Taking USA how far back is far back enough for Trump, MAGA?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 23
  • Views: 353
  • Politics 

nycfan

Curator/Moderator
ZZL Supporter
Messages
8,634


1927?

[Trump doesn’t actually remember this, either, since he wasn’t born yet and Limbergh flew to Paris but not back to NY (he took a ship back and got his hero’s welcome).

Separately, it is not unreasonable to wonder if the weird Lindbergh non sequitur is a dog whistle to white supremacists.]
 


1700s?

Laugh but the Dobbs decision overturning Roe cited Sir Matthew Hale, a 17th century witch finder, so that gets us back to the 1670s …
 
It actually goes back to who ever invented monotheism. Before that, no one was quite sure whose god was the strongest so almost all got some basic respect. After this idea took hold, not only was one God the only god but wars were for the survival of both the people, who were obviously lesser people, and their false god.

Remember Saul lost the throne of Israel because he was too soft to unbelievers.

Only got worse when predestination became a thing.
 


1927?

[Trump doesn’t actually remember this, either, since he wasn’t born yet and Limbergh flew to Paris but not back to NY (he took a ship back and got his hero’s welcome).

Separately, it is not unreasonable to wonder if the weird Lindbergh non sequitur is a dog whistle to white supremacists.]

There’s not much dog whistle in talking about Lindbergh in 2024. That’s straight out Nazi fetishizim.
 


1927?

[Trump doesn’t actually remember this, either, since he wasn’t born yet and Limbergh flew to Paris but not back to NY (he took a ship back and got his hero’s welcome).

Separately, it is not unreasonable to wonder if the weird Lindbergh non sequitur is a dog whistle to white supremacists.]

I suppose it could be a dog whislte, but I doubt 2% of the MAGA morons know the history of Lindbergh, the America First movement (and all the other then existing fascist groups) and the push in pre- WWII by certain congressmen and business people to support Hitler.
 
There’s not much dog whistle in talking about Lindbergh in 2024. That’s straight out Nazi fetishizim.
This.

There’s zero reason to mention Lindbergh, if not to allude to his flirtations with Nazism.

I suppose it could be a dog whislte, but I doubt 2% of the MAGA morons know the history of Lindbergh, the America First movement (and all the other then existing fascist groups) and the push in pre- WWII by certain congressmen and business people to support Hitler.
it seems a pretty obscure reference to make, regardless. I doubt 90% of MAGA people even know who Lindbergh is, and of the 10% who do, many will know of his political ambitions and leanings.
 
Just the maunderings of an old man going senile. His has an angry edge because he's an angry man.
 
My best guess would be that he’s recently learned about or been in a discussion of Lindbergh and his landing in NY.

If he starts discussing something or someone old out of the blue for the first time, it’s usually because he’s either just learned it (or been reminded of it after forgetting it).

The question then becomes why he’d be discussing Lindbergh, but I’m not sure we can know that.
 
My best guess would be that he’s recently learned about or been in a discussion of Lindbergh and his landing in NY.

If he starts discussing something or someone old out of the blue for the first time, it’s usually because he’s either just learned it (or been reminded of it after forgetting it).

The question then becomes why he’d be discussing Lindbergh, but I’m not sure we can know that.
FTR, Lindbergh landed his transcontinental flight in Paris, not NY. He didn’t do a return flight to NY (he and is plane were returned on the USS Memphis).
 
JD Vance wants to go back to Blue Laws to bore people into church attendance, apparently.


They know church attendance is steadily declining, even in most Evangelical churches, and they're panicking. So they're going to try and find ways to force people to adopt their version of Christianity, either by removing the separation of church and state and forcing Evangelical Christianity into public schools, as the wacko Oklahoma Public Schools Superintendent is doing, or they'll pass Blue Laws to close everything but churches on Sundays, or do whatever it takes. I think it will backfire on them, as no one likes to be coerced into anything, but they seem hellbent on trying.
 
Flashback 2016:


America First, for Charles Lindbergh and Donald Trump​


“… In 1940, Lindbergh, who had by then returned to the U.S., was recruited to speak on behalf of America First, an antiwar group founded by several Yale students (including Gerald Ford, the future President, and Potter Stewart, the future Supreme Court Justice) who saw the Second World War as an awful consequence of the First—and who were determined to avoid another disastrous war.

… On September 11, 1941, Lindbergh gave a speech to a huge crowd in Des Moines, in which he described the agitators for the U.S. to enter the war. There were three groups: the British, the government, and “the Jewish race.” “Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government,” he told the audience.

