White Trash In The White’s House

If anyone ever asks me, on some future date, why I refuse to call Tr-mp “president,” why I refuse to acknowledge his legitimacy and fitness for the office, why I consider him to have, perhaps permanently, cratered the dignity of the presidency, and why I consider him to represent the worst of America, I will simply point to this picture of him and Ted Nugent:


Or perhaps I’ll point to this one:

Image result for sarah palin and ted nugent flip off picture of hillary clinton

These are pictures of classless people. And they spent four hours in the White’s House with an even more classless Tr-mp, talking about, according to Ted Nugent, “pretty girls.”

Three years ago, Larry Womack of The Huffington Post wrote this about Nugent:

In fact, in the case of Nugent, we have even come to see alleged child sexual abuse as some sort of eccentricity or harmless vice. Can you imagine anyone else who had been accused of having sex with a 12-year-old, written a song about raping a 13-year-old and adopted a 17-year-old so that he could have sex with her going on to campaign alongside all the most conservative “family values” candidates? […]

Would governors and congressmen hit the campaign trail with that guy? Would they send their children to his “Kamp for Kids” — and professional snipers? What would they say about almost any other man? They wouldn’t call him a creep or a redneck. They’d call him a pedophile.

Instead, Nugent is embraced as some sort of down-home firebrand. He’s a redneck rock star; sex with kids is just part of the package! Sarah Palin says that if a candidate “is good enough for Ted Nugent, he is good enough for me!” Congressmen invite him to the State of the Union.

Besides all that, we have the gun-worshipping, warmongering Nugent’s admission in 1977 that he had an elaborate plan to dodge the Vietnam War draft:

Then two weeks before, I stopped eating any food with nutritional value. I just had chips, Pepsi, beer — stuff I never touched– buttered poop, little jars of Polish sausages, and I’d drink the syrup. I was this side of death. Then a week before, I stopped going to the bathroom. I did it in my pants. Poop, piss, the whole shot. My pants got crusted up.

I don’t have to rehearse all the stupid, nasty, racist, bigoted things that crusty pants Ted Nugent has said, but here are a few of them:

“If Barack Obama becomes the next president in November, again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year. Why are you laughing? Do you think that’s funny? That’s not funny at all. I’m serious as a heart attack.”

“I have obviously failed to galvanize and prod, if not shame enough Americans to be ever vigilant not to let a Chicago communist-raised, communist-educated, communist-nurtured subhuman mongrel like the ACORN community organizer gangster Barack Hussein Obama to weasel his way into the top office of authority in the United States of America.”

“I was in Chicago last week. I was in Chicago and said, “Hey, Obama you might want to suck on one of these you punk.” Obama, he’s a piece of shit, and I told him to suck on my machine gun. Let’s hear it for him. And then I was in New York. I said, “Hey, Hillary, you might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch. Since I’m in California, how about Barbara Boxer, she might want to suck on my machine gun. And Dianne Feinstein, ride one of these you worthless whore. Any questions?”

Those are the words of a man whom Sarah Palin—a classless quitter cynically brought into American politics by a tainted John McCain, thereby helping pave the way for Tr-mpism—embraces and celebrates. Those are the words of a man with whom she proudly stood in the White’s House, in front of a portrait of the former First Lady—the same one Nugent called a “worthless bitch” and suggested she “ride” on his “machine gun”—and mocked Hillary Clinton. And Palin stood there and posed with Ted Nugent in front of that portrait with the permission of Donald Tr-mp, who might have been the one Nugent was referring to when he told the New York Times that someone asked the three of them to “extend their middle fingers beneath the portrait.”

The term “white trash” goes back a long way in American history. It has had a lot of meanings over time. Certainly, somewhere in the extended pedigree of that word Donald Tr-mp and his vulgar, boorish, clownish friends can be found. Alongside the misogyny, the racism, the xenophobia, and general bigotry of these people, there is the simple fact that they are unrefined, unpolished, unsophisticated, ill-bred schmucks who, by their very presence, disgrace what is fast becoming the trashiest house in America’s neighborhood.

