So, without doubt this "I had to remind him he was black" bit is racist (and probably not the persuasive argument she thinks it is). Everyone seems to realize that, to judge from the reception it's getting online.
How to account for her closing argument, that she 'might be willing to seal the deal in more ways than one' if he changes his vote, though? No commentary I've seen addresses what is really a vicious argument in several ways:
1) It assumes his moral judgment about how to vote is for sale, and not even for cash, but for a mere night's pleasure;
2) It proposes that her sexuality is for sale, and not even for cash, but for one vote out of tens of millions in a state that is all but certain not to be swung by his vote nor even his influence;
3) It suggests that his morality is therefore cheaply bought;
4) ...and that her sexuality likewise.
It is not extraordinary that someone might make a proposal like this, but it is extraordinary that they would do so in public -- without shame -- and be called on it by no one whatsoever as far as I can tell. This seems to be quite in alignment with our self-declared elite's mores on sexuality.
How do we deal with this?
7 comments:
Sounds to me like Ol' Chelsea forgot to check her intersectionality of white and liberal and woman privilege before she, umm, opened her mouth.
It's clear that 50cent is well shut of her; she plainly wants to continue as his slave owner, dictating to him as she is what she will permit him to do and require him not to do. I have to wonder whether she can spell "plantation."
She's not the first privileged white woman liberal to offer gratuities for satisfactory votes, though. Madonna made the same offer, in much plainer terms, for everyone (yes, all of them) who would present her with proof of their votes for Hillary Clinton.
How do we deal with this? Reelect Trump in resounding terms, retake the House, expand the majority in the Senate, and then simply ignore these racist prostitutes. Exploding heads will take care of much of the rest.
Eric Hines
Her price is at least higher. She thinks he is influential and carries part-shares of thousands of votes. She likely thinks herself generous.
The solution doesn't include ignoring them. The ultimate solution is to reduce the attractiveness of being in control of the functions of government to a level equal to the amount of corruption we can stand.
Apparently she’s offering cash too, which is illegal should a non-celebrity do it.
https://twitter.com/jeffreycortese/status/1320385945078689793?s=21
Laws, though, are apparently only for the little people.
https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1320426001118023680?s=20
Laws, though, are apparently only for the little people.
There's a distance limit, though, outside which it's legal to campaign. It's a distance easily overcome by microphones and loudspeakers, since that distance was set at times predating such devices.
She's violating the spirit, if maybe not the letter of the law. But bending laws are what Harris has done all her life, not least during her time as a San Francisco prosecutor.
Eric Hines
Grim, I am already dealing with it, no worries.
Post a Comment