.
Trump Campaigned Against Lobbyists. Now They’re on His Transition Team.

i'm also curious how the states rights will play out with the recreation marijuana stuff. i can't see Pence, Christie or Giuliani being very lenient on federal enforcement though Trump has said it's a state issue...

[Loknor]

Idiots on both sides of the issue:

Video: High School Girl Viciously Attacked For Supporting Donald Trump >> Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Corso, do you really bring up a site where the host reports stories that Obama smells of Sulphur? Also, I'm a bit grasping at the notion how you compare the impact of David Duke with bullying at a high school.

Two wrongs do not make one right and I truly assume you do not think support by the KKK is something to handwave just by this.

[Will Neide]

Trump presents the focal point for the intersection of race and politics. He's played on the worst fears of disenfranchised or fearful white Americans and galvanized them into a movement. From my vantage point, this represents a huge step backwards for the country.As to an earlier point, I think it's a diversion in the context of this thread to talk about the left stereotyping the right, and about political correctness, notwithstanding that the points may have some validity. The reason I say this is that one doesn't need to use those devices to infer that Trump is racist and to criticize his supporters in light of those statements. One only has to listen to what he's actually said, and, equally important, what he's done.

Context is critical. Take the "Black Lives Matter" movement and the conservative response to it: "All Lives Matter." The latter, "All Lives Matter," was brought out as a counter to "Black Lives Matter." In some other context, it might have been seen as a movement to ensure that there's better relations in all communities between the police and the people that they serve. However, as a response to the "Black Lives Matter" movement, I personally interpret it as telling blacks to stop whining. Its proponents have also implied, unfairly, that blacks are racist in focusing attention solely on their own problems. Thus, it wasn't the content of the message, it was the context or timing of it, and how it was used. It is not a movement or cause but rather an instrument for blunting one.

If, holding my bag of groceries, I walk past a homeless person looking for food, and respond to his request by saying, "there are lots of people in the world who need food," that has a different meaning than if I say this while starting a food bank. In the context of a discussion concerning Trump and racism, talking about the left stereotyping the right or bringing up political correctness seems like offering an excuse for Trump's faults. Of course, I could be misinterpreting the point (wouldn't be the first time), but, by context, that seems to be the typical purpose of those arguments.

I'm not entirely sure I agree, or at least I'm not sure I agree that the extent of it is as hyped as it's been made out to be. I think there was an element of doom and gloom that the media grabbed onto and blew up into a hyperbolic issue. There seemed to be a confidence, or patting on the back, by the media as Clinton maintained her lead in poll #'s. Both sides played the fear game "bigley" at the end. Clinton repeatedly promoted the fears of what a Trump America could look like. Her lies, hypocrisy and cronyism did her in. Democrats bailed on her, republicans hated her, independents don't trust her. Women don't like her, and the black vote never fully warmed up to her. Dave Chappelle had some interesting comments on her. Donald was an ass.....is an ass, but she lost this on her own.

[Corso]

Corso, do you really bring up a site where the host reports stories that Obama smells of Sulphur? Also, I'm a bit grasping at the notion how you compare the impact of David Duke with bullying at a high school.

Two wrongs do not make one right and I truly assume you do not think support by the KKK is something to handwave just by this.

I was referring to the story of Trump supporters being victimized.

It’s not my website. In fact, I think today is the first time I went there, as a result of looking for that story (I heard about on the radio).

Do I really have to say I think the KKK and Duke are cowardly idiots? Consider it done. For the record.

Others linked to the New York Times. Not exactly a publication that positions itself as Switzerland.

Begs the question: in this internet age, and the big 3 news networks listing heavily to the left, who exactly can you trust?

I usually go to foreign news sources, (yes, its odd to say) as they tend to be more neutral about American issues. BBC for one.

[Bob Ross]

Take the "Black Lives Matter" movement and the conservative response to it: "All Lives Matter." The latter, "All Lives Matter," was brought out as a counter to "Black Lives Matter." In some other context, it might have been seen as a movement to ensure that there's better relations in all communities between the police and the people that they serve. However, as a response to the "Black Lives Matter" movement, I personally interpret it as telling blacks to stop whining. Its proponents have also implied, unfairly, that blacks are racist in focusing attention solely on their own problems. Thus, it wasn't the content of the message, it was the context or timing of it, and how it was used. It is not a movement or cause but rather an instrument for blunting one.

+1. It always struck me that the only way "All Lives Matter" could even be construed to be a remotely appropriate response [sic] to "Black Lives Matter" is if you were misguidedly inferring that the BLM slogan meant "Black Lives Matter More Than Others"

Or iow, this:
20160707_allhousesredux.png

[murphy]

Others linked to the New York Times. Not exactly a publication that positions itself as Switzerland.

There is a huge gulf of a difference between the Times and infowars. The Times, while having a left-leaning bias, is a newspaper of note with many Pulitzer prizes to its name, whereas infowars is more the work of someone who presents conspiracy theories as real stories.

[Will Neide]

+1. It always struck me that the only way "All Lives Matter" could even be construed to be a remotely appropriate response [sic] to "Black Lives Matter" is if you were misguidedly inferring that the BLM slogan meant "Black Lives Matter More Than Others"

Or iow, this:
20160707_allhousesredux.png

It's a branding issue. Change it to "Black Lives Matter Too" and watch the support swell. Everytime someone has to clarify the message at length, you've lost the audience.