Next Post


  1. What an obvious finger in the liberal eye. Tr;mp is shameless. I wonder if any Nugent quotes will show up on the Fox Network? I have noticed that Fox, the favorite of conservatives everywhere, has the most tawdry, bawdy (Two and A Half Men), and low-class lineups of the big four. It is always on at our local YMCA, but not MSNBC – the reason given is that “the most popular channels” are selected. My opinion of my own species continues to slip these days.


    • Fox is on not just at the YMCAs (both of them), but in just about every medical facility in town. I, of course, usually object to it, and sometimes change the channel. I think sometimes that’s why you see so many of those “please don’t change the channel” notes pasted on so many TVs these days! I have noticed, though, in my travels, that businesses are a little more sensitive to what is on their public TVs. I don’t encounter Fox as much as I used to and I suppose Tr-mp has had a lot to do with that.


  2. ansonburlingame

     /  April 21, 2017


    I read with both interest and understanding of your point of view. It was your end point with which I disagree. And I write as an “honest” independent. Right now I would like nothing better to find a Dem whom I could support. just like I would like to find a Republican I could support. I don’t know exactly when it happened, say around 2010 perhaps, when I decided to not register as a Republican and to in fact try to find a way to ignore party platforms and find a man or woman I could trust to lead our country, our State or our nation. I have yet to find one and thus have to put up with whatever happens. I even now use write-in candidates when I vote locally or nationally just to make a point, to myself I suppose.

    You wrote at some length but ultimately came down on the side of Warren, above. You did not even try to write more precisely what you wanted from the leader of Dems other than someone to put single-payer (government payer?) HC in place. Thanks for your frankness but I have always known that was your (and Jim’s) goal in terms of HC politics. You will “support” ACA but not really, right, not as the ultimate goal. But I digress.

    I offer my view of four very prominent Dems, Hillary, Obama, Warren and Sanders. List those folks with the most “rightish” (Hillary) to the really LEFTIST (socialist if I may use the term). Hillary was (is) far more pragmatic than the other three just as was (is) her husband. If she could have untethered herself from the left in her party she would have been a left of center president but remaining somewhat mainstream as well. Said another way, she would have been farther right that Obama if she really had her way. Obama was far to close to the far left for my tastes and he stayed there for 8 years. Result was stalemate, nationally, and outrage from the likes of Sanders for sure and more quietly Warren.

    I have to go back a long way to provide an example of Dem leadership that I might well accept and even support today. Truman of course and JFK comes to mind. Senator Nunn of Georgia, current President of OU, former senator Boren, Pat Moynihan of NY and maybe even Congressman L. Mendel Rivers of SC. Sure there are more but one characteristic of all of them would be “blue dog democrat”, something that is almost non-existent today. They had financial sense, understood the concept of deterrence and strategic resolve, and worked hard to advance the causes of those truly in need when it was financially possible to do so.

    If forced to choose a current Dem I would consider Chuck Schumer (spl?) today. He knows how to exercise political power to reach a conclusion, a compromise, at least he MIGHT be able to do so in more “normal times”.

    All of them understood the LIMITS of American politics and never tried to push the whole country too far, too fast. Progressivism by gradualism might be a sound bite phrase that would be applicable to all of such men (and now women). The last Dem leader that TRIED to move in such a fashion was Bill Clinton, whom I would support today as a presidential candidate if possible, at least against the likes of most the GOP would put up against him today.

    I will go out on a limb, mildly perhaps, and suggest we are observing the slow demise of two party dominance in American politics today. You will be a loyal Dem “forever” now perhaps but I abandoned the single party dictates of the GOP years ago. Sure I became a “conservative independent” but nevertheless an independent willing to listen to your side, but rarely support choices like Warren, OR Sanders, OR Obama, etc.

    You seemed to indicate some mild trepidation by writing the above. I suspect you felt that way because you did not join the fire breathing part of Dems (yes, General, I mean you and yours) and have yet to become a full throated supporter of Sanders. That certainly would seem to be the popular path for most Dems to take today. But your innate “Americanism”, somewhere inside I hope, knows full well that Bernie’s approach will only generate more and more “deplorables” getting in his and your face.

    If Dems continue to push too far left, well “we” got Trump today because you did exactly that and even began to lose part of the “Blue Wall” in doing so, narrowly, but still a loss for sure. Sure you can get back that “wall” but going ever farther to the left is not the right path is my honest, not purely political, belief.