… Anti-Semitism was prevalent in Lindberg’s time; his attitudes were not fringe. He had not made a secret of his interest in eugenics, nor his racial attitudes, which today seem reprehensible. But with that 1941 speech he seemed to cross a line. He was strongly and swiftly condemned for his anti-Semitic and divisive words—not only by interventionists who were opposed to America First but by those who had lionized him. The Des Moines Register called his speech “so intemperate, so unfair, so dangerous in its implications that it cannot but turn many spadefuls in the digging of the grave of his influence in this country.” The Hearst papers, which were generally sympathetic to the non-interventionists—and open about their hatred of Franklin Roosevelt—condemned Lindbergh, calling his speech “un-American.” His home town took his name off its water tower.


A few days ago, the Times interviewed Trump again, and Sanger returned to the phrase. “Think about its historical roots,” Sanger said.

“To me, America First is a brand-new modern term. I never related it to the past,” Trump said.

People had pointed out that it was, as Trump put it, “a historical term,” but he denied the resonance.

He might as well have said, as his campaign at first had about Melania Trump’s plagiarized speech, that “America First” used “common words.”

It may be that he really doesn’t care that some people hear disturbing echoes. He may not have thought a thing when the Anti-Defamation League asked him to stop using the phrase, in March, and redirected fifty-six thousand dollars in donations from the Trump family to anti-bullying and anti-bias causes. …”

——/

Point being, Trump has been made aware of the historical America First movement and Lindbergh’s involvement since at least 2016 (when he could have been feigning ignorance or genuinely ignorant, but was flatly told about the issue), so I don’t think it is reasonable to give him the benefit of the doubt about the implications, TBH.
 
Lindbergh was the greatest celebrity of his era.

Trump likely regards being mentioned with Lindbergh in any way as a great compliment.
 
FTR, Lindbergh landed his transcontinental flight in Paris, not NY. He didn’t do a return flight to NY (he and is plane were returned on the USS Memphis).
Well, poop. I’ll admit to not being familiar with much of the details of Lindbergh’s story other than the broad strokes.
 
Flashback 2016:


America First, for Charles Lindbergh and Donald Trump​


“… In 1940, Lindbergh, who had by then returned to the U.S., was recruited to speak on behalf of America First, an antiwar group founded by several Yale students (including Gerald Ford, the future President, and Potter Stewart, the future Supreme Court Justice) who saw the Second World War as an awful consequence of the First—and who were determined to avoid another disastrous war.

… On September 11, 1941, Lindbergh gave a speech to a huge crowd in Des Moines, in which he described the agitators for the U.S. to enter the war. There were three groups: the British, the government, and “the Jewish race.” “Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government,” he told the audience.

… Anti-Semitism was prevalent in Lindberg’s time; his attitudes were not fringe. He had not made a secret of his interest in eugenics, nor his racial attitudes, which today seem reprehensible. But with that 1941 speech he seemed to cross a line. He was strongly and swiftly condemned for his anti-Semitic and divisive words—not only by interventionists who were opposed to America First but by those who had lionized him. The Des Moines Register called his speech “so intemperate, so unfair, so dangerous in its implications that it cannot but turn many spadefuls in the digging of the grave of his influence in this country.” The Hearst papers, which were generally sympathetic to the non-interventionists—and open about their hatred of Franklin Roosevelt—condemned Lindbergh, calling his speech “un-American.” His home town took his name off its water tower.


A few days ago, the Times interviewed Trump again, and Sanger returned to the phrase. “Think about its historical roots,” Sanger said.

“To me, America First is a brand-new modern term. I never related it to the past,” Trump said.

People had pointed out that it was, as Trump put it, “a historical term,” but he denied the resonance.

He might as well have said, as his campaign at first had about Melania Trump’s plagiarized speech, that “America First” used “common words.”

It may be that he really doesn’t care that some people hear disturbing echoes. He may not have thought a thing when the Anti-Defamation League asked him to stop using the phrase, in March, and redirected fifty-six thousand dollars in donations from the Trump family to anti-bullying and anti-bias causes. …”

——/

Point being, Trump has been made aware of the historical America First movement and Lindbergh’s involvement since at least 2016 (when he could have been feigning ignorance or genuinely ignorant, but was flatly told about the issue), so I don’t think it is reasonable to give him the benefit of the doubt about the implications, TBH.
You think Trump has the attention span to remember conversations from two days ago, much less eight years ago? His brain is mush. He doesn’t know history and he doesn’t care. There is no master plan behind his actions.
 
Back
Top