    Finally, I note some “thinking” above that suggests LEFTIST independents (Bernie supporters that do not at all like Dems because they are not far enough to the left (socialist) for their radical tastes) will win the day for Dems in the coming few years. Against the likes of Trump you just might do so. But there are quite a few “conservative independents” all over the country as well and if you and the Democratic party want to regain and HOLD political power you better be listening to those on or slighty to the right of the centerline of politics in America today. Failure to do so will result in what we have now, two “deplorable camps” fighting tooth and nail against the other side and pleading with me and others, true independents to jump on THEIR train.

    Not trying to argue with you here, Duane. I am simply trying to explain that if you want MY support, the above briefly explains what I would want. That now allows all the fire breathers to tell me to go to …… as NO ONE wants my support!! (unless I go crazy and support single payer HC for starters and agree that NK should be allowed to gain nuclear weapons because it is too HARD (and dangerous) to disallow such things to them!!!)



    • Anson,

      I think I have made it clear that American politics does not easily lend itself to radical transformation and, thus, I don’t think Bernie Sanders or, for that matter, Elizabeth Warren, will revolutionize the country overnight, no matter how much we all want to throw Tr-mp out on his ass. Thus, my advocacy for incrementalism. As I said earlier, build on the progress we have made toward the goal of a single-payer system sometime in the future.

      But there is something else I want to correct. You suggested here that I would support North Korea getting nuclear weapons “because it is too HARD (and dangerous) to disallow such things to them!!!).” I have never even remotely suggested such a thing. You know why? Because I don’t believe such a thing. A nuclear-armed North Korea, with intercontinental ballistic missiles, is unacceptable. As I said before, we can exist, at least for now, with a nuclear-armed Russia because we can assume there are rational actors on the other side who understand reality. We can’t do that with the cultic boy-man who runs that shithole on the peninsula. Thus, we can’t allow him to achieve what he says, and what it appears is true, is his goal.

      The question becomes how close is he and how much time do we have before we have to take military action? My point was, and remains, that diplomacy is the only safe way out of this situation, so long as we have the time. Tough talk is certainly a crude form of diplomacy, but it is stupid when it is directed at someone who is mentally unstable. I object to the stupid tough talk and support the efforts to get the Chinese involved. We’ve tried doing that for years and now it might have a chance, and only a chance, to work because of the progress the North Koreans have obviously made over the last couple of decades. Even the Chinese can see the window closing and seem, at least on the surface, willing to take stronger steps. You can attribute their seeming willingness to get more involved on Tr-mp’s persona, his orange hair, or his gold-plated shitters. I don’t really care. But it really has to do with the changing dynamics in North Korea and how their progress toward nuclearization is jeopardizing the stability in the region that the Chinese need.




  3. Anson, I can empathize with some of what you’re saying. I submit that you may have reached a reasonable conclusion for the incorrect reason.

    I think that the mistake Democrats have made is the same mistake that Republicans have made: both parties want to win in order to hold the power they have, and gain more. Because of who I am and the way I think, the Democrats are more in alignment with my thoughts, and that is a recent development, relatively speaking. I was not in favor of Bill Clinton and did not vote for him either time. It took the stunning incompetence and Neo-Conservative stance of the “W” years, coupled with the almost criminal (if not actually criminal) way he won the presidency to change my mind about which party I favor.

    I think that the winning behavior for Trump was his apparent advocacy of the “forgotten” sector of the middle class, and Hillary’s unexplainable unability to do the same. Of course, Trump’s actions since becoming President have demonstrated that he meant none of that; in fact, doesn’t even understand the dynamics of jobs, regulations, economics, and the middle class. He is a classic neophyte, in every sense, at governing. So much for the idea that a business-person would be good at governing. I think you would agree, Anson, that a leader can lead any kind of organization, and that Trump is NOT a leader, he is a boss, and not a very enlightened one at that.

    I think Republicans are tolerating Trump at the moment, because they don’t want to lose power, much less reliquish power to the opposition. There could come a time when what they get is not worth what they’re paying, but they will not understand that until the 2018 elections, I think (if then).

    What I think both parties need is a leader; someone who clearly advocates for the people of this country, not for the leader, him or her self. That leader could be on the left or right of center; I think there is room for governing on both sides of the spectrum – not on the extremities, but toward the middle. At this time, I don’t see either party moving in that direction, nor do I see a leader developing, but then, that usually happens in the moment, the moment when a situation arises and the new leader steps in with the right mix of skills and philosophy.

    I think that single payer health care is inevitable; too many other 1st world countries are doing that successfully for the USA to think we will never do that. I think that adopting a softer stance about lifestyles you yourself do not hold or even agree with (LGBT, marijuana, not getting married while having children, sane gun control that both sides can live with, etc.) is in our immediate future. Most people do not like conflict, are not adept at it, want to avoid it, and this will drive us to accept, rather than denigrate.

    To me, the ideal situation would be for both parties to have leaders that could engage in reasonable debate/discussions about the relative merits of both points of view, and let the people decide which they want. The changing demographics of this country are going to drive us to this set of conditions, IF we can keep the voting laws egalitarian and reasonable.

    You may think that I am a wild-eyed optimist based on the above. I submit that the human race has been moving in this direction for millenia, and we will continue to do so if we can avoid killing ourselves off through war or destruction of our environment.


  4. Kevin Beck

     /  April 21, 2017

    Ted Nugent and Co were sore losers and are proving to be even worse at winning. I no longer participate with social media due to the low class cesspool it has became, and they are lead by this crew.
    AB, you are out of luck if you think the Dems are not going to go hard left. It proved politically successful, although shamelessly, by the Tea Party. We will be lead by the extremes of both parties now with little getting accomplished.

    Kevin Beck


  5. ansonburlingame

     /  April 22, 2017

    Michael and Kevin (and Duane also and Jim if you are lurking),

    First, I have a new, touch screen computer that is driving me nuts. My above comment was obviously intended for the the previous blog discussing the future for the Dem party. How it arrived as a comment to this posting is beyond me as my screen flies around all over the place right now. Technology is a pain!!! It is like my mother who refused to use a dial phone and insisted on still calling the operator to make her phone calls!!!

    I continue to understand and agree in many cases with your comments herein, Michael. We both seem to want to see the two major parties return closer to the center of traditional American politics. You may recall my frequent comments about current, “dumb bell politics”. It is not a comment on the intelligence of politics, but rather the polarization of same. I can’t have a good debate with either side for now as the sentiments on both sides is either radical left or Tea Party, radical right or alt-right I suppose. (Incidentally, I voted for Ross P. in 1992)

    Simply because of my marriage over 17 years ago, I entered into an “OU family” A step-grandaughter is now a 5th generation Sooner. So for most or all of those years I have observed that University up close to some degree. I cannot imagine a better university president than David Boren. He was a great Dem senator during the Vietnam years as well thought I did not pay much attention to politics at that time. Too busy being a “baby killer” of sorts!! Sam Nunn, etc. were the same.

    I used a phrase above that I don’t recall ever seeing before. I support, believe it or not, progressivism through gradualism in many cases. You can check my spelling on the first term but hope you understand what I mean. Race relations NEEDS to improve, but it cannot move forward using ………. Remember 1968. What did all that accomplish other than extreme division and a full scale and destructive (politically and physically) riot against mainstream Dems? Duane hinted at that in his recent comment following 16 back and forth comments from two socialists in the previous blog.

    Much more specifically, my position on single-payer HC is driven by two factors. First, based on my own experience in a single-payer system, military medicine for me and my family for 23 years, is quality of care (to include long wait times). I don’t remember how many times while living in Hawaii with two young sons (ages 3-6 or so) that Sally and I had to wait for 4-5 hours to get antibiotics for one or both kids for a sore throat. We endured the inconvience but…….

    And we were a very healthy, young family by most measures and did not need any kind of specialty care. Had my kids or wife had serious medical issues needing specialists, well I cringe to think about the quality of care we would have received. If I had such serious medical problems I would have been discharged from active duty and thrown into the good hands of VA! OMG!

    Second is the cost of single-payer. Kevin says it is inevitable and may be correct. But to provide such “free” HC to all Americans (citizens only I would hope) will require a restructuring of our system of taxes that will outrage most Americans. The old “we need it and don’t care how much it costs” approach will blow up in somebody’s face with a nuclear-like detonation when checks have to be written.

    Sanders failed miserably, as Duane points out, in describing the level of taxation (federal) that will take place in order to pay for “free” HC, college education, and that progressive list goes on forever. All of the country screams for HC that does not cost as much as it does today. One half however pays for what we have. The other half the country either does not have a personal checkbook and lives with it being unbalanced if they have one and the other half keeps track of their money and lives within their means until they are asked to pay more taxes!! How do you settle that division, just on HC.

    I have written before that MY HC is very cheap, about $2400 total, each year for me and my wife (and my ex-wife as well!!). I would love for every American to have such HC costs, but like every American I cringe to go into a single-payers system equivalent to our VA today, in terms of quality of care. I also have not a clue how to pay for a single-payer system today (Medicare for all plus all with TriCare for Life) even if we raised taxes to post WWII levels today.

    Read the exchanges (17 of them thus far and I am going to add an 18th) on the previous blog. It is a very good debate between two socialist and Duane’s position is to the right of both of them, to some degree. It is a great discussion as well with smart men arguing positions on degrees of socialism. I of course am “off the charts” to the right of all of them but willingly listen to them because such issues will be on the table in the coming years.

    By the way, when I write about socialism I mean “European style socialism” as we see today in the world. Bernie would be a great and maybe winning candidate in the upcoming French election. God forbid if he wins an American election. America will have to change the demographics enough to trash our current tax system (levels of taxation) and create another one. When those with “no check books” win, well who will write the checks then, I ask?

    Remember if you can (are old enough) to recall what JFK did soon after entering the WH. He took our federal income tax system DOWN (amount paid by many). America was struggling with a WWII tax system and the country needed to free up money to GROW, financially. JKF dramatically cut taxes to do so (and Reagan did it “more”). Sanders will take us back to a level of taxes that caused JFK to REDUCE to allow growth. Such “Sanders taxes” will take America UP TO levels now paid in Europe and Dems say that is a good idea it seems. Hell Sanders, Warren and Obama would love a tax system akin to those levels after WWII. So would Duane, I suspect. We did it then and had acceptable economic growth, why not now? Short answer is we are no longer the only economic power on the block, as we were in the second half of the 40’s a most of the 50’s.

    No doubt to me that in 2018 and later in 2020 we will see Warren/Sanders – like candidates from Dems. GOP will be trying to distance themselves from Trump in 2018 and in 2020 there will be another “war” in GOP ranks. Guess who just might win the 2020 “GOP war”? Try Ted Cruz!! IF that happens a Cruz – Sanders slate for the WH, can any of you predict how America might “swing” THEN? On the other hand if Cruz (and thus Tea Party) loses control of GOP why not a Romney (or Jeb Bush) – Sanders general election in 2020?

    Along similar lines, as it relates to “popular opinion”, can anyone predict how Great Britain will next vote in June to support or not support Brexit? I greatly admire the wisdom of Ms. May right now. “I am going to do (Brexit) what you voted to do last year and hold another election to see if you (voters) really mean it”!! Problem is if voters keep changing their minds how does any government govern??



    • Anson,

      Just picking out one thing here to comment on, I guess I don’t understand what you mean by comparing your experiences with the VA to “single-payer” healthcare. They aren’t remotely alike. The VA is a healthcare system, with hospitals and clinics and people who work for that delivery system. Single-payer healthcare, as it is advocated by most people I know here in America, is not such a system. It is simply the idea that the government is the insurer, not the deliverer of services. People would essentially pay insurance premiums, via taxes, to the government in exchange for coverage at private medical facilities whose employees are not government employees. In other words, Medicare for all ages. As you know, people on Medicare see private doctors and go to private hospitals, not government-employed doctors or government-run hospitals. Very different. Thus, your experience with the VA, whether it was good or bad, has no relevance to any discussion of single-payer healthcare here in the United States.

      As for how to pay for single-payer, as you noted I see that as a problem, in terms of how to present the funding plan to people in a way that they can understand and in a way that counters the obvious propaganda that will be offered, night and day, by Republicans. I confess I don’t know how that can be done. I don’t think there is a politician out there who can explain it in such a way that another politician on the other side couldn’t easily and effectively demagogue. That’s why I am for the goal of single-payer, but with a more restrained way to get there. Let’s start with making improvements to what we have, Obamacare, and go from there. That policy, I believe, can be sold and, as polls are lately showing, is what a majority of Americans want.



  6. Anonymous

     /  April 22, 2017

    AB, I think you confused me with someone else on HC, but I would agree with that. But back to the subject of Tr:mp and his association with the low class, draft dodging, pedophile known as the Motor City Madman. ( Any association with Detroit would normally get him banned at FOX, but Ted gets a pass now, right?) Tr:ump just announced that he will have another rally, on his behalf of course, instead of attending the Correspondence Dinner. What a huge mistake he is making. Instead of showing the world some humility and being able to laugh at himself and possibly gaining support from the moderates and the left, he pulls the Dick move of another self promoting rally.

    Kevin Beck


  7. ansonburlingame

     /  April 23, 2017

    Kevin or Anonymous, etc.,

    “Everyone” wants to know what makes Trump tick. It is simple to me and goes back to my “southern” childhood. He is a damn Yankee, rude, brash, full of himself, talks funny, and will sooner punch you out than have a beer. So I was raised. I left home after HS and entered a prep school in DC for a year before going to college. I was a dumb hill billy from KY and had to get into a couple of fights with Yankees before they would leave me alone!! Tough year going from “everyone being alike, rebels if you will” to living around a bunch of Yankees. But I learned and stopped trying to restart the Civil War!

    No Yankee is going to go to an event where the sole purpose is to make fun of him. If he went he would be inclined to throw a beer in your face rather than tolerate ………. Well that is not “presidential” opponents will say. It isn’t but it sure fits the framework of Yankees.

    I could care less if he goes to the dinner. I am only concerned about how he governs. And yes I do not like at all letting a Yankee govern for me today. Never have liked those SOBs but must put up with them!!

    For better or for worse, America elected a damn Yankee. Now I have to find a way to tolerate him. I can’t get my way now by getting into a fight with him either as I did almost 60 years ago with boys just like him!!



    • Kevin Beck

       /  April 23, 2017

      AB, being from Saginaw Mi., I guess I am a Yankee. In no way can I relate to your theory here. No way you can pin this fiasco on “Yankees.” Trumps base is strongest in the South, ( that includes Missouri) although the Southern Strategy seems to have leaked into the Rust Belt. Only this time he blamed Mexicans as the reason for whites losing thier hold onto a middle class life, not just Blacks.

      Kevin Beck


  8. ansonburlingame

     /  April 24, 2017


    I hope you realize my comments were very much tongue in cheek, trying to relate current politics to childhood views on “north – south” disagreements. I have worked with and admired “Yankees” ever since I left KY in 1960. I could just as easily compared Trump to a dumb, red neck, etc. flying Confederate battle flags from his pick up truck as Duane might be inclined to do.

    But in a sense, Trump is very predictable it seems to me. Interesting clip on 60 minutes last night on Bloomberg. Wow, I really like that man now after listening to his comments. He can’t be a Republican because…… and can’t be a Dem because ……… If I had $47 Billion in hand I might sound just like him, at a shallow level at least.

    As revealed on 60 minutes his business is unbelievable. Some 300,000 customers pay about $25,000 per year to access his computer systems. That is over $7,5 BILLION per year in customer fees alone. My God, if Duane had the money to buy into that system we would read about every “red neck” member of every Board of Directors in American business, maybe global business, etc.

    I also was unaware of Bloomberg’s speech at Dem convention last year where he called Trump a “con man”. That sure fits the description of that “Yankee”, a real estate, wheeler dealer of the first sort that is now our President, which I don’t like but have to live with for four years.

    Just imagine, the rumbled up, old, angry socialist, Sanders, against Bloomberg, smart, somewhat arrogant, very accomplished capitalist. Would not that fight be worth watching and commenting from the sidelines??



    • Anson,

      Glad to hear your Yankee rant was “tongue in cheek”. In the future I recommend you give us a hint when that’s happening because you didn’t this time.



%d bloggers like this: